# NBN Rollout Scrapped



## Garpal Gumnut

I have it on good opinion from one of my Queensland ALP contacts , that the NBN is to be "modified". 

This will free up money for the Flood and Cyclone Reconstruction.

The word "scrapped" will not be used.

"Modified" is the buzzword. 

One can imagine a Dalek saying it...."Modified, modified, modified"

gg


----------



## So_Cynical

No talk of this over at whirlpool...so your usual misinformation GG?

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum/142

---------------

Something interesting i did find over at whirlpool was this interesting site

The top 10 NBN myths debunked 

http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/


----------



## Boggo

We can only hope GG, cyclone Yasi may have prevented us from encountering an even bigger disaster.

They cannot even run a simple power station in the outback, how are they ever going build a faster means of downloading pr0n at a projected final cost of $20000.00 per household.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/...rator-lying-idle/story-e6frea83-1225999762268


----------



## trainspotter

So_Cynical said:


> No talk of this over at whirlpool...so your usual misinformation GG?
> 
> http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum/142
> 
> ---------------
> 
> Something interesting i did find over at whirlpool was this interesting site
> 
> The top 10 NBN myths debunked
> 
> http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/




1. The NBN will cost taxpayers $43 billion dollars. We can’t afford it and it’s uncosted

False

First, the government investment is capped at $26-27 billion dollars, not 43. The remainder will come from revenue and NBN Co’s private debt.[1] *No private funds have signed up to secure this kind of debt. WHAT REVENUE???*
Second, experts now say that it will not cost $43bn thanks to the deal NBN has secured with Telstra to access all their existing ducts, poles, backhaul fibre and customer base. Savings are estimated at between 20 and 30% ($8.6-12.9bn).[2] Tlestra has NOT agreed to use thier infrastructure. Only to CLOSE DOWN the copper cable and retain FOXTEL.

More detailed information about funding the NBN here 

2. If it were viable, the private sector would build it

False

a. The private sector could not afford it. ~$40bn is a huge investment for any company, and well beyond any telco operating in Australia. SO how does a Government think they can afford it when they cannot afford 5.8 billion to rebuild QLD after a flood and a cyclone???

3. We will never need that much speed or data

False

Check out this graph showing the increase in speed of internet access in Australia. Due to the limitations of wireless and copper systems, the only way we can maintain this increase is to move to a fibre-based system. LOLOLOL ...... Japan has 103 MBPS and only uses 12 % capacity. ROFL
Historic and future internet speeds

4. Noone else in the world is installing such a system

False

Fibre-To-The-Premises or Home (FTTP/H) is currently being rolled out across Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan and China.[4] Google have announced they are building a trial network to cover up to 500,000 homes in the USA, which complements the Verison FiOS network covering over 12 million premises,[5][5a] and many areas in Europe and the UK are also having FTTP networks installed.[6][6a] USA Guvmint has invested 225 MILLION DOLLARS ONLY  !!!!!!!!! 

5. Our internet speed is good enough

False

Australia has amongst the slowest available broadband speeds in the developed world. This is a huge impost to new technologies for business and education. Where FTTP is available, the cost is so high that only the largest businesses can afford it. HAHAHH Ahaha hah aha h aaaa ...... are you for real ??? We are 4th in all the developed nations for speed compared to the amount of population we have in Australlia !

The dismal position of Australian internet speeds

6. A Wireless (eg 4G, LTE, WiMax) or DSL (ADSL2+/VDSL/HDSL) network can provide the same speed for a fraction of the price

False

More detailed information about wireless here and here

Much is claimed (usually by those with a vested interest) about the potential of wireless networks, with speeds such as 300Mbps being quoted. But this is highly deceptive, because those are peak speeds per cell site (ie per tower), not realistically achievable speeds for individuals. For example if the “300Mb” tower has just two users active, then speed is halved to 150Mbps. A trial of “4G/LTE” in 2009 showed that with just 20 people using any one tower, speed plummeted to just 7Mbps.  Melbourne already has 100MPBS per second with Telstra ....... LOLOL  ........ 1 million homes already  ........ OOOOOOOOOPssss all have to be shut down with the introduction of NBN !! hahahaha

7. People don’t want fixed internet, they only want mobile

False

There is no doubt that people want some data on the move, and wireless connections are the fastest growing (in number) of all data connections. However wireless is a low volume convenience solution that can never physically replace a fixed connection for large amounts of information. So why has Telstra LOST over 1 million customers on "FIXED" lines and are now increasing tghe cost of "FIXED" lines to compensate???

8. It will be too expensive to have an NBN connection

False

Following the NBN Implementation study, the Government has announced that they will adopt the recommendations for a “competitive” wholesale price for basic NBN access of $20-$30 per month for data and $30-35 for data+phone.[3] This compares to the ~$24 per month (wholesale) currently charged by Telstra for ADSL data, and ~$40 for ADSL data+phone. At the time of writing, homes and businesses can have an NBN connection in Tasmania for $29.95 per month with a faster connection than ADSL.[13] Now you are REALLY pulling the excrement out of your posterior !!!!! TRY $129 per month to access High Speed Internet NBN in Tasmania at FULL NOISE. $29.95 is an ENTRY level cost ...... Get a grip.

9. It will cost thousands of dollars to install it into my house

False

NBN Co will install fibre into your home during the build for no cost, providing you with 4 data ports and 2 phone ports.[14] Simply plug your current wireless router and cordless phone into that socket, and you’ll get your internet and phone anywhere in the house, just like you do now. There is no need to rewire your house with fibre-optics unless you want hard-wired access in other places of your home. Ummmmmmmmm ...... nope ...... look here for some facts

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...nternet-from-nbn/story-fn59niix-1225907517167

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ds-an-extra-3000/story-fn59niix-1225908005122

http://www.zdnet.com.au/only-45-accept-free-nbn-fibre-connection-339303593.htm
10. Fibre optics only last a maximum of 15 or 20 Years.

False

Manufacturers now quote an average lifetime of 60 years for fibre-optic cables,[15] which is about 10 years more than the typical underground copper cabling we have now. Fibre-optics are also unaffected by water penetration, unlike copper cables. Maintenance costs are much lower for fibre than copper.[16]

Nortel Networks report that they are running over 100Gbps over 15-year-old fibre networks without a problem, saying “The age of the fibre has nothing to do with it any more, thanks to the dispersion compensation techniques we use.”[17]

PMSL .......... You have got to be kidding me ....... Vermin eat the plastic coatinfg rendering it USELESS http://www.fiberopticmania.com/2010/12/effective-ways-to-protect-fiber-optic.html


----------



## So_Cynical

LOL Tranny...is that the best you can do?

Rats
Floods
Japan the US

The NBN rolls on....at last we have a government that's actually doing something about our future, a government sticking its neck out and having a go instead of cowering in the face of real challenge.

For those interested here is some details of the First Release Sites.


Brunswick (VIC)
Townsville (QLD)
Armidale (NSW)
Minnamurra and Kiama Downs (NSW)
Willunga (SA)

http://www.nbnco.com.au/wps/wcm/connect/first-release/site-base/first-release-areas/maps#brunswick

Long live the NBN :aus:


----------



## Boggo

So_Cynical said:


> ....at last we have a government that's actually doing something about our future




Yeah, they are doing that alright, my tax just went up in the last week, anything that was in the kitty has been spent on setting fire to ceilings, putting illegal immigrants in military accommodation, partly building new classrooms, ensuring that more money is spent on the administration of both the health and education system than on the people doing the work, making donations to corruption in Indonesia and numerous jollies overseas to save the planet.

You cannot be serious !


----------



## trainspotter

I reiterate my earlier composium ...... "SO how does a Government think they can afford it when they cannot afford 5.8 billion to rebuild QLD after a flood and a cyclone???"

Is this what you have become So-Cyclical? A former broken down shadow of ones intellectual self? Nay ..... no longer a free thinker amongst modern men but a mere bufoon bent on monopolizing the spotlight to echo the party line of spending the ill gotten gains of overseas borrowings and living on largesse they cannot afford. Surely you of all people who at one time had the capacity of being in the Mensa category would recognise as to when to withdraw gracefully from a “quantity theory” as being a specific theory of the demand for money from a Socialist Guvmint that can ill afford to place our necks on the chopping block of recievership.

Hmmmmmmmmm ...... Alas, poor Yorick! I knew him, Horatio, a fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy: he hath borne me on his back a thousand times; and now, how abhorred in my imagination it is!  ........ springs to mind about now.


----------



## Julia

Boggo said:


> Yeah, they are doing that alright, my tax just went up in the last week, anything that was in the kitty has been spent on setting fire to ceilings, putting illegal immigrants in military accommodation, partly building new classrooms, ensuring that more money is spent on the administration of both the health and education system than on the people doing the work, making donations to corruption in Indonesia and numerous jollies overseas to save the planet.
> 
> You cannot be serious !



Ah Boggo, so beautifully put.  Ditto Trainspotter's most recent remarks.


----------



## bellenuit

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I have it on good opinion from one of my Queensland ALP contacts , that the NBN is to be "modified".
> 
> This will free up money for the Flood and Cyclone Reconstruction.
> 
> The word "scrapped" will not be used.




I was reading an article today, I can't recall if it was the Fin Review or The Weekend Australian as I read both, that made the claim the Julia will scrap the NBN by the end of next week, with the Queensland disasters as the excuse. No source given. It said that Julia is gradually dumping all the commitments made during Kevin's reign


----------



## tothemax6

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I have it on good opinion from one of my Queensland ALP contacts , that the NBN is to be "modified".



I hope so. I hope this is 'modified' in the same sense that taking a sledge-hammer to a laptop could be considered 'technical adjustments'. 


So_Cynical said:


> The NBN rolls on....at last we have a government that's actually doing something about our future, a government sticking its neck out and having a go instead of cowering in the face of real challenge.
> 
> Long live the NBN :aus:



Look, they are still using our money. Whether we buy the internet services we want, or the government buys the same services, we pay for it one way or another. The government cannot make the fibers free, nor the workers work for free. 
The difference is that the government is not building something we want. This stands to reason. If we wanted to spend our money on it - it would exist. The government is building something the government wants - with our money.
You can claim the same things about 'the future' and 'having a go' to anything the government does, since these are subjective. Any money the government spends on its things is money we do not have to spend on our things.

Death to the NBN, and every other government boondoggle.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

So_Cynical said:


> LOL Tranny...is that the best you can do?
> 
> Rats
> Floods
> Japan the US
> 
> The NBN rolls on....at last we have a government that's actually doing something about our future, a government sticking its neck out and having a go instead of cowering in the face of real challenge.
> 
> For those interested here is some details of the First Release Sites.
> 
> 
> Brunswick (VIC)
> Townsville (QLD)
> Armidale (NSW)
> Minnamurra and Kiama Downs (NSW)
> Willunga (SA)
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/wps/wcm/connect/first-release/site-base/first-release-areas/maps#brunswick
> 
> Long live the NBN :aus:




Not Townsville mate, just a few upper class suburbs who vote Labor like Mundingburra. 

Most workers will not get it comrade.

gg


----------



## DB008

Boggo said:


> Yeah, they are doing that alright, my tax just went up in the last week, anything that was in the kitty has been spent on setting fire to ceilings, putting illegal immigrants in military accommodation, partly building new classrooms, ensuring that more money is spent on the administration of both the health and education system than on the people doing the work, making donations to corruption in Indonesia and numerous jollies overseas to save the planet.
> 
> You cannot be serious !




+1
Well put


----------



## Julia

bellenuit said:


> I was reading an article today, I can't recall if it was the Fin Review or The Weekend Australian as I read both, that made the claim the Julia will scrap the NBN by the end of next week, with the Queensland disasters as the excuse. No source given. It said that Julia is gradually dumping all the commitments made during Kevin's reign




It was in "The Weekend Australian", bellenuit.  I was quite surprised to read that.  May it be true!


----------



## drsmith

> IT wouldn't really be a surprise to see Julia Gillard announce she was dumping Labor's $36 billion National Broadband Network towards the end of next week.!




No substance to this that I could see in the article proper. Dennis Shanahan is just having a dig with the above comment.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...ect-to-be-junked/story-e6frg6zo-1226000468745

God bless The Australian.


----------



## drsmith

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I have it on good opinion from one of my Queensland ALP contacts , that the NBN is to be "modified".
> 
> This will free up money for the Flood and Cyclone Reconstruction.



It wouldn't suprise me if there are delays.

They still have not reached formal agreement with Telstra.


----------



## So_Cynical

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Not Townsville mate, just a few upper class suburbs who vote Labor like Mundingburra.
> 
> Most workers will not get it comrade.
> 
> gg




Aitkenvale and Mundingburra...looks like 100% coverage to me, everything has to start somewhere GG and Townsvilles NBN experience is starting in 
Aitkenvale and Mundingburra. 

http://www.nbnco.com.au/wps/wcm/con...ERES&CACHEID=f50deb0043d0e318826782fcbbdbc23d


----------



## IFocus

So_Cynical said:


> LOL Tranny...is that the best you can do?
> 
> Rats
> Floods
> Japan the US
> 
> The NBN rolls on....at last we have a government that's actually doing something about our future, a government sticking its neck out and having a go instead of cowering in the face of real challenge.
> 
> For those interested here is some details of the First Release Sites.
> 
> 
> Brunswick (VIC)
> Townsville (QLD)
> Armidale (NSW)
> Minnamurra and Kiama Downs (NSW)
> Willunga (SA)
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/wps/wcm/connect/first-release/site-base/first-release-areas/maps#brunswick
> 
> Long live the NBN :aus:




Agree SC spent a long time around technology have yet to see a reason not to build the NBN or some hybrid close to it.

I would support it regardless of which government decided to build if you look at any major national infrastructure project the same negative behavior is acted out. 

Spending on infrastructure is a good thing and has a direct effect on productivity. 

The Perth to Mandurah rail line had almost the exact same language used against it BTW the out come after it was built.........it has the highest usage of any line in Perth.

Long live the NBN :aus: +1


----------



## drsmith

IFocus said:


> The Perth to Mandurah rail line had almost the exact same language used against it BTW the out come after it was built.........it has the highest usage of any line in Perth.



The Perth to Mandurah rail line was supported by both sides of WA state politics with the only difference being the route.


----------



## So_Cynical

tothemax6 said:


> Look, they are still using our money. Whether we buy the internet services we want, or the government buys the same services, we pay for it one way or another. The government cannot make the fibers free, nor the workers work for free.
> The difference is that the government is not building something we want. This stands to reason. If we wanted to spend our money on it - it would exist. The government is building something the government wants - with our money.




Who said we don't want it :dunno: i am a part of we and i want it....i mean seriously who doesn't want ultra fast, latest technology broadband, com-on how many people are reading this right now using a dial up connection or even DSL1? the answer is very few and that's because technology changes and as a society we want the fastest and the best....and the providers want to gives us that...problem is the infrastructure is dated and at breaking point and cannot continue to deliver the higher speeds and content loads required into the future.

The way forward was always a choice between patching up what we have (the cheap nasty coalition option) or building a new backbone using the latest technology (Expensive NBN) i reckon we are better off embracing change and going with the new expensive technology...but that's me and how i think...the ASF right and other coalition supporters here think differently, coalition supporters in general seem to be a little unwilling to pay. 

Coalition supporters want fast and reliable broadband but don't want the expensive new NBN

Coalition supporters want to help flood victims but don't want to pay a levy

Coalition supporters want to help the environment and reduce GHG's but don't want to pay higher utility bills.

One could be left with the impression that coalition supports want good things to happen...just they don't want to actually pay for them.


----------



## wayneL

So_Cynical said:


> Who said we don't want it :dunno: i am a part of we and i want it....i mean seriously who doesn't want ultra fast, latest technology broadband, com-on how many people are reading this right now using a dial up connection or even DSL1? the answer is very few and that's because technology changes and as a society we want the fastest and the best....and the providers want to gives us that...problem is the infrastructure is dated and at breaking point and cannot continue to deliver the higher speeds and content loads required into the future.
> 
> The way forward was always a choice between patching up what we have (the cheap nasty coalition option) or building a new backbone using the latest technology (Expensive NBN) i reckon we are better off embracing change and going with the new expensive technology...but that's me and how i think...the ASF right and other coalition supporters here think differently, coalition supporters in general seem to be a little unwilling to pay.
> 
> Coalition supporters want fast and reliable broadband but don't want the expensive new NBN
> 
> Coalition supporters want to help flood victims but don't want to pay a levy
> 
> Coalition supporters want to help the environment and reduce GHG's but don't want to pay higher utility bills.
> 
> One could be left with the impression that coalition supports want good things to happen...just they don't want to actually pay for them.




I want a Ferrari too, but don't want't to pay for it. Hence I don't have one.


----------



## So_Cynical

wayneL said:


> I want a Ferrari too, but don't want to pay for it. Hence I don't have one.




But you do have some very nice expensive roads to drive on if you choose to buy a Ferrari, Govt's have build those expensive roads to meet the basic needs of society.

Australian society needs a new telecommunications/internet backbone and Govt is delivering that, how you choose to use that backbone is up to you.

Governments make the big decisions for us, that allows us to then make decisions about how we use what results form there decisions....they build a road, we choose our mode of transport.


----------



## drsmith

wayneL said:


> I want a Ferrari too, but don't want't to pay for it. Hence I don't have one.



A Ferrari levy will fix that.

We may eny up not being able to afford electricity though.


----------



## wayneL

So_Cynical said:


> But you do have some very nice expensive roads to drive on if you choose to buy a Ferrari, Govt's have build those expensive roads to meet the basic needs of society.
> 
> Australian society needs a new telecommunications/internet backbone and Govt is delivering that, how you choose to use that backbone is up to you.
> 
> Governments make the big decisions for us, that allows us to then make decisions about how we use what results form there decisions....they build a road, we choose our mode of transport.




I don't recall any problems with my internet access when in Aus. 

I've used superfast BB overseas and didn't notice any difference from my point of view.

I don't want autobahns for suburban streets. 

Cost/benefit does not add up.


----------



## trainspotter

So_Cynical said:


> The *way forward* (MEIN GOTT you are a card carrying communist bleating the Party Line) was always a choice between patching up what we have (the cheap nasty coalition option) or building a new backbone using the latest technology (Expensive NBN) i reckon we are better off embracing change and going with the new expensive technology...but that's me and how i think...the ASF right and other coalition supporters here think differently, coalition supporters in general seem to be a little unwilling to pay.
> 
> Coalition supporters want fast and reliable broadband but don't want the expensive new NBN. Nope .... happy to have an NBN but not for the detriment of the country fiscally. Use the existing infrastructure that Telstra provides. Only a million in Melbourne people have 100mbps already PLUS Foxtel. Derrrrrrrrrrr
> 
> Coalition supporters want to help flood victims but don't want to pay a levy Nope ... have already helped the flood victims by donation of money. I have given more than enough in taxes and watched this government squander it on ridiculous and costly schisms. They can't even build a school hall or put pink batts into a roof efficiently.
> 
> Coalition supporters want to help the environment and reduce GHG's but don't want to pay higher utility bills. Hey wait a minute ???? all those billions spent on pink batts were supposed to REDUCE our energy bills by making our houses solar eficcient BULLSH!T, did that work So_Cylical??
> 
> One could be left with the impression that coalition supports want good things to happen...just they don't want to actually pay for them.




Answers are in RED ....... one of your favourite colours So_Cyclical.


----------



## noco

So_Cynical said:


> Who said we don't want it :dunno: i am a part of we and i want it....i mean seriously who doesn't want ultra fast, latest technology broadband, com-on how many people are reading this right now using a dial up connection or even DSL1? the answer is very few and that's because technology changes and as a society we want the fastest and the best....and the providers want to gives us that...problem is the infrastructure is dated and at breaking point and cannot continue to deliver the higher speeds and content loads required into the future.
> 
> The way forward was always a choice between patching up what we have (the cheap nasty coalition option) or building a new backbone using the latest technology (Expensive NBN) i reckon we are better off embracing change and going with the new expensive technology...but that's me and how i think...the ASF right and other coalition supporters here think differently, coalition supporters in general seem to be a little unwilling to pay.
> 
> Coalition supporters want fast and reliable broadband but don't want the expensive new NBN
> 
> Coalition supporters want to help flood victims but don't want to pay a levy
> 
> Coalition supporters want to help the environment and reduce GHG's but don't want to pay higher utility bills.
> 
> One could be left with the impression that coalition supports want good things to happen...just they don't want to actually pay for them.




I think for a start this disfunctional Government needs to get their priorities in order and the NBN should take  back stage to allow our money to be spent on improved highways flood free and without potholes. For the past month our roads in North Queensland have been cut on numerous occassions due to two cyclones and excessive rain falls. The money wasted on HOME INSULATION,BER and other hare brain Labor Government Green schemes, the excessive Foreign aid to third world countries who rort the system and the $599 million given to the Climate change in Cancun Mexico could have gone a long way to improving the road connections for essential items to feed North Queensland towns.

We don't need the NBN. We don't need free home insulation. In most cases we could have done without many of Julia Gillard's memorial school halls. We don't need these useless subsidised renewable energy schemes.

It's all about mooooooving forrrrrrrward with the essentials.

PRIORITIES....PRIORITIES....PRIORITIES. 

SO_Cynical, do you  understand the meaning of PRIORITIES? If you don't, well you are more dense than I thought you were.


----------



## Logique

noco said:


> For the past month our roads in North Queensland have been cut on numerous occassions due to two cyclones and excessive rain falls. The money wasted on HOME INSULATION,BER and other hare brain Labor Government Green schemes, the excessive Foreign aid to third world countries who rort the system and the $599 million given to the Climate change in Cancun Mexico could have gone a long way to improving the road connections for essential items to feed North Queensland towns.



What Noco said. 
Don't have the privilege of being a QLD'er but we've sure had QLD temps down here the last week. 42C yesterday, give me strength.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

So_Cynical said:


> Aitkenvale and Mundingburra...looks like 100% coverage to me, everything has to start somewhere GG and Townsvilles NBN experience is starting in
> Aitkenvale and Mundingburra.
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/wps/wcm/con...ERES&CACHEID=f50deb0043d0e318826782fcbbdbc23d




Both those suburbs are full of DINK's and ex Labor or presently Labor politicians and hangers-on.

Not a worker amongst them.

gg


----------



## Julia

What would really be worth doing would be to put all the electricity connections underground so that every time there's a storm, people are not left without power, often for weeks.

Obviously this would be a massive undertaking.  Anyone have any thoughts about how feasible it would be?

Would the funds going to the NBN be sufficient to cover doing underground power?

I have no idea about the technology, but for that matter could the NBN connections and the electricity be put underground together?

Smurf, you're the expert on this stuff.  Is something along these lines at all feasible?


----------



## IFocus

drsmith said:


> The Perth to Mandurah rail line was supported by both sides of WA state politics with the only difference being the route.




Nope....... liberals were dead against it based on cost and lack of usage, Richard Court led the charge then relented to run it to Rockingham via Kenwick but not Mandurah. The extra to Mandurah was a cost of $20mil I think



> The original proposed route branched from the Armadale Line at Kenwick, and then ran alongside the freight lines until Jandakot where it would run in the middle of the Kwinana Freeway. However, a bill passed in November 2002 after a change of state government saw that the route would start at Perth, traverse the Kwinana Freeway, and then continue along its initial route after Jandakot.[3]  This second route was much more direct, and allowed through services with the Joondalup Line.




They attacked Alana relentlessly, remember the boring machine problems, Richard Court went as so far as to run down the barriers they built along the freeway saying they were not high enough. 



> Mandurah rail cost
> 
> The recently completed Mandurah line in Perth is 70km long, and cost $960 million in 2006/07 dollars. The whole New Metro Rail project cost over $1.4 billion, but included numerous other works and the purchase of a fleet of trains. The Mandurah line has 11 stations, two of which are underground, which are included in the $960 million cost. Per km, Mandurah cost $13.7 million, including 11 stations and an underground section.




As with any large public project there was plenty of criticism around but Alana  got it over the line, like I miss Keating from Federal politics I miss Alana from state politics.

Living down here I remember it well.


----------



## bellenuit

IFocus said:


> The Perth to Mandurah rail line had almost the exact same language used against it BTW the out come after it was built.........it has the highest usage of any line in Perth.




That is not an apt technology comparison. The Perth to Mandurah line is more comparable to a fibre backbone network linking major nodes, something I think is part of the coalition plan, but if not, it should be.

The NBN as proposed is comparable to running a high speed rail link to every home. Too costly and wasteful. 

There is no doubt that a fast link is better than a slow link, all else being equal. But mobile access is also better than fixed access, all else being equal. The issue is whether fixed access on extremely fast links at extremely high cost is better than mobile access on not as fast links at moderate cost.

The government is betting on the former using our money when all indications are the industry is moving towards the latter.


----------



## So_Cynical

Julia said:


> What would really be worth doing would be to put all the electricity connections underground so that every time there's a storm, people are not left without power, often for weeks.
> 
> Obviously this would be a massive undertaking.  Anyone have any thoughts about how feasible it would be?
> 
> Would the funds going to the NBN be sufficient to cover doing underground power?




Interesting point Julia...sounds like you are unaware of a small movement of concerned citizens that have long lobbied Govt's to replace overhead power with under ground on the premise of making our roads safer....ill quote a NSW RTA document so you get the general idea.



			
				RTA said:
			
		

> In NSW, over the five year period from 2004 to 2008 there were 100,068 casualty crashes resulting in 2,347 fatalities and 126,929 injuries. Of the 100,068 casualty crashes, 21,356 (21%) involved a collision with a fixed roadside object. During this period* 3,972 casualty crashes involved an impact with a utility pole which is 19% of the casualty crashes with fixed objects. These crashes resulted in 171 deaths and 5,060 injuries.*




http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/downloads/reducing_trauma_utility_poles.pdf

Interesting in that other than research, nothing been done about it even thou there is a pretty solid argument for utility pole removal on safety grounds.


----------



## So_Cynical

bellenuit said:


> That is not an apt technology comparison. The Perth to Mandurah line is more comparable to a fibre backbone network linking major nodes, something I think is part of the coalition plan, but if not, it should be.
> 
> The NBN as proposed is comparable to running a high speed rail link to every home. Too costly and wasteful.
> 
> There is no doubt that a fast link is better than a slow link, all else being equal. But mobile access is also better than fixed access, all else being equal. The issue is whether fixed access on extremely fast links at extremely high cost is better than mobile access on not as fast links at moderate cost.
> 
> The government is betting on the former using our money when all indications are the industry is moving towards the latter.




A brilliant mobile network is absolutely dependant on a brilliant fixed network..what's the point of a perfect back bone that doesn't go to the home  that's what Telstra did to us for 25 years!....you wouldn't build a gravel road to access a freeway so how could you build a FTTN Fibre to the Nowhere network.


----------



## IFocus

wayneL said:


> I want a Ferrari too, but don't want't to pay for it. Hence I don't have one.





I don't want to drive a brand new FJ Holden either  

The copper net work is dieing, wireless wont cut it......ever unless you all have towers in your back yards. I was using fiber 18 years ago in process control to reduce electrical noise and yes to increase bandwidth strewth it isn't new.

Fiber is a long way from being a Ferrari.


----------



## Julia

So_Cynical said:


> Interesting point Julia...sounds like you are unaware of a small movement of concerned citizens that have long lobbied Govt's to replace overhead power with under ground on the premise of making our roads safer....ill quote a NSW RTA document so you get the general idea.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/downloads/reducing_trauma_utility_poles.pdf
> 
> Interesting in that other than research, nothing been done about it even thou there is a pretty solid argument for utility pole removal on safety grounds.



Thanks, So cynical.  That's a really sensible point.
I've seen the issue raised in the past but instantly dismissed as being too expensive.

Hopefully Smurf will come across this question in the next day or two and cast his expert opinion about the feasibility of moving to all underground electricity and NBN.
That would be something I think most people would support increasing the deficit to fund.


----------



## tothemax6

wayneL said:


> I want a Ferrari too, but don't want't to pay for it. Hence I don't have one.



Nah thats OK, just go up and down your street stealing the money from everyone else, then you can buy it. I believe its called 'funding public sector projects'. 


So_Cynical said:


> Who said we don't want it :dunno: i am a part of we and i want it....i mean seriously who doesn't want ultra fast, latest technology broadband, com-on how many people are reading this right now using a dial up connection or even DSL1? the answer is very few and that's because technology changes and as a society we want the fastest and the best....and the providers want to gives us that...problem is the infrastructure is dated and at breaking point and cannot continue to deliver the higher speeds and content loads required into the future.
> 
> The way forward was always a choice between patching up what we have (the cheap nasty coalition option) or building a new backbone using the latest technology (Expensive NBN) i reckon we are better off embracing change and going with the new expensive technology...but that's me and how i think...the ASF right and other coalition supporters here think differently, coalition supporters in general seem to be a little unwilling to pay.
> 
> Coalition supporters want fast and reliable broadband but don't want the expensive new NBN
> 
> Coalition supporters want to help flood victims but don't want to pay a levy
> 
> Coalition supporters want to help the environment and reduce GHG's but don't want to pay higher utility bills.
> 
> One could be left with the impression that coalition supports want good things to happen...just they don't want to actually pay for them.



Some coalition supporters, maybe. I'd say many, like I, just want the whole lot privatized. The USSR proved that central planning is the same thing as economic destruction, simply doing a fraction of that just makes it a fraction as bad. We don't recognize the validity of the concept "to get something good the government has to do it for us". We consider that a crock of #$#$.

You are skipping over my points. The money expropriated from people to pay for this, is money they do not have to buy the other things they like. What if the NBN were to cost 30% GDP? You could still say everything you just said.
Theft is still theft regardless of the agent. The role of the government is to uphold law, and the only legitimate tax is one to cover costs to this extent.

Besides, there are plenty of other things that could follow your reasoning. Space program would be nice, right? High-speed rail? Roads big enough to actually drive on without stupid traffic jams? Maybe more generators to lower to cost of electricity? More farms to lower the cost of food? How do we address these competing priorities? Easy - leave the money in peoples pockets, and they will decide based on what things they want and how much they want them.


----------



## todster

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I have it on good opinion from one of my Queensland ALP contacts , that the NBN is to be "modified".
> 
> This will free up money for the Flood and Cyclone Reconstruction.
> 
> The word "scrapped" will not be used.
> 
> "Modified" is the buzzword.
> 
> One can imagine a Dalek saying it...."Modified, modified, modified"
> 
> gg



 GG ALP contact= Labor voter who drinks at local watering hole!


----------



## bellenuit

So_Cynical said:


> A brilliant mobile network is absolutely dependant on a brilliant fixed network..what's the point of a perfect back bone that doesn't go to the home  that's what Telstra did to us for 25 years!....you wouldn't build a gravel road to access a freeway so how could you build a FTTN Fibre to the Nowhere network.




Of course you would build a gravel road to access a freeway if the access is from a single user. The way the road network is built is that the roads get progressively better as you go from individual homes to the main arteries. A driveway to a single lane roadway to a dual carriageway to the freeway. You are suggesting we need a freeway to every home. The majority will not require that sort of access. Let those who want blindingly fast speeds pay for it and let those who are content with lesser speeds pay for what they require.


----------



## drsmith

IFocus said:


> Nope....... liberals were dead against it based on cost and lack of usage, Richard Court led the charge then relented to run it to Rockingham via Kenwick but not Mandurah. The extra to Mandurah was a cost of $20mil I think



From Wikipedia, including the 1'st sentence.



> *Legislation for the construction of the Mandurah Line was passed in December 1999.[*2] The original proposed route branched from the Armadale Line at Kenwick, and then ran alongside the freight lines until Jandakot where it would run in the middle of the Kwinana Freeway. However, a bill passed in November 2002 after a change of state government saw that the route would start at Perth, traverse the Kwinana Freeway, and then continue along its initial route after Jandakot.[3] This second route was much more direct, and allowed through services with the Joondalup Line.



I can't remmember specifically whether the Court government had a staged program for construction or not, but they did pledge to build it branched through Kenwick as noted above.


----------



## drsmith

IFocus said:


> As with any large public project there was plenty of criticism around but Alana  got it over the line, like I miss Keating from Federal politics I miss Alana from state politics.



Alannah did a good job. The final route selected for the Mandurah railway was the right choice and better than Ricardo's option.

Federal politics on both sides lack her substance.


----------



## IFocus

drsmith said:


> From Wikipedia, including the 1'st sentence.
> 
> 
> I can't remmember specifically whether the Court government had a staged program for construction or not, but they did pledge to build it branched through Kenwick as noted above.




Yes my remiss it was the argument over the direction and the higher risk of the tunnels sinking the Perth stations not if they were going to build it.


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

trainspotter said:


> 1. The NBN will cost taxpayers $43 billion dollars. We can’t afford it and it’s uncosted
> ...
> No private funds have signed up to secure this kind of debt. WHAT REVENUE???



It hasn't been built yet! Are all properties that are built by developers, sold "off the plan"?



trainspotter said:


> Telstra has NOT agreed to use thier infrastructure. Only to CLOSE DOWN the copper cable and retain FOXTEL.



Telstra have agreed to move their copper services across ONTO the NBN. NBN Co will lease Telstra’s existing fibre, ducts, pipes and other infrastructure for $9 billion over an undisclosed amount of time. That amount is to be paid to the telco as the copper network is decommissioned.



trainspotter said:


> 2. If it were viable, the private sector would build it
> ...
> SO how does a Government think they can afford it when they cannot afford 5.8 billion to rebuild QLD after a flood and a cyclone???



Money for the NBN has already been earmarked. The Government believes an NBN is in the best interests of Australia. No money has been earmarket for natural disasters and they've had plenty of those in the past 5 years. I believe the Independents are pushing for a Disaster Fund to be set up... not sure how this is any different to the Future Fund, but that opens a whole new can of worms. The point is, if you have a homeloan (already in debt) and your car breaks down, what do you do? Go into further debt, use your holiday fund (savings), or like the NSW Government does - sell an asset?

Here's a thought: Everyone (for or against the NBN) - perhaps you should visit your local MP and request a referendum??? BUT first, do some research into the BENEFITS of fibre, PUTTING ASIDE the cost factor first. Imagine you have unlimited funds, and can even afford a Ferrari (@wayneL). 


trainspotter said:


> 3. We will never need that much speed or data
> ...
> LOLOLOL ...... Japan has 103 MBPS and only uses 12 % capacity. ROFL



Last time I looked we weren't Japan and the fact that Australia is 20 times bigger than Japan means there are vast areas of ground to cover between populated areas.

I don't quite understand what your argument is - speed (103Mbps) is VERY different to capacity. I have a 1.5Mbps service at home (lucky me), but if I need to receive a large file, I can reach my capacity (100% or around 150k Bytes per second) quite easily but have to wait approximately 1 hour for every 500mb downloaded. For the majority of the time however, my capacity is probably 1-2%. If I had a faster connection (100mbps), I might only have to wait approximately 1 minute. My productivity has just increased considerably.

Why is Japan OUR benchmark anyway?


trainspotter said:


> Historic and future internet speeds
> 
> 4. Noone else in the world is installing such a system
> ...
> USA Guvmint has invested 225 MILLION DOLLARS ONLY  !!!!!!!!!



Ok - now the USA is our benchmark. Stop jumping around. They have 15 times the population we do which is spread pretty much evenly right across the country. They have much better competition, and therefore don't have a monopoly / duopoly (such as we do here). It hasn't been a prority for them so far until now, but then again neither is their public health system.

Perhaps you should investigate further: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_in_the_United_States



trainspotter said:


> 5. Our internet speed is good enough
> ...
> HAHAHH Ahaha hah aha h aaaa ...... are you for real ??? We are 4th in all the developed nations for speed compared to the amount of population we have in Australlia !



Oh dear, now we are looking at population. Here's a list of countries in the 23 million - 20 million population ranking:
North Korea, Ghana, Taiwan, Australia, Yemen, Mozambique, CÃ´te d'Ivoire, Romania, Syria, Sri Lanka, Madagascar.

We're back to the SIZE issue again. We're not Japan, or the USA.

Referring to your population list above, North Korea's neighbour (with double the population) has the FASTEST internet in the world with an average speed of 11Mbps (up to 100Mbps). It's amazing what you can do on a smaller scale and by spreading the cost over a larger taxable population. I wonder what it costs for them to protect their neighbouring borders though.



trainspotter said:


> The dismal position of Australian internet speeds
> 
> 6. A Wireless (eg 4G, LTE, WiMax) or DSL (ADSL2+/VDSL/HDSL) network can provide the same speed for a fraction of the price
> ...
> Melbourne already has 100MPBS per second with Telstra ....... LOLOL  ........ 1 million homes already  ........ OOOOOOOOOPssss all have to be shut down with the introduction of NBN !! hahahaha



Why? It's not on copper and those 1 million homes have the choice to hook into the fibre network. The service is provided over cable, which probably also provides their FoxTel service. It's funny though, how Telstra promotes it as being able to "... pull down a movie file of 860MB in less than 10 minutes." 



trainspotter said:


> 7. People don’t want fixed internet, they only want mobile
> ...
> So why has Telstra LOST over 1 million customers on "FIXED" lines and are now increasing the cost of "FIXED" lines to compensate???



Finally a good response. The reason is because people don't want to spend $30+ on home phone, $30+ on mobile, $50+ on internet, when they can get a combined service for (say) $60. This has only changed in the past couple of years though, through competition from Vodafone, Optus and other telcos. I'm only forced to install a home phone, due to the fact that I can't get a Naked-DSL service and are too far from the exchange.

This sort of thing is fine in the major cities, but for the majority of the population outside of the metro area they still need a fixed line. If power goes out, a fixed line is about the only thing that still works. Mobile phone towers still need electricity to transmit / receive.

The NBN will no doubt roll out wireless as well, to areas where it would be prohibitively expensive to run fibre to each home. It would therefore be run to a node and a wireless tower erected to service a wider area.



trainspotter said:


> 8. It will be too expensive to have an NBN connection
> ...
> Now you are REALLY pulling the excrement out of your posterior !!!!! TRY $129 per month to access High Speed Internet NBN in Tasmania at FULL NOISE. $29.95 is an ENTRY level cost ...... Get a grip.



You're lucky you have the option. In some areas of Tasmania, they have been forced to use dialup. 28.8kbps (unlikely to be 56kbps) compared with a 1.5Mbps service - I know what I would choose. If you don't need a faster service, then stick with a cheaper solution. If you want all of the bells and whistles then you'll have to pay for it. What do you pay for an equivalent service not on the NBN?



trainspotter said:


> 9. It will cost thousands of dollars to install it into my house
> ...
> Ummmmmmmmm ...... nope ...... look here for some facts...



I looked at your references, and I think you're off topic. For some residents where the house is (for example) made of bluestone, a wireless service may not be capable of penetrating throughout the home. This will obviously require additional hardwired points to be installed. However, if you already have a Telstra copper service (like I do) then I should be able to simply re-connect my telephone / modem into the new NBN socket. My ADSL modem is able to support 54Mbps wirelessly, so my router is therefore a bottleneck compared with a full 100Mbps network. I'm pretty sure I'd be able to cope with a 50Mbps (half-speed) service though.



trainspotter said:


> 10. Fibre optics only last a maximum of 15 or 20 Years.
> ...
> PMSL .......... You have got to be kidding me ....... Vermin eat the plastic coating rendering it USELESS



Did you read your own reference? They put metal sheaths around the plastic in order to protect it. And my phone was out for 3 days last year, because water got into the telephone pit shorting out the connections, rendering it USELESS. What's your point?

Perhaps you didn't know that the submarine cables that run between countries are also prone to shark attacks, once again, rendering them USELESS (but that's why they build in redundancy).


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

wayneL said:


> I want a Ferrari too, but don't want't to pay for it. Hence I don't have one.



No. You want a Ferrari. You can't justify the cost because you would have to forgo something else (a roof over your head, food, alcohol, entertainment) perhaps for a VERY long time. Hence, you don't have one.

BTW - I'd be happy just to be able to drive one... once... but I don't WANT one.


----------



## Boggo

zzaaxxss3401 said:


> No money has been earmarked for natural disasters and they've had plenty of those in the past 5 years.




Not for disasters in Australia, seems to be plenty available for other disasters (Phuket) and they just throw money away to stupid concepts such as Cancun and Indonesian climate change when they are not saving the planet in Copehagen.

You guys have to be kidding with some of the mismanagement and corruption you try (unsuccessfully) to defend.


----------



## Boggo

There's a redheaded bird missing !


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

Boggo said:


> There's a redheaded bird missing !



Are they budgies?


----------



## Boggo

zzaaxxss3401 said:


> Are they budgies?




Budgie smugglers, that's why Julia is missing


----------



## wayneL

zzaaxxss3401 said:


> No. You want a Ferrari. You can't justify the cost because you would have to forgo something else (a roof over your head, food, alcohol, entertainment) perhaps for a VERY long time. Hence, you don't have one.




Incorrect.

There are probably lots of people here who could cash in a few shares or maybe even have a few hundred K sitting in a bank account.

But there are other priorities.


----------



## NBNMyths

As one of the contributors of the site in question, I think some correction is in order!



trainspotter said:


> 1. The NBN will cost taxpayers $43 billion dollars. We can’t afford it and it’s uncosted
> 
> The remainder will come from revenue and NBN Co’s private debt.[1] *No private funds have signed up to secure this kind of debt. WHAT REVENUE???*
> Second, experts now say that it will not cost $43bn thanks to the deal NBN has secured with Telstra to access all their existing ducts, poles, backhaul fibre and customer base. Savings are estimated at between 20 and 30% ($8.6-12.9bn).[2] Tlestra has NOT agreed to use thier infrastructure. Only to CLOSE DOWN the copper cable and retain FOXTEL.




The deal with Telstra is for both leasing charges for their infrastructure (Poles, pits, ducts), and for the migration of customers and decommissioning of their copper and HFC voice and data services. See *this story*.

The Biz case estimated it will be revenue positive by 2018, IIRC. Alan Kohler seems *rather happy* with the figures.



> 2. If it were viable, the private sector would build it
> 
> a. The private sector could not afford it. ~$40bn is a huge investment for any company, and well beyond any telco operating in Australia. SO how does a Government think they can afford it when they cannot afford 5.8 billion to rebuild QLD after a flood and a cyclone???




Perhaps because the network is off-budget due to it providing a forecast positive return?



> 3. We will never need that much speed or data
> 
> LOLOLOL ...... Japan has 103 MBPS and only uses 12 % capacity. ROFL




That's pretty much the point. Right now, 12Mbps is fine. But what about in 10 years? Considering that we've gone from 256kbps to 24Mbps in the last 10 years, do you not suspect that a similar improvement will be required in the next 10 years? The only way that such an improvement would be feasible is through the rollout of either fibre or HFC cable. Both networks cost about the same, but fibre has huge advantages over HFC, so it's the obvious choice.



> 4. Noone else in the world is installing such a system
> 
> Fibre-To-The-Premises or Home (FTTP/H) is currently being rolled out across Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan and China.[4] Google have announced they are building a trial network to cover up to 500,000 homes in the USA, which complements the Verison FiOS network covering over 12 million premises,[5][5a] and many areas in Europe and the UK are also having FTTP networks installed.[6][6a] USA Guvmint has invested 225 MILLION DOLLARS ONLY  !!!!!!!!!




Not sure of your point here. The difference is that the USA has much higher population density and also has a huge number of HFC cable networks (the construction of which was hugely subsidised by their cable TV networks). Due to anti-siphoning laws, cable TV is nowhere near as popular here, hence the small HFC cable coverage.



> 5. Our internet speed is good enough
> 
> HAHAHH Ahaha hah aha h aaaa ...... are you for real ??? We are 4th in all the developed nations for speed compared to the amount of population we have in Australlia !




What does our population have to do with our right to have decent internet speeds? On that basis, should we also abandon paved roads, airports, hospitals etc because we have a 'low' population for a developed country?



> 6. A Wireless (eg 4G, LTE, WiMax) or DSL (ADSL2+/VDSL/HDSL) network can provide the same speed for a fraction of the price
> 
> Melbourne already has 100MPBS per second with Telstra ....... LOLOL  ........ 1 million homes already  ........ OOOOOOOOOPssss all have to be shut down with the introduction of NBN !! hahahaha




Unrelated to wireless, but Telstra's (and Optus') HFC cable networks may advertise a speed of 100Mbps, but they don't deliver anything like that. HFC is a shared medium, that is the network speed slows drastically as more people connect. While the network can theoretically do 100Mbps, that is a speed per node. So if there are 5 people on that node, all using the net, then each will get ~20Mbps. And that's exactly what happens. See these examples of a 100Mbps NBN connection in Tasmania, and a 100Mbps Telstra HFC Cable connection in Melbourne:

*NBN:*
Theory down: 100Mbps
_Actual down: 92.3Mbps_
Theory up: 40Mbps
_Actual up: 34.2Mbps_




*Telstra Cable:*
Theory down: 100Mbps
_Actual down: 20.8Mbps_
Theory up: 2Mbps
_Actual up: 1.1Mbps_



*The above examples should put NBN Vs Cable into perspective!*



> 7. People don’t want fixed internet, they only want mobile
> 
> wireless is a low volume convenience solution that can never physically replace a fixed connection for large amounts of information. So why has Telstra LOST over 1 million customers on "FIXED" lines and are now increasing tghe cost of "FIXED" lines to compensate???




Telstra have mainly lost fixed customers to _Naked DSL_, not to _no fixed line at all_. Unfortunately, naked DSL is only available in ~400 out of ~9200 exchanges across Australia, or more people would take advantage of it.



> 8. It will be too expensive to have an NBN connection
> 
> ... This compares to the ~$24 per month (wholesale) currently charged by Telstra for ADSL data, and ~$40 for ADSL data+phone. At the time of writing, homes and businesses can have an NBN connection in Tasmania for $29.95 per month with a faster connection than ADSL.[13] Now you are REALLY pulling the excrement out of your posterior !!!!! TRY $129 per month to access High Speed Internet NBN in Tasmania at FULL NOISE. $29.95 is an ENTRY level cost ...... Get a grip.




For entry level, you can get an NBN connection (with VOIP phone) for less than you can currently get a ADSL plus phone connection. eg, iiNet have a *bundle for $40* which gives you 25Mbps NBN, plus a VOIP phone (via Bob) and all local and national calls. Try matching that on the current systems.

For mid level use, pricing for similar service levels is the same as now, although you actually _get_ 25Mbps. While current ADSL2+ advertises 24Mbps, the average ADSL2+ speed available in Australia is about 8-9Mbps due to distance from the exchange, a limiting factor for DSL services.

For high-volume use, the NBN is dearer that most current ADSL2+ services, although the speed is higher and there is the option of massive speed increases (at a cost). 

But there's no point complaining about the price of those fast services relative to the current situation, because _the current tech can't deliver those speeds at any price_. In other words, isn't it better to have those speeds available (at a cost), than not have them at all?



> 9. It will cost thousands of dollars to install it into my house
> 
> There is no need to rewire your house with fibre-optics unless you want hard-wired access in other places of your home. Ummmmmmmmm ...... nope ...... look here for some facts




Sorry, but inaccurate sensationalism from The Oz doesn't constitute facts. 

The NBN Co will install a box, inside (or outside if you choose) your house* at no cost to you.* *Here is info on the box*.

As you can clearly see, it has 2x std phone ports and 4x std data ports. You can plug any current phone, wireless or wired router into the box. Wireless routers have been at 54Mbps for years, and are now doing 108Mbps. Hence, there is absolutely no need to rewire your house. 

Even if, for some reason, you wanted Cat6 cable to deliver 1Gbps to every room throughout your house, the going rate is about $70 per point. But whatever technology is used to deliver fast net, the same things would be required. It's not a requirement of fibre/NBN, it's a requirement to transmit data quickly.



> 10. Fibre optics only last a maximum of 15 or 20 Years.
> 
> Manufacturers now quote an average lifetime of 60 years for fibre-optic cables,[15] which is about 10 years more than the typical underground copper cabling we have now. Fibre-optics are also unaffected by water penetration, unlike copper cables. Maintenance costs are much lower for fibre than copper.[16]
> 
> PMSL .......... You have got to be kidding me ....... Vermin eat the plastic coatinfg rendering it USELESS




Does this even require a comment? 

Vermin will have a go at everything sooner or later, but the NBN are using vermin-resistant cabling from Prysmian and Corning. That said, if it were really a problem, don't you think they'd be eating the plastic coating on the copper and HFC cables as well?

*The site has been updated, so you might like to read what real experts have to say about it:
http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/what-do-the-experts-say/*


----------



## sails

NBNmyths, I have always said there is likely nothing too much wrong with NBN, but it's the high price tag.

Australia is now in debt and that debt is climbing.  Ms Gillard wants to impose a levy to help rebuild Qld infrastructure apparently because of insufficient funds.

Under these circumstances, no matter how shiny and nice the new product might be, I don't think this country can afford it right now given it's financial difficulties.

We need to look for a more affordable solution.  May not be quite as fast, but if that's all we can afford since labor spent all our savings, that's the way it just may have to be.

BTW are you on a government or NBN payroll?


----------



## trainspotter

*GOSH !!!!! *  Look at them come out of the woodwork to defend a shiny blue cable. First time poster from NBNMyths is an absolute CORKER !! :

Sooooooooooo we really need to spend 43 billion dollars on a shiny blue cable that will save us from anhilation on the technology front compared to the rest of the world?? This Government can't even manage the existing programmes it has in place let alone introduce the worlds most expensive Fibre Optic Network Cabling System. 

No other government in the world has been so ambitious in the scale of the design and massive public funding of a national fibre network, or the constraints on competition from alternative technology.

According to the NBN business plan, the Australian version will require a $27.5bn investment by taxpayers, buttressed by $13.5bn in debt from private investors, mainly from offshore. (To date NIL investors have signed up for it, offshore or otherwise)

Even NBN Co says there is a risk that private investors will not take up the opportunity and $27.5bn could turn into Canberra's minimum commitment. LOLOL ..... Beauty Newk !

Then there is the additional $13bn-plus to be paid to Telstra over several years in exchange for use of its equipment and its commitment to shut down any broadband competition to NBN Co from its copper network and its pay TV cable, which passes 2.4 million homes. (Deal has not been finalised and is still in protracted negotiations)

*The more than $40bn required to fund the project is a huge investment for a project that can only offer best guesses on consumer preferences, changing technology, competition from wireless and rollout risk, including the cost and availability of labour.*

But the government, backed by NBN Co's figures, insists the project will eventually earn a return of *7 per cent per annum *when the network is *sold to the public,* supposedly in about 20 years. Whoopeeeeeeeeeee a massive 7% ....... can't wait.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...d-up-in-red-tape/story-e6frg8zx-1225985867050

Ummmmmmmmmm ....... Let me get this straight? We are funding it with approx 27.5 BILLION dollars of our tax payers money only to have it sold back to us in about 20 years?

Talk about welfare for the technocrats ........... Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


----------



## Chris45

Julia said:


> What would really be worth doing would be to put all the electricity connections underground so that every time there's a storm, people are not left without power, often for weeks.
> 
> I have no idea about the technology, but for that matter could the NBN connections and the electricity be put underground together?



Now *THAT* would be an *EXCELLENT* plan, and a *really* visionary one!!! Since they’re going to dig a network of trenches for the NBN, it would certainly make sense to put everything underground while they’re at it, even if it means extending the rollout by several more years, and if the Coalition could adopt it as policy I think many would support it.

The suburb I live in was developed some forty years ago and the decision was made to put all services underground and in the thirty years I’ve lived here we’ve had very few blackouts, no power surges, and no people being electrocuted by fallen wires or losing their hearing while using the phone during a storm. There is no visual pollution of all of those ugly power poles with their webs of wires and no danger of being pooped on by a bird sitting on the overhead wires (as happened in another area once). Going from my suburb into an older suburb with all its poles and wires is like going back in time!

The power and phone cables here run under the concrete footpaths, so are relatively easy to access if needed without destroying any trees or bushes, and it's really difficult for a moron in a backhoe to accidentally dig them up. A Telstra technician showed me recently how they protect their connections from water when the pits flood. The connections are tucked up into a plastic ‘diving bell’ which is suspended inside the pit. The water can only rise so far up into the bell and air pressure then stops it from reaching the connections. The whole system works beautifully!


----------



## trainspotter

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sC3TS_qP-xA

This is the future right here right now.


----------



## Mofra

sails said:


> NBNmyths, I have always said there is likely nothing too much wrong with NBN, but it's the high price tag.
> 
> Australia is now in debt and that debt is climbing.  Ms Gillard wants to impose a levy to help rebuild Qld infrastructure apparently because of insufficient funds.
> 
> Under these circumstances, no matter how shiny and nice the new product might be, I don't think this country can afford it right now given it's financial difficulties.
> 
> We need to look for a more affordable solution.  May not be quite as fast, but if that's all we can afford since labor spent all our savings, that's the way it just may have to be.
> 
> BTW are you on a government or NBN payroll?



The high price tag depends on how the returns are structured - as a project that is planned to receive a profitable return, it's an off-budget item so scrapping it tomorrow would not effect any surplus/deficit argument. 

There are still issues to work though - the battery life in the NBN-box unit is an example, as copper networks are slightly electrified so that if the power is out people still can obtain their legislated access to emergency services. As fible is non-electrified, a battery needs to be installed at the junction so that a certain amount of power is supplied in the event of black-out for that emergency service access. Battery life is (to my knowledge) not yet determined.

Copper is very old technology, and make no mistake that if the regulatory framework was disbanded tomorrow, much of the expensive copper network would fall into disrepair due to unprofitable infrastructure being placed into the "too hard to repair" basket. In a country as sparsely populated as Australia, and with few major players, communications is unfortunately an industry that does require a strong regulatory framework.

I know many are fans of wireless, but we are only a few years away from major spectrum issues that are exaasebated by the rise in data services from smartphones (300% over the last 12 months!). The Voda/Hutch merger will make this a very interesting space to watch in the near future.


----------



## NBNMyths

sails said:


> NBNmyths, I have always said there is likely nothing too much wrong with NBN, but it's the high price tag.
> 
> Australia is now in debt and that debt is climbing.  Ms Gillard wants to impose a levy to help rebuild Qld infrastructure apparently because of insufficient funds.
> 
> Under these circumstances, no matter how shiny and nice the new product might be, I don't think this country can afford it right now given it's financial difficulties.
> 
> We need to look for a more affordable solution.  May not be quite as fast, but if that's all we can afford since labor spent all our savings, that's the way it just may have to be.
> 
> BTW are you on a government or NBN payroll?




Yes, it's a big price tag. But good infrastructure costs big money. You could build a cheaper network, but then it wouldn't be as fast, or as universal, and one day we'd have to pony up and do it anyway. Remember what we are doing here...Effectively replacing our entire copper infrastructure with fibre-optic. It's a massive project, hence the cost.

But in the scope of the budget, the Government contribution is quite reasonable. During the 10 years we'll spend $27.5bn on the NBN, we'll spend $1Trillion on public health, $500bn on public education and $200bn on defence.

Our debt is relatively small, and the debt for the NBN (as bonds), is of no concern to me. The debt costs 5%, and will be returned at 7%. It's true that these numbers are based on the business plan, but that's all we have to go on, and it's been generally well received by financial commentators. It's also supported by the KPMG study.

Could we do something cheaper and still deliver significant benefits?

Perhaps, but it wouldn't be very good in the long term. Wireless isn't even a stop-gap option, so that leaves either a copper upgrade of some sort or HFC cable. Upgrading copper is problematic, expensive and a short-term stop-gap. Of the 9200 telephone exchanges in Australia, only 400 have access to multiple ADSL2+ vendors, and the average ADSL2+ speed availability in Australia is 8-9Mbps due to distance issues. To get a decent speed increase (say delivering ~40Mbps to most people) would require the construction of tens-of-thousands of powered nodes containing VDSL tech. But this also requires two pairs of copper to each premises, which only about 15-20% of premises have. So we would need to build and power the nodes, run fibre to them, then run more copper to premises. I don't see there being much of a financial saving, but the outcome is far below what FTTP would bring. 

Rolling out more Hybrid Fibre Coaxial (HFC) cable is of no cost benefit over fibre, so there's no point doing that. But, perhaps rather than overbuilding the HFC networks, they could be incorporated into the NBN. While the outcome for these areas would be well below the NBN fibre, it could offer short-term savings with no additional costs, and those areas could be fibred at a later date.

There's a great (but technical) *comparison* of FTTP, FTTN and Wireless by Professor Rod Tucker from Melbourne Uni. If you want a better understanding of the options, it's worth a read.

I don't care who builds the NBN. If the Coalition came up with a viable alternative, I'd be all for it. But their current policy is, to be blunt, backward and atrocious.

No, I'm not on any government, NBN, supplier, contractor or related payroll. I don't know anyone who is and I hold no shares in any company that would benefit from the NBN. I'm a small business owner, but passionate about technology. My only interest in the NBN is that I see it (or something like it) as a necessary piece of infrastructure for our future.



trainspotter said:


> *GOSH !!!!! *  Look at them come out of the woodwork to defend a shiny blue cable. First time poster from NBNMyths is an absolute CORKER !! :
> 
> Sooooooooooo we really need to spend 43 billion dollars on a shiny blue cable that will save us from anhilation on the technology front compared to the rest of the world?? This Government can't even manage the existing programmes it has in place let alone introduce the worlds most expensive Fibre Optic Network Cabling System.
> 
> No other government in the world has been so ambitious in the scale of the design and massive public funding of a national fibre network, or the constraints on competition from alternative technology.
> 
> According to the NBN business plan, the Australian version will require a $27.5bn investment by taxpayers, buttressed by $13.5bn in debt from private investors, mainly from offshore. (To date NIL investors have signed up for it, offshore or otherwise)
> 
> Even NBN Co says there is a risk that private investors will not take up the opportunity and $27.5bn could turn into Canberra's minimum commitment. LOLOL ..... Beauty Newk !
> 
> Then there is the additional $13bn-plus to be paid to Telstra over several years in exchange for use of its equipment and its commitment to shut down any broadband competition to NBN Co from its copper network and its pay TV cable, which passes 2.4 million homes. (Deal has not been finalised and is still in protracted negotiations)
> 
> *The more than $40bn required to fund the project is a huge investment for a project that can only offer best guesses on consumer preferences, changing technology, competition from wireless and rollout risk, including the cost and availability of labour.*
> 
> But the government, backed by NBN Co's figures, insists the project will eventually earn a return of *7 per cent per annum *when the network is *sold to the public,* supposedly in about 20 years. Whoopeeeeeeeeeee a massive 7% ....... can't wait.
> 
> Ummmmmmmmmm ....... Let me get this straight? We are funding it with approx 27.5 BILLION dollars of our tax payers money only to have it sold back to us in about 20 years?
> 
> Talk about welfare for the technocrats ........... Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz




Well, if we want to be technologically competitive, then yes we need to spend it. If technological competitiveness doesn't matter, then we don't need to spend it. That's probably the reason why so many business and technology groups are so supportive of the project.

We are already seeing investment coming in on the back of the NBN, like HP's new $120M regional datacentre in Sydney. We are also seeing the beginning of the job and investment creation due to the construction itself, with hundreds of jobs and millions in Australian manufacturing upgrades:
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/nbn-bonanza-for-cable-contractors/story-fn6bmfwf-1225990530604
http://delimiter.com.au/2011/01/17/nbn-co-inks-trio-of-small-cable-deals/

Fibre To The Premises (FTTP) is the best technology for communications delivery. It's also the most future proof (upgrade the ends, and the network gets faster). Fibre has been the fastest data transmission medium for 40 years, and current in-use bandwidth for one single strand of fibre is thousands of times greater than the maximum total theoretical bandwidth for wireless, let alone what we can actually get from it. That's why all our major networks are fibre based. All the world's countries, all the telephone exchanges, all the cellular towers are joined by fibre.

Pretty sure that it's not the most expensive fibre cabling system out there. NTT in Japan spent *US$47billion* on their NBN, and South Korea have just announced that they are *spending another US$24bn* upgrading their existing fibre network. Now if they are spending $24bn upgrading the hardware, you can be assured that it cost them lots more than that to roll out the fibre+hardware in the first place! 

And let's not forget that the total cost isn't just for fibre. There will be hundreds of wireless towers and two dedicated satellites for rural and regional areas where low population density makes fibre cost-prohibitive and wireless viable.

Private funding...No-one has signed up, because no-one has been asked to. Private funding isn't required until 2015.

A 7% return is fine for a non-commercial project, and it doesn't need to be sold to get that return, any future sale is on top of that. The 7% return is purely from revenue. 

Now since when do we expect a serious return from Government infrastructure? Do you think the roads, rail, electricity or telephone networks made commercial returns for the Govt when they were rolled out?

As for the future sale... Personally, I'd much rather that it not be sold, and the legislation actually requires the approval of federal parliament for that to take place.





trainspotter said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sC3TS_qP-xA
> 
> This is the future right here right now.




I assume you're inferring that wireless is the future? Sorry, just not possible. There is a reason why there are no telco engineers advocating wireless as a replacement for fixed networks.


I have no issue with people who oppose the NBN for whatever reason. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But they are not entitled to their own facts, which is the entire reason for the NBN Myths site. When people make physically impossible claims about apparently alternate technologies, they should expect to be taken to task on them.


----------



## derty

Cheers NBNmyths, when you boil it down and look at the facts it's the only alternative to replace the copper network and with time it will revolutionise the way our information/data/entertainment sphere functions. 

That comparison link is great and spells out the benefits of fibre in simple terms. It has already been posted here though it doesn't appear to have been read by many. 



NBNMyths said:


> Fibre To The Premises (FTTP) is the best technology for communications delivery.



The NBN will end up making FOXTEL cable network infrastructure obsolete and will open up the market to many competitors which is why you see the Murdoch rags conducting such a concerted campaign against the rollout.


----------



## wayneL

OK I can see NBN may ultimately be inevitable/desirable/necessary:

But the thing that concerns me is NBN on top of of bewildering myriad of wasteful programs/quangos/middle class welfare/etc/etc/etc/etc.

1/ Form a razor gang to address the above

2/ I see no harm in delaying the roll-out of NBN to put basic infrastructure back together after the east coast troubles etc.


----------



## tothemax6

derty said:


> The NBN will end up making FOXTEL cable network infrastructure obsolete and will open up the market to many competitors which is why you see the Murdoch rags conducting such a concerted campaign against the rollout.



I'm sorry, but can someone pro-NBN please address the fact that it is funded with expropriated money? It is not an enterprise. Can they also please address the fact that any pro-NBN argument can also be applied to any other tax-funded project, regardless of its size?

Regarding public projects - whether or not a man or a group of men can explain that a project is fantastic, we would never accept it is so fantastic as to allow them to rob us to fund it. Why is it that when the group of men is referred to with the English word 'government', a group formed by elections, does it become right that they can expropriate whatever funds they so wish, in whatever quantity they deem appropriate, to fund whatever project they consider good?
There is a place for such people - jail.


----------



## NBNMyths

tothemax6 said:


> I'm sorry, but can someone pro-NBN please address the fact that it is funded with expropriated money? It is not an enterprise. Can they also please address the fact that any pro-NBN argument can also be applied to any other tax-funded project, regardless of its size?
> 
> Regarding public projects - whether or not a man or a group of men can explain that a project is fantastic, we would never accept it is so fantastic as to allow them to rob us to fund it. Why is it that when the group of men is referred to with the English word 'government', a group formed by elections, does it become right that they can expropriate whatever funds they so wish, in whatever quantity they deem appropriate, to fund whatever project they consider good?
> There is a place for such people - jail.




Well, if you go to an election with a policy to spend a certain amount of money on a certain project, and you are voted into Government, then I would suggest that you are well within your rights to spend that amount of money on that project.

You may question the legitimacy of the Labor Government at this time, but there is no question that a majority of Australians voted for parties (Labor or Greens) or independents (all of them) that supported the NBN. In other words, a majority of Australians voted to spend the money on the NBN.

Given this, how is the money expropriated?

I'm not sure what you mean by _"any pro-NBN argument can also be applied to any other tax-funded project, regardless of its size?"_


----------



## IFocus

zzaaxxss3401 & NBNMyths thanks guys great input


----------



## NBNMyths

wayneL said:


> OK I can see NBN may ultimately be inevitable/desirable/necessary:
> 
> But the thing that concerns me is NBN on top of of bewildering myriad of wasteful programs/quangos/middle class welfare/etc/etc/etc/etc.
> 
> 1/ Form a razor gang to address the above
> 
> 2/ I see no harm in delaying the roll-out of NBN to put basic infrastructure back together after the east coast troubles etc.




I am all for the NBN spending being scrutinised to ensure value for money. I am relieved that it's not the Government who is actually building it, and that they have recruited some very respected talent to run NBN Co.

The only valid reason I can see for a delay is if the rebuild leads to a labour shortage, and a subsequent increase in the cost of the rollout. In this case, NBN should be able to concentrate on unaffected areas first. But delaying due to the cost of recovery alone does not provide any benefit.


----------



## IFocus

NBNMyths said:


> Well, if you go to an election with a policy to spend a certain amount of money on a certain project, and you are voted into Government, then I would suggest that you are well within your rights to spend that amount of money on that project.
> 
> You may question the legitimacy of the Labor Government at this time, but there is no question that a majority of Australians voted for parties (Labor or Greens) or independents (all of them) that supported the NBN. In other words, a majority of Australians voted to spend the money on the NBN.
> 
> Given this, how is the money expropriated?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean by _"any pro-NBN argument can also be applied to any other tax-funded project, regardless of its size?"_




Actually Labor won the primary vote Abbott lost the independents who supported the NBN yes you are right NBN green light.


----------



## wayneL

NBNMyths said:


> I am all for the NBN spending being scrutinised to ensure value for money. I am relieved that it's not the Government who is actually building it, and that they have recruited some very respected talent to run NBN Co.
> 
> The only valid reason I can see for a delay is if the rebuild leads to a labour shortage, and a subsequent increase in the cost of the rollout. In this case, NBN should be able to concentrate on unaffected areas first. But delaying due to the cost of recovery alone does not provide any benefit.




The benefit is fiscal.


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> Yes, it's a big price tag. But good infrastructure costs big money.  It's a massive project, hence the cost. We cant afford to rebuild flooded areas of QLD ?? How can we afford the price tag?? HUH
> 
> But in the scope of the budget, the Government contribution is quite reasonable. During the 10 years we'll spend $27.5bn on the NBN, we'll spend $1Trillion on public health, $500bn on public education and $200bn on defence. All necessary funding and projects that require IMMEDIATE attention. Not a shiny blue cable that will deliver internet speed faster?? I am all for having an NBN when we can fix what we have in place already !!!!
> Our debt is relatively small, and the debt for the NBN (as bonds), is of no concern to me. The debt costs 5%, and will be returned at 7%. HAhahahahah a ha aaha ah a in 20 years time you iriot!!!!! . It's true that these numbers are based on the business plan, but that's all we have to go on, and it's been generally well received by financial commentators. It's also supported by the KPMG study. Tell me when financial commentators have EVER been right?? Name one position wherby they actually had the upper hand in a FISCAL argument ??? Why is it the rest of the WORLD is questioning the amount of money being spent??
> 
> Could we do something cheaper and still deliver significant benefits? More than likely we could SLOW DOWN the process and see if it is succesful rather than CHOKING on such a massive program.
> 
> Perhaps, but it wouldn't be very good in the long term. Wireless isn't even a stop-gap option, so that leaves either a copper upgrade of some sort or HFC cable. Upgrading copper is problematic, expensive and a short-term stop-gap. Of the 9200 telephone exchanges in Australia, only 400 have access to multiple ADSL2+ vendors, and the average ADSL2+ speed availability in Australia is 8-9Mbps due to distance issues. To get a decent speed increase (say delivering ~40Mbps to most people) would require the construction of tens-of-thousands of powered nodes containing VDSL tech. But this also requires two pairs of copper to each premises, which only about 15-20% of premises have. So we would need to build and power the nodes, run fibre to them, then run more copper to premises. I don't see there being much of a financial saving, but the outcome is far below what FTTP would bring.
> 
> BLAH BLAH BLAH HHHHHHHH ....... We have internet already at a relatively high speed compared to the rest of the world ......... I give up???  I am typing to you at a very fast pace. I cannot read any faster than what I am downloading already ?? Why do we need to have such blinding speed when less than 30% of Australia can cope with what we have now in the way of internet access?? HUH ??? The amount spent on IT already FIXING the **** we have in palce is astounding !!!!
> Rolling out more Hybrid Fibre Coaxial (HFC) cable is of no cost benefit over fibre, so there's no point doing that. But, perhaps rather than overbuilding the HFC networks, they could be incorporated into the NBN. While the outcome for these areas would be well below the NBN fibre, it could offer short-term savings with no additional costs, and those areas could be fibred at a later date. FINALLY ....... some sense ......... UTILISE the existing infrastructure and creat e HYBRID version to benefit Australia THEN upgrade to worlds best practice.
> There's a great (but technical) *comparison* of FTTP, FTTN and Wireless by Professor Rod Tucker from Melbourne Uni. If you want a better understanding of the options, it's worth a read.
> 
> I don't care who builds the NBN. If the Coalition came up with a viable alternative, I'd be all for it. But their current policy is, to be blunt, backward and atrocious. We are NOT talking politics .... I want the highest speed to download pr0n from the internet just like everyone else. I DON'T want it at the expense of the country or to the tax payer.
> No, I'm not on any government, NBN, supplier, contractor or related payroll. I don't know anyone who is and I hold no shares in any company that would benefit from the NBN. I'm a small business owner, but passionate about technology. My only interest in the NBN is that I see it (or something like it) as a necessary piece of infrastructure for our future. LOLOLOL .......... then go and spend YOUR money getting the best available technology and RECEIVE all the high speed internet you want. I want a bigger boat with a 1000HP Volvo V10 motor. I CAN'T AFFORD it so I will just plug along with my little 450HP 6 cylinder until I can afford it.
> 
> Well, if we want to be technologically competitive, then yes we need to spend it. If technological competitiveness doesn't matter, then we don't need to spend it. That's probably the reason why so many business and technology groups are so supportive of the project. Do we need to be this technologically advanced?? REALLY ...... we are a nation of 23 million people. Not even a suburb of India or China. Get over yourself.
> 
> We are already seeing investment coming in on the back of the NBN, like HP's new $120M regional datacentre in Sydney. We are also seeing the beginning of the job and investment creation due to the construction itself, with hundreds of jobs and millions in Australian manufacturing upgrades:
> http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/nbn-bonanza-for-cable-contractors/story-fn6bmfwf-1225990530604
> http://delimiter.com.au/2011/01/17/nbn-co-inks-trio-of-small-cable-deals/
> 
> Fibre To The Premises (FTTP) is the best technology for communications delivery. It's also the most future proof (upgrade the ends, and the network gets faster). Fibre has been the fastest data transmission medium for 40 years, and current in-use bandwidth for one single strand of fibre is thousands of times greater than the maximum total theoretical bandwidth for wireless, let alone what we can actually get from it. That's why all our major networks are fibre based. All the world's countries, all the telephone exchanges, all the cellular towers are joined by fibre.
> 
> Pretty sure that it's not the most expensive fibre cabling system out there. NTT in Japan spent *US$47billion* on their NBN, and South Korea have just announced that they are *spending another US$24bn* upgrading their existing fibre network. Now if they are spending $24bn upgrading the hardware, you can be assured that it cost them lots more than that to roll out the fibre+hardware in the first place!
> 
> And let's not forget that the total cost isn't just for fibre. There will be hundreds of wireless towers and two dedicated satellites for rural and regional areas where low population density makes fibre cost-prohibitive and wireless viable.
> 
> Private funding...No-one has signed up, because no-one has been asked to. Private funding isn't required until 2015.
> 
> A 7% return is fine for a non-commercial project, and it doesn't need to be sold to get that return, any future sale is on top of that. The 7% return is purely from revenue.
> 
> Now since when do we expect a serious return from Government infrastructure? Do you think the roads, rail, electricity or telephone networks made commercial returns for the Govt when they were rolled out?
> 
> As for the future sale... Personally, I'd much rather that it not be sold, and the legislation actually requires the approval of federal parliament for that to take place.
> 
> As fo rthe rest of the palava you have placed out here in a public forum I am ashamed that Australians are prepared to place an anchor of such ill informed nonsense around their neck thinking that this will be the be all and end all of our great country. We do not have enough police, hospitals, road funding, education, scholastic requirements BUT WE NEED A FUGGEN SHINY BLUE CABLE????
> 
> I assume you're inferring that wireless is the future? Sorry, just not possible. There is a reason why there are no telco engineers advocating wireless as a replacement for fixed networks.
> 
> Nope .......... you missed it completely ....... the thrust of the video was to say that EVERYTHING is replacebale with new technology. You want a shiny blue cable ( Ozzie Osborne ....... before you know it a Justin Bieber walks on by and makes you redundant in a blink of an eye)
> 
> I have no issue with people who oppose the NBN for whatever reason. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But they are not entitled to their own facts, which is the entire reason for the NBN Myths site. When people make physically impossible claims about apparently alternate technologies, they should expect to be taken to task on them.




And as should you for the myths you have spread as to the capabilities and costings of the greatest HOODWINK the Australian public is being induced into perceiving this is their only great hope of advancement into the future.

Talk about playing the fiddle whilst Rome burns. Harumph ..........


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> We cant afford to rebuild flooded areas of QLD ?? How can we afford the price tag?? HUH




It's not a difficult concept. The NBN provides a return, other Govt expenditure generally doesn't. I could type it all again, but maybe you should just read *this*. I'm sure you'll disagree, but, meh.



> All necessary funding and projects that require IMMEDIATE attention. Not a shiny blue cable that will deliver internet speed faster?? I am all for having an NBN when we can fix what we have in place already !!!!




Let's say for a moment that we could just redirect the NBN money to health, for example. What would that achieve?

Such a redirection would add 3% to the health budget per year for 10 years. Do you honestly think that would do _anything at all_? And at the end of the 10 years, having made no noticeable improvement to healthcare, we'd be an extra $27bn in debt with nothing tangible to show for it.



> Our debt is relatively small, and the debt for the NBN (as bonds), is of no concern to me. The debt costs 5%, and will be returned at 7%. HAhahahahah a ha aaha ah a in 20 years time you iriot!!!!! .




Actually, the return begins in 2019/20, so 9 years from now. It's complete in 2034, including 7%pa (not 7% total).



> It's true that these numbers are based on the business plan, but that's all we have to go on, and it's been generally well received by financial commentators. It's also supported by the KPMG study. Tell me when financial commentators have EVER been right?? Name one position wherby they actually had the upper hand in a FISCAL argument ??? Why is it the rest of the WORLD is questioning the amount of money being spent??




The rest of the world? Hmm, all I've seen as far as criticism goes from overseas is a billionaire from Mexico saying the NBN costs too much (You would prefer Mexican telecommunications, perhaps?), and a misrepresented comment from an NTT Japan boss, which is what we've come to expect from The Oz. His *real comments* were somewhat different!



> Could we do something cheaper and still deliver significant benefits? More than likely we could SLOW DOWN the process and see if it is succesful rather than CHOKING on such a massive program.




How slowly would you want it to go? I swear, it's impossible to win with the anti-NBN crowd. When the duration went from 8 to 10 years, they cried that it takes too long. Now they say we are rushing it!

The NBN have rolled out three trial sites in Tassie, and are now doing 5 trial sites on the mainland. After that, there's another 14 2nd release trial sites, with the main rollout not commencing until 2011. So two years worth of trials in 22 areas isn't enough?



> BLAH BLAH BLAH HHHHHHHH ....... We have internet already at a relatively high speed compared to the rest of the world ......... I give up???




You really think we have "relatively high speed" compared to the rest of the world? Are you serious? _Turkey_ has higher average broadband speeds than us. *Turkey!*

The OECD currently rank us in 18th place out of 31 developed countries for broadband speed. We are ranked 24th/31 for fibre-optic penetration.



> HUH ??? The amount spent on IT already FIXING the **** we have in palce is astounding !!!!



And that's exactly the point. The maintenance cost of keeping our decrepit old copper network running is huge. Why do you think Telstra are so keen to sign their agreement to decommission it?



> LOLOLOL .......... then go and spend YOUR money getting the best available technology and RECEIVE all the high speed internet you want. I want a bigger boat with a 1000HP Volvo V10 motor. I CAN'T AFFORD it so I will just plug along with my little 450HP 6 cylinder until I can afford it.




Well, considering Volvo Penta don't make a V10, you might have a while to save up for one 



> Do we need to be this technologically advanced?? REALLY ...... we are a nation of 23 million people. Not even a suburb of India or China. Get over yourself.




Well let's see. The Netherlands have about our population, and they are rolling out FTTP. Other countries with lower or similar populations than us, who are currently rolling out FTTP networks include:
• Iceland _(Pop. 320,000)_
• Norway _(Pop. 4.8 million)_
• Denmark _(Pop. 5.5 million)_
• The Slovak Republic _(Pop. 5.5 million)_
• The Czech Republic _(Pop. 10 million)_
• Peru _(Pop. 29 million)_



> As fo rthe rest of the palava you have placed out here in a public forum I am ashamed that Australians are prepared to place an anchor of such ill informed nonsense around their neck thinking that this will be the be all and end all of our great country. We do not have enough police, hospitals, road funding, education, scholastic requirements BUT WE NEED A FUGGEN SHINY BLUE CABLE????




See point above about healthcare;
Police are a state fund;
 The NBN will greatly contribute to education. For example;
And, if supported by business, will lead to greater telecommuting resulting in less traffic and congestion on roads and rail networks.

Oh, and I'm pretty sure the cable isn't very shiny. 



> Nope .......... you missed it completely ....... the thrust of the video was to say that EVERYTHING is replacebale with new technology. You want a shiny blue cable ( Ozzie Osborne ....... before you know it a Justin Bieber walks on by and makes you redundant in a blink of an eye)And as should you for the myths you have spread as to the capabilities and costings of the greatest HOODWINK the Australian public is being induced into perceiving this is their only great hope of advancement into the future.
> 
> Talk about playing the fiddle whilst Rome burns. Harumph ..........




Funny! What I picture when I read this is some cranky old man with a wrinkly face and a walking stick, scowling _BAH HUMBUG!_

Sure, technology advances. But, for the last 40 years fibre-optic has been at the forefront. No other technology has ever approached it for speed, let alone beaten it. The same fibre cables that were laid under the oceans 30 years ago are still working today, and their speed has been constantly increased as the tech has improved. But the cables remain the same. 

Even in theory, wireless and copper can never even approach the speed we are delivering over fibre right now. Current fibre technology is 250,000 times faster than wireless and 100,000 times faster than copper.

So sure, technology advances. And the 1Gbps GPON equipment used on our NBN will no doubt be superseded before the rollout is even complete. When that happens, we can replace the bits, keep the cable and get a 10Gbps NBN. Or a 100Gbps NBN. But using that as a reason not to build the NBN is like saying you shouldn't buy a coputer because in 5 years it will be superseded. If you didn't buy that computer, then in 5 years time you'd be 5 more years out of date. Then what? Do you keep holding off and using that old 286, or do you eventually do something about it?


----------



## tothemax6

NBNMyths said:


> Well, if you go to an election with a policy to spend a certain amount of money on a certain project, and you are voted into Government, then I would suggest that you are well within your rights to spend that amount of money on that project.
> 
> You may question the legitimacy of the Labor Government at this time, but there is no question that a majority of Australians voted for parties (Labor or Greens) or independents (all of them) that supported the NBN. In other words, a majority of Australians voted to spend the money on the NBN.
> 
> Given this, how is the money expropriated?



How is it not? 49% of the populace didn't want it, hence you are stealing from them. You are using phrase-laundering with the phrase 'the money'. It is 'our money'. A majority vote does not make moral theft from the minority. 
And btw nor did these 51% vote specifically for this particular policy. I doubt more than 5% of the population specifically voted for labor because of their NBN policy. When you have the choice of two major parties, both which have a multitude of policies going into the election, you cannot thereafter specifically refer to isolated individual policies of the victor as logically having moral sanction from the majority, and at the same time believe yourself to be intelligent. Only in the case where individual policies are voted for (i.e. referendums) can they be declared supported by a majority. Comprende?


NBNMyths said:


> I'm not sure what you mean by _"any pro-NBN argument can also be applied to any other tax-funded project, regardless of its size?"_



"Its really good, its an investment for the future, we need it, the expense is justified, the existing infrastructure is 'insufficient', we don't want australia to 'slip behind', etc etc".

And whats your deal anyway? You sign up at this forum (an aussie stock forum), with the name 'NBNMyths', and post *monster* pro-NBN posts that look like essays, and you do these posts during the day as well. May I hazard a guess at who NBNMyths is? A labor internet-foot-soldier perhaps?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

The NBN is a dead parrot.

ALP higher-ups have decided.

London to a brick.







gg


----------



## drsmith

Garpal Gumnut said:


> The NBN is a dead parrot.
> 
> ALP higher-ups have decided.



If that were the case, The Australian would have more than this for fodder,

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nbn-to-cost-24-times-s-koreas/story-e6frg6n6-1226002952747
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/aus...-nonsense-of-nbn/story-e6frgakx-1226002441049

God bless The Australian.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

drsmith said:


> If that were the case, The Australian would have more than this for fodder,
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nbn-to-cost-24-times-s-koreas/story-e6frg6n6-1226002952747
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/aus...-nonsense-of-nbn/story-e6frgakx-1226002441049
> 
> God bless The Australian.




It's gone, mate.

gg


----------



## So_Cynical

Garpal Gumnut said:


> The NBN is a dead parrot.
> 
> ALP higher-ups have decided.
> 
> London to a brick.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gg




Your radar is way off GG...probably courtesy of Yasi 
maybe a case of post traumatic shock. :

Politically another back down would be the end of them....NBNMyths has gotchas all spooked.


----------



## drsmith

Garpal Gumnut said:


> It's gone, mate.
> 
> gg



If it were to go, it will still be a slow and expensive death. 

To kill it outright would not only be a significant loss of hide for the ALP, it would also mean the loss of a few vital organs as well.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

So_Cynical said:


> Your radar is way off GG...probably courtesy of Yasi
> maybe a case of post traumatic shock. :
> 
> Politically another back down would be the end of them....NBNMyths has gotchas all spooked.




Without the True Bee Levers, how would we ever get stung , mate.

gg


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> If it were to go, it will still be a slow and expensive death.
> 
> To kill it outright would not only be a significant loss of hide for the ALP, it would also mean the loss of a few vital organs as well.




It would be certain political suicide...along the lines of say the Coalition dumping Turnbull for the totally unelectable 1 vote Tony...now that was a cracker. :bonk:


NBN Rollout Scrapped = snowball in hell.


----------



## Julia

drsmith said:


> If it were to go, it will still be a slow and expensive death.
> 
> To kill it outright would not only be a significant loss of hide for the ALP, it would also mean the loss of a few vital organs as well.



Agree.  It would certainly be the end of Conroy, for one.
Just can't see it happening, gg.
Possibly they could defer it ostensibly to pay for flood and cyclone recovery and then allow it to fade into nothing.
But I doubt it.
Too much to lose.  One backdown too many.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> It would be certain political suicide...along the lines of say the Coalition dumping Turnbull for the totally unelectable 1 vote Tony...now that was a cracker. :bonk:



The Coalition almost lost it's brain when it changed Turnbull for Abbott, but in fairness to the Liberal Party, only one side of that brain was functioning at best.


----------



## drsmith

Julia said:


> Too much to lose.  One backdown too many.



If they were to back away, the face saving option may be the rollout schedule.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Believe me.

It's gorne.

gg


----------



## wayneL

drsmith said:


> The Coalition almost lost it's brain when it changed Turnbull for Abbott, but in fairness to the Liberal Party, only one side of that brain was functioning at best.




The Social Democrat side?


----------



## trainspotter

Funny how a NEW subscriber to Aussie Stock Forums has all the answers to an oft quoted furphy. Get a grip sunshine. Go back to Whirlpool with the rest of the technocrats. For CHRISAAKKKKE !!!!!!!!! We have a subdivision here where I live with the shiny blue cable in the ground. It is yet to live up to its expectations by a LOOOONG shot. 

Supposed to give:-

1) blindingly fast internet ....... FAIL
2) home security by providing monitoring responses by an LAN ...... FAIL
3) video and movie on demand ........ FAIL
4) television reception ......... FAIL
5) Order groceries and other such products off the internet ...... FAIL

Most people in the subdivision have rabbit ears and Foxtel to compensate.

Your ESSAY's are kinda boring as they have no factual statements attached. oooooooooh hhhhhhhhhh YES ......... Larry Fozzpot from the same company employed to roll out the stuff says we will get 7% return .... in 20 years time when they sell it back to us. Talk about Telstra repeating itself again.

Your charade of transparency is not illuminating to the proletariat. 

D34A-MT Volvo ....... look it up. Known as the V10 in the boat world due to it's ability to drop 2 cylinders for fuel efficiency. But ...... how do you say it .... meh ? 

By the way ........ what is wrong with Turkey ?? 77 million people live there. 3.34782 times more than Australia.


----------



## drsmith

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Believe me.
> 
> It's gorne.
> 
> gg



That will be intersting in the context of Messers Conroy and Thodey shaking hands at Telstra's profit announcement tomorrow.


----------



## drsmith

wayneL said:


> The Social Democrat side?



He was in agreement with Labor and the Greens on a price on carbon and that's primarily what got him rolled. That and general political stupidity (Godwin Grech).


----------



## Mofra

tothemax6 said:


> And whats your deal anyway? You sign up at this forum (an aussie stock forum), with the name 'NBNMyths', and post *monster* pro-NBN posts that look like essays, and you do these posts during the day as well. May I hazard a guess at who NBNMyths is? A labor internet-foot-soldier perhaps?



Ah, the old tactic - when you can't fault the argument, attack the messenger. 

Would be interested to hear someone provide an actual counter-argument to the NBN that relies on facts and not rhetoric.


----------



## boofhead

Labor can't afford to have it scrapped. Windsor and co. would dump them and Labor loses power.

As for a new subdivision with nice new blue cable doing nothing useful - put blame at the company responsible for it. Is it Opticom? If so I would be surprised because one of their retail partners has FetchTV and a good reputation for speed.


----------



## prawn_86

Mofra said:


> Ah, the old tactic - when you can't fault the argument, attack the messenger.




Agreed.

ASF is a forum for discussion primarily on stocks, but also issues which can affect stocks. 

It is also a forum which facts and figures are the best form of posts rather than slagging off other members. NBNMyths has provide a hell of a lot of detail in his posts, so if anyone wishes to counter it feel free to provide some alternate detail, facts and figures


----------



## trainspotter

Myth No 1: ‘The Snowy Hydro Scheme and/or Sydney Opera House were not subjected to cost-benefit analyses, so neither should the NBN be’.

This is a classic logical fallacy, an ‘appeal to tradition’, which asserts that past practice is, ipso facto, suitable in the present. This is obviously not of itself true, for a number of reasons. Consider the bare numbers: the Sydney Opera House cost roughly $110 million. The Snowy Hydro Scheme was about $8 billion (both these figures are in 2010 dollars). We know that the NBN will likely turn out to cost in the region of $30-40 billion, if government predictions are accurate – that’s about 3 Snowy Schemes, or 360 Opera Houses. Even if those two ventures were not subjected to a cost-benefit analysis, the sheer expense of the NBN suggests the need for a more diligent approach.

Myth No 2 (a corollary to No 1): ‘The NBN is necessary simply because it is a nation-building venture, regardless of the outcome of a cost-benefit analysis’. 

While social utility is an important criterion of any government project, it should never be the sole determinant of whether a project should go ahead. Large-scale government activities ought always to be subjected to a rigorous economic analysis. The days of the 1950s, when Labor opposition leaders blithely made promises to increase aggregate government spending by 50 per cent or more without a care in the world for the economic viability of such proposals, are best left in the past. As F. A. Hayek once wrote, ‘the curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they think they can design’ – idealist nation-building should never come before statistical reality.

Myth No 3: ‘I live in a remote regional community and I have no/very slow internet, therefore the NBN is necessary’.

This is black-and-white thinking at its best. It is akin to saying, ‘I do not own a car and therefore the government should purchase for me a Rolls-Royce (although it will still charge me for servicing that I may not be able to afford)’. The question is not one of ‘yes or no’, and it is disingenuous of supporters of the network to make that claim. Instead, the question is, ‘yes, but how much?’ Do we need expensive fibre-to-the-house hardware, that is not necessarily fully exploitable by ordinary households, in 93 per cent of Australian homes? Could a sufficient level of service be achieved by upgrading existing ADSL services? These are examples of valid questions that are swept under the carpet by the black-and-white nature of this particular NBN myth, and whatever decision is made regarding the future of Australian broadband would be strengthened by a frank and full analysis of them.

Myth No 4: ‘Our regional neighbours in Asia are modernising, and if we do not keep up then we will become a backwater’. 

In my opinion, this myth captures well the cultural zeitgeist of ‘keeping up with the Joneses’ that has pervaded progressive thought in this country for many years (see Hawke’s ‘clever country’ for an earlier example). However, in this case, the argument spectacularly ignores basic variations in geography and economy that distinguish us from the Joneses of the Asia-Pacific region. Although countries such as Japan and South Korea are modernising their own telecommunications infrastructure, it is worth remembering that the population densities of these countries are over a hundred times that of Australia’s, meaning that economies of scale makes this infrastructure inherently cheaper for a larger number of people. China is the only country in the region that is remotely comparable in size and geographical issues to that of Australia – and do you see a fibre optic cable stretching into the home of every Chinese peasant? Even notwithstanding the obvious differences in personal wealth and level of development that influence the Chinese case, it is clear that geographical considerations cannot be overlooked.

Additionally, the economic strength of countries such as China, Japan and South Korea will always be greater than our own, and they will be ahead of us in ways that extend beyond telecommunications infrastructure. Let’s consider an analogous large-scale project in another country. Japan is currently engaged in the building of a Maglev train line, the Chūō Shinkansen, on which trains will one day travel at up to 600 km/h (twice the speed of contemporary high-speed rail systems). Incidentally, this train line will cost JR Central (a private Japanese railway company) $44 billion US. Of course, we are a long way behind Japan on the development of Maglev train systems, but how much credence do you think a politician would give to the suggestion that we ought to spend tens of billions of dollars on the construction of a Maglev link between Sydney and Melbourne? Probably very little – as the reader may well know, the current debate concerns whether we will have any sort of high-speed rail! The idea that the NBN will allow us to ‘lead the pack’, so to speak, is quite simply a ludicrous one when other countries will inevitably continue to outperform us in other ways, such as high-speed rail networks, and the opportunity cost of the NBN is obviously stratospheric. Instead, it is far more important for us to design policy around the consideration of domestic economic and social issues first before worrying about what other (more densely-populated and economically powerful) states are doing.

What Does Mythbusting Tell Us?

In conclusion, it is important to realise that the debunking of these myths is not in itself an invalidation of the whole NBN project. Although I see it as a near impossibility that the network will be ultimately successful in its current form, I am happy to be proven wrong in retrospect – after all, I am interested first and foremost in the best outcomes for this country. Thus, the purpose of refuting these myths is to help encourage a logical and constructive debate on the merits and demerits of the NBN, and to prevent that grandiose ambition from being implemented on the basis of incorrect and simpliciter justifications that obscure the very real potential for the network to fail, and to soften the sneering barbs of progressives who seek to portray dissenting voices as geriatric Luddites. By removing the myth of NBN as an absolute necessity, a more effective solution to Australian telecommunications needs is likely to result. 

Taken from comments in relation to this article http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...rollout-scrapped/story-fn59niix-1225950383911


----------



## drsmith

Not quiet a handshake, but still progress in that direction.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/aus...s-stephen-conroy/story-fn4iyzsr-1226003578911


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Believe me.
> 
> It's gorne.
> 
> gg





Hmm. Considering that they *signed deals* worth $1.6billion 2 weeks ago for hardware (in addition to the ~$1bn worth already signed), and just today Conroy *announced* the finalisation of the Telstra deal in addition to $100M to retrain Telstra's workforce to assist with the rollout, I don't think anyone's told the ALP or NBN co....


----------



## tothemax6

Mofra said:


> Ah, the old tactic - when you can't fault the argument, attack the messenger.
> 
> Would be interested to hear someone provide an actual counter-argument to the NBN that relies on facts and not rhetoric.





prawn_86 said:


> Agreed.
> 
> ASF is a forum for discussion primarily on stocks, but also issues which can affect stocks.
> 
> It is also a forum which facts and figures are the best form of posts rather than slagging off other members. NBNMyths has provide a hell of a lot of detail in his posts, so if anyone wishes to counter it feel free to provide some alternate detail, facts and figures



Unbelievable.
Neither of you think there is anything up with someone joining a stock forum with the name 'NBNMyths', and who is specifically there to post about the NBN, and the NBN only? Nor do you think it would perhaps be appropriate to comment on this and the nature of it? Unbelievable and laughable.
Regarding the facts and 'rhetoric', Mofra, you could perhaps respond to the rest of the content of my posts (the factual bit), rather than selectively skimming off the 'rhetoric' bit. I have already placed my counter-argument in the mix.
That is, unless you were only looking to spout rhetoric yourself. :


----------



## prawn_86

tothemax6 said:


> Unbelievable.
> Neither of you think there is anything up with someone joining a stock forum with the name 'NBNMyths', and who is specifically there to post about the NBN, and the NBN only? Nor do you think it would perhaps be appropriate to comment on this and the nature of it? Unbelievable and laughable.
> Regarding the facts and 'rhetoric', Mofra, you could perhaps respond to the rest of the content of my posts (the factual bit), rather than selectively skimming off the 'rhetoric' bit. I have already placed my counter-argument in the mix.
> That is, unless you were only looking to spout rhetoric yourself. :




NBNMyths made it quite clear that he/she was here to post comments on the issue as some posts here had quoted information *on his/her website*.

ASF fully supports freedom of speech and opinion and encourages on topic debate, providing the site rules and regulations are not breached.


----------



## prawn_86

Obama says he will spend $18b to upgrade the USA's network. Is he spending less because they already have a better network in place, therefore less upgrade required? Or is it because he is going with a cheaper option?

I have no idea about all this hardware sort of stuff.

Story here:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/11/3136019.htm?section=justin


----------



## trainspotter

Forum killer ...........


----------



## Mofra

tothemax6 said:


> Regarding the facts and 'rhetoric', Mofra, you could perhaps respond to the rest of the content of my posts (the factual bit), rather than selectively skimming off the 'rhetoric' bit. I have already placed my counter-argument in the mix.



You'd have to actually post some facts first, ttm6


----------



## tothemax6

Mofra said:


> You'd have to actually post some facts first, ttm6



Well OK, but I don't understand what you mean then by 'facts'. I have stated a line of reasoning that supports 'the NBN is bad'. Arguments are not a stream of facts, they are facts + logical reasoning as to the interrelatedness of the facts + moral implications of conclusions reached from this reasoning. Good arguments are, anyway.

But if you wish facts first: the NBN is a government project. A government project is funded by expropriation of assets from citizens. Logic: These assets cannot thenceforth be invested by the citizens according to those citizens actual personal wants. Facts: Government projects are not under market forces, i.e. competition, and hence (as proven time and time again) do not have natural checks upon inefficiency, waste, budget blow-outs, etc etc. Logic: hence such projects tend to produce much less per dollar than private projects.
Morals: the NBN is a big, government boondoggle, funded by theft, so that the politicians can point at it and say 'we did something'. It is bad.


----------



## NBNMyths

prawn_86 said:


> Obama says he will spend $18b to upgrade the USA's network. Is he spending less because they already have a better network in place, therefore less upgrade required? Or is it because he is going with a cheaper option?
> 
> I have no idea about all this hardware sort of stuff.
> 
> Story here:
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/11/3136019.htm?section=justin




The USA already has a relatively large 150Mbps Fibre To The Home (FTTH) network (which currently passes 15.4 million premises), plus an extremely large HFC cable network. Some of their cable has been upgraded to 100Mbps (shared), but most is at 50Mbps or less.

Over there, cable TV is huge business. This, combined with their relatively high population density means that there is a big commercial return for rolling out cable networks. The FTTH network is also used for cable TV. In Australia, things like the anti-siphoning list have meant that pay TV is pretty small business and there is no commercial incentive to roll out fast cable/fibre networks.

Obama's plan provides very little $$$ for fixed infrastructure, because it's all been done commercially. Although, from what I have read, he will be contributing some money for cable upgrades in less populated areas so residents can get an upgrade to 100Mbps services.

But the wireless network over there is in real trouble. There is a lack of spectrum, and due to the relatively low commercial returns (they have unlimited data on their wireless broadband, which is killing them commercially), the networks are sparse in non-profitable areas, and in many cases have not even been upgraded to 3G. 

The situation therefore is almost the opposite of Australia. While our fixed line infrastructure is waaaay behind the US, with almost no fibre and only small HFC networks. However, we do have a massive, advanced 3G wireless network (Telstra's), which covers 98% of the population already and provides theoretical speeds of 21-42Mbps. There is nothing like it in the USA.

Much of what Obama's doing over there is being funded through the sale of additional wireless spectrum, which will hopefully drag their wireless networks out of their current data crisis. IIRC they are planning on getting $27bn just from the auctioning of spectrum.

In Australia, we'll be doing a similar auction once the switch to digital TV is complete.


----------



## noco

NBNMyths said:


> Hmm. Considering that they *signed deals* worth $1.6billion 2 weeks ago for hardware (in addition to the ~$1bn worth already signed), and just today Conroy *announced* the finalisation of the Telstra deal in addition to $100M to retrain Telstra's workforce to assist with the rollout, I don't think anyone's told the ALP or NBN co....




Doesn't the Telstra deal have to be approved by the share holders and if they don't what happens then?


----------



## drsmith

noco said:


> Doesn't the Telstra deal have to be approved by the share holders and if they don't what happens then?



It does, but I'll suggest Telstra shareholders will prefer a share price closer to $3 than to $2.


----------



## bellenuit

*Senator Conroy's hypocrisy truly galling over national broadband*

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...tional-broadband/story-e6frg9if-1226004670045


----------



## sails

bellenuit said:


> *Senator Conroy's hypocrisy truly galling over national broadband*
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...tional-broadband/story-e6frg9if-1226004670045




hmmmm - will be interesting how NBNmyths will explain this one...

Without spin, pleeeeese...


----------



## So_Cynical

bellenuit said:


> *Senator Conroy's hypocrisy truly galling over national broadband*
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...tional-broadband/story-e6frg9if-1226004670045






sails said:


> hmmmm - will be interesting how NBNmyths will explain this one...
> 
> Without spin, pleeeeese...




Explain what? its a politically based, anti NBN piece of page filling opinion...not journalism.

The Govt thru Conroy uses selective comparisons to help "sell" the NBN, this it what all politicians do and could hardly be considered to be hypocritical in any genuine way.

Sth Korea has a FTTH network, Aust wants a FTTH network...Apples & Apples.

Sth Korea has a population of 50 mill in a land area of 99,392 km², Aust has a
population of 22 mill in a land area of 7,617,930 km²....Apples and Oranges.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Korea
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia


----------



## sails

So_Cynical, here's an excerpt from that article which may explain it a bit better:



> FOR years, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has been citing South Korea to justify his National Broadband Network.
> 
> But after a report this week by The Economist's Economic Intelligence Unit ranked Conroy's NBN plan poorly against top-ranked South Korea, Conroy claimed that comparing Australia with South Korea was like comparing "apples with oranges".




So, it's OK with you that Conroy used South Korea to justify his controversial NBN even though you point out the differences now? 

Now that the Economist's Economic Intelligence Unit has ranked Conroy's plan poorly against South Korea, he conveniently finds an excuse...

And you're OK that he now backflips?

It only makes me more cynical and distrusting of this politician.  Good try to brush it off, but I think Conroy has damaged his credibility further...


----------



## trainspotter

*Telstra sell-off was a mess. Let's hope we've learnt for the NBN *

But the mere fact that private ownership of the NBN is on the table is a cause for concern. Parliament has only recently passed legislation to separate Telstra's wholesale and retail arms - in effect, partially correcting the monumental error of its initial transformation from a public monopoly into a private one. Why would we do this again?

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/po...e-weve-learnt-for-the-nbn-20101223-196hx.html

Ooooooooooooooooooohhhhhhh the irony of it all. We sold Telstra to stop monopolies and to relieve Government from owning/controlling telecomunications companies. Now we are rushing headlong back into the same mistake. GOSH .... not very bright are we?

And just LOL at So_Cylcical response. Are you sure you read the same article?

_"My point isn't that nose jobs and broadband deliver no benefits, but that claimed benefits by vested interests -- like a nose doctor or a minister whose entire credibility rests on defending the NBN -- need to be checked out."_ - *Paul Kerin is Professorial Fellow, Melbourne Business School*

Yep ... real political hack job that one ??!?!??!?!??!?


----------



## So_Cynical

trainspotter said:


> *Paul Kerin is Professorial Fellow, Melbourne Business School*
> 
> Yep ... real political hack job that one ??!?!??!?!??!?




You guys are getting more desperate as the days roll by  so he's a professor, robots is a professor do we take him seriously? do we think professors don't have political opinions or agendas?

I actually took the time to google the professor and found one link calling him a Labor voter  the guy fancy's himself as a jouro / business commentator...prob has he's eyes on a TV gig sometime in the future.


----------



## Julia

So_Cynical said:


> You guys are getting more desperate as the days roll by  so he's a professor, robots is a professor do we take him seriously? do we think professors don't have political opinions or agendas?



Even allowing for your maniacal determination to defend all things Labor, this has to be one of the silliest things you've ever said.  Robots a professor?   Give me a break!!



> I actually took the time to google the professor and found one link calling him a Labor voter  the guy fancy's himself as a jouro / business commentator...prob has he's eyes on a TV gig sometime in the future.



 Well, if you'd taken a little more time you might have found one of several references to this person.  Here is just one and it's hardly the profile of a hack.



> Faculty staff profile
> Paul Kerin
> 
> PhD, AM (Harvard) MEc, BEc (Hons) (Adelaide)
> Professorial Fellow - Strategy
> 
> Paul Kerin's experiences and interests span the gamut of academia, business, media and public policy.
> 
> At MBS, Paul specialises in business strategy, corporate strategy and M&A. A Fulbright Scholar, Paul earned his PhD in Business Economics at Harvard University, where he served as the George Dively Research Fellow in the Centre for Business & Government.
> 
> Prior to joining MBS, Paul was Managing Director of AT Kearney (Australia and New Zealand). His long consulting career has ranged across strategy development and implementation, M&A, corporate finance, corporate governance and microeconomics. He has consulted in many industries (including private equity, retailing, consumer goods and telecommunications) and nations.
> 
> Paul has performed many roles in the business world, including: non-executive chairman, non-executive director, executive chairman, managing director and executive director. He is currently a director of Wheat Exports Australia and a member of funds manager JF Capital Partners' Investment Process and Trinity Best Practice Committees.
> 
> He also writes a regular column with The Australian, focusing on the curly issues that key decision-makers - directors, CEOs and politicians - face and is frequently sought for comment by other leading business publications and electronic media.


----------



## DB008

I can't wait for NBN to come to my place, l'll be able to download pr0n in 5 seconds, instead of the usual 5 minutes....LOL.

I personally feel that there are much, much, much better things to spend 40'odd + BILLION dollars on. But hey, that's just my opinion. I won't be voting Labor come the next election. Labor is wasting money like _water through a busted sieve_. 



> http://www.zdnet.com.au/govt-grilled-on-tassie-nbn-uptake-339306323.htm
> 
> *Govt grilled on Tassie NBN uptake*
> 
> ...Albanese later confirmed earlier reports that uptake of the NBN in Tasmania was around 50 per cent.
> 
> Addressing calls for a cost-benefit analysis on the $43 billion project, Gillard said significant study of the benefits of the NBN was already part of the 500-page McKinsey implementation study.


----------



## trainspotter

So_Cynical said:


> You guys are getting more desperate as the days roll by  so he's a professor, robots is a professor do we take him seriously? do we think professors don't have political opinions or agendas?
> 
> I actually took the time to google the professor and found one link calling him a Labor voter  the guy fancy's himself as a jouro / business commentator...prob has he's eyes on a TV gig sometime in the future.




Just gotta say how disappointed I am in the response there So_Cyclical. Very poor form I would have thought. The guy has a serious amount of letters behind his name in Economics from Harvard and you are comparing him to robots? 

Here is his contact details so you can confirm his "desperation" at wanting to be a journo / business commentator.

Ph: +61 3 9349 8135
Fax: +61 3 9011 6215
Email: p.kerin@mbs.edu 

Poor form.


----------



## NBNMyths

There, that's much better. Although most of these points are a bit strawman-y.



trainspotter said:


> Myth No 1: ‘The Snowy Hydro Scheme and/or Sydney Opera House were not subjected to cost-benefit analyses, so neither should the NBN be’ etc.




Although there are some people making such a comparison, I'm not one of them.

But I do agree that a CBA of the NBN would be a waste of time for different reasons.

While it would be relatively easy to assess the costs of the NBN (as has been done), quantifying the benefits is far more difficult. How do you assess the benefits of an enabling technology that will almost certainly lead to innovation and invention of other things. How can you assess the value of things not yet invented?

I think a far better comparison for the NBN is to the electricity and phone networks. Think back ~100 years to when these things were being rolled out....

When the electricity grid was being built, no-one could have predicted that it would lead to the invention and widespread use of refrigeration, air conditioning, television, radio, telex, fax, computers, email, the industrial revolution etc etc. So doing a CBA could never have assessed the financial and social benefits of these inventions.

Similarly, the copper telephone network was seen as a useless toy with little useful purpose. The bosses of the British Post Office and Western Union both derided the idea as unnecessary. But look at the inventions it has enabled...Telex, fax, email, the internet itself... Video conferencing, automatic fire/security alarms, remote control and monitoring os systems. Again, if one did a CBA of the phone system none of these things could have been included, because they hadn't been invented. It's quite likely that a CBA of the PMG (now Telstra) network would have advised that it never should be built.

The internet is in its infancy, and anyone who thinks that fast networks won't lead to uses we can't yet imagine is deluding themselves. Considering this, how can one possibly value those uses?




> Myth No 2 (a corollary to No 1): ‘The NBN is necessary simply because it is a nation-building venture, regardless of the outcome of a cost-benefit analysis’. etc




Pretty much covered above. "Nation building" is a buzz phrase, and while improving national infrastructure certainly has benefits, this one is a bit of a strawman. No-one I've seen is merely saying "build the NBN because it's (undefined) Nation Building. Improving telecommunications has tangible benefits, which have been pretty well documented by the various business and telco groups that are backing the NBN strategy.



> Myth No 3: ‘I live in a remote regional community and I have no/very slow internet, therefore the NBN is necessary’. etc




_Full and Frank?_ OK, I'll do my best...

First, it's a very poor analogy. It's not as though people in rural/regional/remote areas could "buy their own car", because often no "car" is available for them to buy.

Second, the cost of an NBN connection (comparable to current speeds) will be the same or lower than current ADSL/Cable+phone connections. If you want the higher speeds of the NBN, then they will cost more. But for remote (Sat) connections, the service cost under the NBN will be 12x faster, and less than half the price of a current Satellite service.

Finally, do we need it over an improved ADSL service? This is a harder one to answer, because the answer depends on what we expect our future speed needs to be. If we accept that ~10-12Mbps will do us for the foreseeable future, then there is no doubt that the NBN is unnecessary and expensive. For maybe a few billion, ADSL could be extended and improved so most people could get 10-12Mbps.

BUT.... Do we really think that will cut it? I suspect it would be a very naive person who thinks it will. In just the last 10 years, our speed availability (in Australia alone) has increased by well over 20,000%. Does anyone seriously expect that this 'need for speed' will not continue to grow, even if it's at a slower rate? The other massive issue (especially for business) is upload speeds. ADSL offers incredibly poor upload speeds (<1Mbps), which rules out remote backups, HD video converencing, efficient cloud computing etc. There is no way to improve this.

So if we accept that 10-12Mbps DL is not sufficient, that's where it starts to get expensive. ADSL is at it's tech limit at 24Mbps, but there are very few people able to get that speed due to two major factors:

*a) Distance.* All DSL technologies are severely limited by distance. By the time you get just 1.8km from the exchange, there is nothing that will deliver more than 12Mbps.

*b) Copper quality: *Our phone lines are (in many cases) very old. They have been soaked, boiled, cut, spliced and repaired. Every join slows the speeds, as does corrosion and damage.

Neither of the above issues can be resolved cheaply. To resolve the distance issue, you would (literally) need to construct tens-of-thousands of "nodes" closer to homes. You'd need to run fibre to those nodes, install DSL DSLAMS into them, and power them. To exceed ADSL speed limits (using VDSL2 for example), you'd also need to add a second pair of copper to each house that doesn't already have 2pr available (About 80%).

So we could upgrade our copper network, and maybe get >50Mbps to most premises using VDSL2. But at what cost? I really don't have an accurate figure, but I don't imagine it would be much cheaper than doing FTTP. You're effectively replacing the same amount of cable, plus adding nodes/DSLAMS. And in the end, you're left with a greatly inferior network and in all likelihood one which would have to be replaced with FTTP eventually. Even in the unlikely event that it only cost 50% of the NBN, is it worth it when it may only keep you going for 10 or 20 years?

A better analogy may be:
If you have a beaten up old car, would you spend $20,000 to patch it up for another year, and in all likelihood have to spend $60,000 then to replace it? Or would you buy a brand new one for $40,000 right now?



> Myth No 4: ‘Our regional neighbours in Asia are modernising, and if we do not keep up then we will become a backwater’.
> 
> ....do you see a fibre optic cable stretching into the home of every Chinese peasant?




The thing is that it's not just our regional neighbours who are killing us on this, or planning to do so. We've already covered our regional neighbours. But they are just the tip of the Iceberg. The fact is that there are hundreds of countries around the World, which are bigger, smaller, denser and less dense than Australia, who are all rolling out similar networks, either privately or by their Governments.

It's funny that you should mention China, since they are also beginning their FTTP networks, with a total of 24 million connections planned to be completed by now.

The US has just committed to having 100 million premises covered by at least 100Mbps network within 10 years. Countries that already have larger FTTP networks than Australia include: Japan, SK, HK, China, Czech, Portugal, Italy, Turkey, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Austria, Luxembourg, Poland, Iceland, Sweden, Switzerland, Norway, Spain, Hungary, Peru, the Netherlands, Denmark, France and Slovakia. 

It's not a matter of trying to "keep up with the Jonses", or take over them. It's a matter of keeping our heads above water, and not being continually left behind, putting our businesses in a position where they are totally un-competitive in a global marketplace. Currently, a fibre connection is prohibitively expensive in Australia. A connection that can be had for maybe $200 a month in the US would cost closer to $4,000 a month here, and that's on top of the tens-of-thousands to actually be connected if you're not in a fibre CBD area. There is no way an Australian business can be internationally competitive with such a massive cost disparity.

The NBN, while not as cheap as similar networks in Asia or more populated countries, will still be orders of magnitude cheaper than current options.




> In conclusion, it is important to realise that the debunking of these myths is not in itself an invalidation of the whole NBN project..... By removing the myth of NBN as an absolute necessity, a more effective solution to Australian telecommunications needs is likely to result.




You may be under the impression that I think the NBN is perfect. I don't, but I do think it's pretty close. I would be happy with a compromise that included incorporation of the Telstra/Optus HFC networks as a short-term cost saving (or at the very least, these areas should be the last to receive an NBN rollout). I'd also like to see any existing FTTP incorporated rather than overbuilt. (AFAIK, some of it will be, some won't).

But, the NBN is the best solution on offer. The Coalition policy of 12Mbps for 97% via ADSL, and an "improved" satellite service for the remaining 3% is as good as doing nothing. And _nothing_ is something we cannot afford to do.

So, given the choice of _the NBN_ verses _nothing/Coalition plan_, there is only one choice I can make. Unfortunately, they have not shown any indication that their policy will receive any serious changes before the next election.

Oh, and continuing the off-topic bit... I've certainly never heard the *V12* D34A-MT described as _the V10_, but whatever floats your boat.  But it's a bit moot, since it's been discontinued for 2 or 3 years now


----------



## drsmith

It should be rigorously subjected to a cost/benefit analysis.


----------



## NBNMyths

sails said:


> hmmmm - will be interesting how NBNmyths will explain this one...
> 
> Without spin, pleeeeese...




Sure:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/02/09/eiu_says_nbn_too_expensive/

BTW, I'm no huge fan of Conroy. I like the policy, not the man or the party.

I'm sure Paul Kerin is a very good economist, but his opposition to the NBN has been well known for a long time, after he made a submission against it to the Senate Inquiry last year.

I think I'd prefer to listen to IT and telecommunication experts in relation to an IT / telecommunication project, than to the beancounters. And IT/Telco experts opposing the NBN are few and far between.


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


>




Lucky you. You appear to be part of the <1% of Australians who live in a new fibre-served estate. Now if only the rest of us could get what you have. Hmmm. Here's an idea, why don't we do that...


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

I really regret having started this thread.

The NBN will be scrapped.

It has been decided by fat old men and baron (sic) women in Queensland, NSW and Victoria, who control the ALP's destiny. 

Once ole Kennealy takes it on board it will be gospel. Jeez, she needs all the traction she can get, not to have the ole Greens outvote the ALP in NSW.

I digress.

The NBN is dead. 

Its method of internment is all I was suggesting we discuss.

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I really regret having started this thread.
> 
> The NBN will be scrapped.
> 
> It has been decided by fat old men and baron (sic) women in Queensland, NSW and Victoria, who control the ALP's destiny.
> 
> Once ole Kennealy takes it on board it will be gospel. Jeez, she needs all the traction she can get, not to have the ole Greens outvote the ALP in NSW.
> 
> I digress.
> 
> The NBN is dead.
> 
> Its method of internment is all I was suggesting we discuss.
> 
> gg




Umm, if it's dead what will we be doing with the 100,000km of fibre we've already bought, not to mention all the other bits and pieces?  I'm pretty sure the satellites will be ordered soon too.

And I think someone had better tell Conroy, since he's still tabling bills in Parliament for it. Oh, and Telstra. They'd better not use the money Conroy gave them yesterday to retrain for fibre...

The only thing that will kill the NBN is a change of Federal Govt. So I can only hope that in 3 years, the ~2 million premises connected (~4 million voters) will have it past the (political) point of no return. :


----------



## bellenuit

NBNMyths said:


> And IT/Telco experts opposing the NBN are few and far between.




Just as accountants wanting to simplify the tax system are few and far between. Ditto farmers wanting import restrictions relaxed, CEOs wanting remuneration votes by shareholders to be made binding and religious institutions wanted their tax free status removed.


----------



## IFocus

bellenuit said:


> Just as accountants wanting to simplify the tax system are few and far between. Ditto farmers wanting import restrictions relaxed, CEOs wanting remuneration votes by shareholders to be made binding and religious institutions wanted their tax free status removed.




You forgot those that oppose everything being objective.........sorry couldn't help it, NBNMyths has put up some pretty compelling arguments


----------



## trainspotter

Unfortunately I do not have enough time to cover all the responses posted by my learned adversary but I will retort with this gem,

*NBNMyths wrote this* _"Pretty much covered above. *"Nation building"* is a buzz phrase, and while improving national infrastructure certainly has benefits, this one is a bit of a strawman. *No-one I've seen* is merely saying "build the NBN because it's (undefined) Nation Building. Improving telecommunications has tangible benefits, which have been pretty well documented by the various business and telco groups that are backing the NBN strategy."_

The Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy Senator Stephen Conroy said the Statement of Expectations puts in place the final pieces of how the NBN will be implemented.

“Today represents another significant milestone in the delivery of the NBN and it means we can get on with delivering Australia’s *largest nation-building project* in our history,” Senator Conroy said.

http://www.minister.dbcde.gov.au/media/media_releases/2010/121 .... for the Guvmint Statement of Expectations.

And this by NBNMyths    _"You may be under the impression that I think the NBN is perfect. I don't, but I do think it's pretty close. I would be happy with a compromise that included incorporation of the Telstra/Optus HFC networks as a short-term cost saving (or at the very least, these areas should be the last to receive an NBN rollout). I'd also like to see any existing FTTP incorporated rather than overbuilt. (AFAIK, some of it will be, some won't)."_

I concur with this rationale. A true modicum of sense has been displayed.


----------



## DB008

NBNMyths said:


> Lucky you. *You appear to be part of the <1% of Australians who live in a new fibre-served estate.* Now if only the rest of us could get what you have. Hmmm. Here's an idea, why don't we do that...




No.
Lower North Shore (Sydney) in a 40+ year old house. Internode ISP, l think that Internode use Optus lines or something. Try making a phone call and you can hear cracking in the background.

As l also proved in another thread, when l was in Perth, l also had the same speed.


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> No.
> Lower North Shore (Sydney) in a 40+ year old house. Internode ISP, l think that Internode use Optus lines or something. Try making a phone call and you can hear cracking in the background.
> 
> As l also proved in another thread, when l was in Perth, l also had the same speed.




To get the speed your test shows, you must either be on fibre or HFC. It's possible internode have an agreement with Optus to access their infrastructure. You can't get that speed over ADSL no matter where you are.


----------



## DB008

NBNMyths said:


> To get the speed your test shows, you must either be on fibre or HFC. It's possible internode have an agreement with Optus to access their infrastructure. You can't get that speed over ADSL no matter where you are.




I'm on the ADSL+2 Easy Broadband Classic option (I don't know if they offer that plan anymore?) with Internode. More here...
$49.95 per month, 50gb download. Super Fast for my needs. 
_Happy with Internode on ALL FRONTS._

Anyways, there is a huge discussion on the NBN over at Whirpool with some 300+ replies, broken up into 3 parts.



> http://michaelwyres.com/2011/02/nbn-interesting-tidbits-from-quigley/
> 
> NBN: Interesting Tidbits from Quigley
> 
> Following up on my previous post in regards to the shape of end-user NBN services, I thought I would discuss a few interesting comments made by NBN Co CEO Mike Quigley at the morning Q&A session at the NBN Customer Collaboration Forum last week in Melbourne.
> 
> While I will be presenting his comments as “quotes” – they are not exact word-for-word quotes, only regurgitated from my notes and I’m not the best shorthand note taker in the world! The content is however 100% accurate. Comment number one was about volume pricing, in which he stated:
> 
> “No single service provider will receive any wholesale volume pricing from NBN Co.”
> 
> This is a very important result for the industry. In simple terms, on a connection by connection basis, the wholesale price of NBN services to Retail Service Providers (RSPs) will be the same across the board. An RSP with 1,000 customers requesting an end-user service of a particular dimension from NBN Co, will be charged the exact same price for that service as an RSP with 1,000,000 customers requesting a service of the exact same dimension.
> 
> Size of the RSP will not be a factor.
> 
> What this does for the industry is allow every RSP to compete on equal wholesale customer access terms with every other RSP.
> 
> The big players will no longer be able to squeeze the smaller players on wholesale price – a practice currently common in the industry. Telstra – (as the incumbent dominant wholesale provider) – has a record of ACCC intervention when presenting retail pricing to Bigpond customers that is LOWER than their wholesale pricing to other ISPs. Most recently, Internode has had a very public spat with Telstra over wholesale pricing.
> 
> The structural separation of Telstra, and the common wholesale pricing structure under the NBN should eliminate these unfair practices forever.
> 
> Next up was a statement in response to a question from the floor about extending the reach of the fibre footprint beyond the 93% coverage in the current plans. Quigley confirmed:
> 
> “We are open to extending fibre beyond 93% coverage to interested groups willing to share the cost.”
> 
> The specific example he gave in responding to the question was that, for example, a group of farmers along a road who might be in the 94th percentile of the total NBN footprint, might be able to get together and provide the gap funding.
> 
> That is, NBN Co would look at funding the build for their situation as if they were part of the 93rd percentile, and as a group the farmers would need to fund the gap to get the build completed. This will interest a lot of communities just outside of the 93% fibre footprint who would otherwise receive wireless or satellite service from NBN Co.
> 
> Finally, one for the financial boffins, and what would be done with any “profits” generated by NBN Co:
> 
> “Any ‘profit’ above the expected IRR of 7% will be used to push wholesale pricing down, and not used as ‘profit’ as such.”
> 
> Quigley was quite strong on this point, reiterating that NBN Co are not interested in profits per-se – their primary goal is to deliver the IRR of 7% to the government to repay the debt funding used for the NBN build, as described in their corporate business plan, released late last year.
> 
> As long as the 7% IRR is reached to repay the debt, the “profits” over and above the 7% will “fund” lower wholesale pricing to the RSPs – in real world terms, this means as more and more usage develops on the network, the wholesale pricing will be able to be reduced.
> 
> With an announcement today that Telstra and NBN Co have agreed to commercial terms for the decommissioning of the Telstra copper network and the migration of existing Telstra customers on to the NBN, the question of just where NBN uptake will come from has been largely answered.
> 
> Prepare for the future.


----------



## trainspotter

Not sure what to make of this ?? 

From Post #60 by NBNMyths - *I am all for the NBN spending being scrutinised to ensure value for money.* 

From Post # 105 by NBNMyths - *But I do agree that a CBA of the NBN would be a waste of time for different reasons.*

Why is it the NBN Senate Committee reccomended a CBA but the Government has refused?

2.18      *Professor Jock Given, Professor of Media and Communications at Swinburne University's Institute for Social Research, has written:*

[In the Implementation Study, rates] *of return come out at 3.6 per cent for low demand,* low price, a cost blowout and no sharing of ducts and poles, or 8.3 per cent if it all goes swimmingly. McKinsey and KPMG think 6–7 per cent is a reasonable estimate. When the long-term bond rate is around 6 per cent, that’s enough for the government to declare it 'viable' – though it’s plainly not for the private sector, from which 'significant investment' was anticipated when the policy was announced a year ago. McKinsey and KPMG deliver this message unflinchingly, though they are only stating what most observers knew from the outset. *Despite a lot of talk about spirited investors taking a stake in the country’s broadband future and particular companies 'vending in' certain assets in exchange for equity in NBN Co, this is not even close to a commercial proposition given the level of risk*

http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/broadband_ctte/report/c02.htm#anc4

2.19      Mr Kevin Morgan, an independent analyst, submitted to the committee that the Implementation Study's findings on the commercial viability of the NBN project have led to the *government quietly moving the goalposts *on what it means to say that the NBN is commercially viable:

_f nothing else the study puts the lie to the initial announcement by the Prime Minister in April of last year that the NBN would be effectively a Public Private Partnership and would attract private sector equity whilst it was being built. That implied the NBN could be justified on commercial grounds. Faced with the obvious finding of the Study that the NBN investment *could never be deemed to be a commercial undertaking *the government’s rhetoric on the NBN has now changed.

2.25      The Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy explained to the committee that the Lead Advisor for the Implementation Study *was specifically not directed to undertake a cost-benefit analysis because such analysis was seen as superfluous given that the government had made an election commitment to build the NBN regardless of what a cost-benefit analysis might conclude:*

And all this from the Governments own Senate Committee ??? GOSH !!!! 

No wonder they do not want a CBA ....... eh ???_


----------



## boofhead

DB008 said:


> I'm on the ADSL+2 Easy Broadband Classic option (I don't know if they offer that plan anymore?) with Internode. More here...
> $49.95 per month, 50gb download. Super Fast for my needs.
> _Happy with Internode on ALL FRONTS._
> 
> Anyways, there is a huge discussion on the NBN over at Whirpool with some 300+ replies, broken up into 3 parts.




The speeds in the speedtest are not possible on a single ADSL2+ connection. MMC and others from Internode will also say so.  Try the Internode 100 MB test file without any fancy features enabled like Opera's Turbo feature. Also I'm sure you modem's line sync speeds will say the Speedtest result isn't right.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> Not sure what to make of this ??
> 
> From Post #60 by NBNMyths - *I am all for the NBN spending being scrutinised to ensure value for money.*
> 
> From Post # 105 by NBNMyths - *But I do agree that a CBA of the NBN would be a waste of time for different reasons.*




Perhaps you're misinterpreting what I wrote.

By "value for money" I mean that, within the objectives of the project (rolling out a FTTP network to 93%, Wireless to 4% and Sat to 3%), that spending of NBN Co should be fully accountable for the decisions they make in regards to equipment selection, tendering, process etc etc.

This has nothing to do with a CBA.



> Why is it the NBN Senate Committee reccomended a CBA but the Government has refused?
> 
> And all this from the Governments own Senate Committee ??? GOSH !!!!




_The Government_'s Senate committee  

*Considering the membership, should the result really come as any surprise?*

Senator the Hon. Ian Macdonald, _Chair_, *Liberal*, QLD
Senator Fiona Nash, _Deputy Chair_, *National*, NSW
Senator Simon Birmingham, *Liberal*, SA
Senator Mary Jo Fisher, *Liberal*, SA
Senator Scott Ludlam, *Green*, WA
Senator Kate Lundy, *ALP*, ACT
Senator Glenn Sterle, *ALP*, WA

You really think a committee dominated by the parties that have pledged to _demolish the NBN_ would produce a finding that recommended it go ahead?

Perhaps the funniest recommendation was the final one, where they state that the Govt should accept the "generous offer" of Henry Ergas _(Who is employed by the Liberal Party through the Menzies institute)_ to do a CBA "free of charge". I wonder what the outcome of that would be?


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> Perhaps you're misinterpreting what I wrote.
> 
> By "value for money" I mean that, within the objectives of the project (rolling out a FTTP network to 93%, Wireless to 4% and Sat to 3%), that spending of NBN Co should be fully accountable for the decisions they make in regards to equipment selection, tendering, process etc etc.
> 
> This has nothing to do with a CBA.
> 
> 
> 
> _The Government_'s Senate committee
> 
> *Considering the membership, should the result really come as any surprise?*
> 
> Senator the Hon. Ian Macdonald, _Chair_, *Liberal*, QLD
> Senator Fiona Nash, _Deputy Chair_, *National*, NSW
> Senator Simon Birmingham, *Liberal*, SA
> Senator Mary Jo Fisher, *Liberal*, SA
> Senator Scott Ludlam, *Green*, WA
> Senator Kate Lundy, *ALP*, ACT
> Senator Glenn Sterle, *ALP*, WA
> 
> You really think a committee dominated by the parties that have pledged to _demolish the NBN_ would produce a finding that recommended it go ahead?
> 
> Perhaps the funniest recommendation was the final one, where they state that the Govt should accept the "generous offer" of Henry Ergas _(Who is employed by the Liberal Party through the Menzies institute)_ to do a CBA "free of charge". I wonder what the outcome of that would be?




Granted. Misrepresentation duly noted. 

Ummmm now it is my turn for misrepresentation The link I provided to the 
Senate Committe http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committ...t/c02.htm#anc4 clearly evidences that The Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy (Labor Govt. Dept) was specifically not directed to undertake a cost-benefit analysis because such analysis was seen as superfluous given that the government had made an election commitment to build the NBN *regardless of what a cost-benefit analysis *might conclude:

Nothing to do with who chaired the Senate Committee nor the independent analysis from noted Professors in Media and Communications party leanings. SO therefore we have emminent and qualified people ADVISING the Senate Committee that this is not commercially viable and you have the LABOR Govt. Dept. specifically directed to *not *undertake an analysis because the LABOR Govt. has decided that this is an election promise of *NATION BUILDING *as per my previous post straight from the mouth of Stephen Conroy with links attached. SHHHHHEEEEEEESH ! 

I want an NBN as well BUT not for the sacrifice of the country. Install the damn thing where it is MOST needed. Where population density and commercial viability requires it. Where education (schools), law enforcement (police stations) and health (hospitals)require it. I am sure Mrs Kafoops in sleepy backwater Hicksville could not give a toss if she has superfast internet. It is meaningless when she does not have a computer or a house to live in. This Guvmint has a terrible track record of delivering ANYTHING on time or on budget. 

BTW ...... I hardly believe that 4 to 3 is "dominated" per se. And as Senate Committees can only report the findings of "independent" experts it is highly unlikely that the political leanings had any forebearance on the outcome. :


----------



## Julia

trainspotter said:


> The link I provided to the
> Senate Committe http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committ...t/c02.htm#anc4 clearly evidences that The Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy (Labor Govt. Dept) was specifically not directed to undertake a cost-benefit analysis because such analysis was seen as superfluous given that the government had made an election commitment to build the NBN *regardless of what a cost-benefit analysis *might conclude:



And that is the whole point.  The government is determined to go ahead with this project, irrespective of ANYTHING which might be presented which would deem it unwise or impracticable.
There is now way too much loss of face involved should they back down.

If it all falls in a heap after they have lost government, they won't much care.


----------



## drsmith

Julia said:


> The government is determined to go ahead with this project, irrespective of ANYTHING which might be presented which would deem it unwise or impracticable.
> There is now way too much loss of face involved should they back down.



They have and it's plan B.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> 2.18      *Professor Jock Given, Professor of Media and Communications at Swinburne University's Institute for Social Research, has written:*
> 
> [In the Implementation Study, rates] of return come out at 3.6 per cent *for low demand, low price, a cost blowout and no sharing of ducts and poles*, or 8.3 per cent if it all goes swimmingly. McKinsey and KPMG think 6–7 per cent is a reasonable estimate.




That's is exactly why we have the Telstra agreement. It gives access for NBN Co to all of Telstras ducts, pits and poles. It also guarantees high demand through the progressive decommissioning of the copper network and the migration of copper and HFC customers over to the NBN.

NBN Co have also since set the pricing of the service to achieve the desired return, and we have had Quigley state that he's happy to slow the rollout if a labour shortage due to flood recovery causes cost blowouts.

NBN Co have locked in their major component pricing (Fibre and GPON hardware) for the duration of construction, and made a deal with unions for future wage increases during the construction.

In other words, the primary risks to the return identified in the implementation study have now been addressed.



> 2.19      Mr Kevin Morgan, an independent analyst, submitted to the committee that the Implementation Study's findings on the commercial viability of the NBN project have led to the *government quietly moving the goalposts *on what it means to say that the NBN is commercially viable:
> 
> _If nothing else the study puts the lie to the initial announcement by the Prime Minister in April of last year that the NBN would be effectively a Public Private Partnership and would attract private sector equity whilst it was being built. That implied the NBN could be justified on commercial grounds. Faced with the obvious finding of the Study that the NBN investment *could never be deemed to be a commercial undertaking *the government’s rhetoric on the NBN has now changed.
> _



_

Conroy and Co may well have changed the definition of "commercially viable", but I don't care. I suspect that it was clear from the outset that if it were truly "commercially" viable, then it would be done commercially. They should never have used the term "commercially viable", when they probably meant "viable".

From Professor Joshua Gans, an economist with the Melbourne Business School: "...many commentators have, in my opinion, focussed unduly on the issue of a commercial return. In my view, it is the social return that is relevant as this is a government policy and not a money making venture."

I must admit that I don't understand the anti-NBN 'demand' for the project to achieve a "commercial rate of return". We don't make such demands of any other Government infrastructure project or service. In fact, most Government services produce a negative financial return. Because the Government's job is to provide services, not to make a profit. On this basis, why do some demand such a return from the NBN? 

On an aside, I read Morgan's submission, and researched him a little. Seems he's a long-time trade unionist at Telstra, and the majority of his submission deals with his opposition to the structural separation of them, rather than FTTP. He also makes some dubious statements about there being no international examples of either a wholesale-only network (incorrect), or a Nationwide fibre network (incorrect), or structural separation (incorrect).




			2.25      The Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy explained to the committee that the Lead Advisor for the Implementation Study *was specifically not directed to undertake a cost-benefit analysis because such analysis was seen as superfluous given that the government had made an election commitment to build the NBN regardless of what a cost-benefit analysis might conclude*

Click to expand...



Yes, that's right. The purpose of the *implementation* study was to identify the best implementation of the Government's policy, find out if the NBN project could be completed within the allocated budget, identify risks to the project and make recommendations to avoid those risks. It was never supposed to look at the value of  benefits resulting from the network.




			Nothing to do with who chaired the Senate Committee nor the independent analysis from noted Professors in Media and Communications party leanings. SO therefore we have emminent and qualified people ADVISING the Senate Committee that this is not commercially viable and you have the LABOR Govt. Dept. specifically directed to *not *undertake an analysis because the LABOR Govt. has decided that this is an election promise of *NATION BUILDING *as per my previous post straight from the mouth of Stephen Conroy with links attached. SHHHHHEEEEEEESH !
		
Click to expand...



I never said the phrase "nation building" wasn't used, I said "*undefined* nation building". You quoted one line in a list of expectations that included many others, which you can see here: http://www.minister.dbcde.gov.au/media/media_releases/2010/121

And again, the NBN shouldn't produce a commercial return. That's not the purpose of it.




			I want an NBN as well BUT not for the sacrifice of the country. Install the damn thing where it is MOST needed. Where population density and commercial viability requires it. Where education (schools), law enforcement (police stations) and health (hospitals)require it. I am sure Mrs Kafoops in sleepy backwater Hicksville could not give a toss if she has superfast internet. It is meaningless when she does not have a computer or a house to live in.
		
Click to expand...



In just 10 short years, the internet has become almost as essential a service as a telephone. As this dependence grows, old alternatives are disappearing (such as phone books). Yet there are millions of Australians who have access to extremely poor, unreliable and expensive internet services, even in urban areas. Commercially, there has been essentially zero construction of improved internet infrastructure for 10 years. There is no sign of this changing anytime soon.

I think you are missing the point of the NBN concept. It is to build a network because commercially it wouldn't otherwise be done. To reduce the gap of broadband availability across the country. 

If Government only built infrastructure where it would produce a commercial return, then there would be a good 20% of the population without electricity or telephone services, posting a letter from Broken Hill to Perth would cost $20, and reticulated water would stop at the Gt Dividing Range. 

I think it's entirely reasonable that the Govt step in with broadband as they have done with the above, to ensure a reasonable level of parity for the country, instead of just the metro areas.




			This Guvmint has a terrible track record of delivering ANYTHING on time or on budget.
		
Click to expand...



I would say that there are very few Governments or private companies that deliver a majority of major projects on time and on budget. So should we just pull up stumps and give up?

I would also repeat that the NBN isn't being built by a Government department. It's being built by a Government-owned company, with an extremely qualified and talented management team.

Now if it were being built by Public Works, I may have an entirely different opinion on how it may turn out!




			BTW ...... I hardly believe that 4 to 3 is "dominated" per se. And as Senate Committees can only report the findings of "independent" experts it is highly unlikely that the political leanings had any forebearance on the outcome. :
		
Click to expand...



Well when it comes to a vote or recommendations, then 4-3 is a majority, so the outcome was always going to be against the project.

As for the committee findings representing the opinions of the "independent experts" who made submissions, I'd suggest you actually read them. I've had a scan through almost all of them, and could only come up with a handful that opposed the NBN. In fact, the vast majority were glowing endorsements of the project. The full list of submissions is here:
http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/broadband_ctte/index.htm

There is absolutely no doubt that the committee made it's findings along party lines. Nothing more, nothing less._


----------



## trainspotter

It is quite obvious your "bent" for the NBN has clouded your judgement on several points you have made. For instance:

_"We don't make such demands of any other Government infrastructure project or service. In fact, most Government services produce a negative financial return." _

How many billions did Telstra, Sydney Airports and Commonwealth Bank make for the Government prior to privatisation just for starters ?????

Here is a website itemising the SELL OFF of profitable going concerns.

http://www.caslon.com.au/privatisationnote3.htm

Oh yeah ......... that's right ...... The Government is talking about selling the NBN back to us in 20 years time as well (as per previous post)

I am not going to bother correcting the rest of the statements you have made as I can tell that the baby has been thrown out with the bath water on this one. 

I wish you the best of luck with your shiny blue cable and blindingly fast internet. You will need it.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> I
> 
> How many billions did Telstra, Sydney Airports and Commonwealth Bank make for the Government prior to privatisation just for starters ?????





There is a HUGE difference between selling a profitable asset long after the cost of building its assets has been written off, compared to funding the construction of them.

Do you _really think_ that Telstra (AKA Telecom, PMG) produced a "commercial" return during it's network build phase and/or 1st 15yrs? Or Sydney Airport during its construction / 1st 15 yrs?

If you really believe that, then you're off with the fairies!


----------



## trainspotter

"Nothing is infinite, except the universe and stupid people, and sometimes, I doubt the universe."  --- Albert Einstein

No one is asking for a return on the "build phase" NBNMyths ....... we are asking for a return on our tax payers dollars ......... period.  AND more than 7% BEFORE it is sold back to us ...... wait a minute ...... we paid for it in the first place .... Telstra all over again. OH WELL ......... sigh.

Good luck with your Don Quixote moment. No seriously .....  I am off to the bottom of the garden with The Cottingley Fairies now.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> 2.25 The Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy explained to the committee that the Lead Advisor for the Implementation Study was specifically not directed to undertake a cost-benefit analysis because such analysis was seen as superfluous given that the government had made an election commitment to build the NBN regardless of what a cost-benefit analysis might conclude
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, that's right. The purpose of the *implementation* study was to identify the best implementation of the Government's policy, find out if the NBN project could be completed within the allocated budget, identify risks to the project and make recommendations to avoid those risks. It was never supposed to look at the value of  benefits resulting from the network.
Click to expand...


Just because a cost/benefit analysis wasn't done in the first place (on whatever gorunds), it doesn't mean it shouldn't subsequently be done.

It's this sort of voodoo socialist economic nonsense that wrecks ecnonomies and impoverishes the people subjected to it.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

drsmith said:


> Just because a cost/benefit analysis wasn't done in the first place (on whatever gorunds), it doesn't mean it shouldn't subsequently be done.
> 
> It's this sort of voodoo socialist economic nonsense that wrecks ecnonomies and impoverishes the people subjected to it.





Doc,

It's been done by the ALP and they are ignoring it publically. 

As I said in the first post of this thread, it has been decided at a higher than elites level, that it is to be scrapped. *"We just need the NSW election out of the way for this to happen" Quote, unquote from my highly placed source.
*

From today's Australian.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...and-network-plan/story-e6frg9hx-1226005989633

Headline :   *Wireless threat to National Broadband*



> THE growing popularity of wireless internet could have a "significant" impact on the economics of the National Broadband Network, according to Labor's own corporate advisers.
> And they have warned the government that the risks associated with the taxpayer-funded NBN rollout warrant extra layers of scrutiny over the $35.9 billion project.
> As Telstra prepares to unveil a massive upgrade to its mobile network to increase capacity and provide download speeds comparable with the NBN, a government-commissioned review has found competition from alternative technologies is a key risk to the NBN Co's ambitions to rapidly sign up homes.
> Telstra will today announce plans to usher in the nation's first commercial release of super-fast 4G mobile technology, which will be deployed in capital-city CBDs by the end of the year.
> The telco giant will roll out the so-called LTE, or Long-Term Evolution standard, which is capable of peak download speeds as high as 150 megabits a second, although speeds fall rapidly as more people use the network.
> The NBN promises a network capable of delivering 100mbps to most Australians, with the potential to hit 1000mbps.
> Next-generation wireless is at the heart of President Barack Obama's plan to make wireless available to 98 per cent of US homes.
> The move by Telstra comes as a review of the NBN Co's business case by corporate advisory group Greenhill Caliburn identifies the preference of some consumers for mobile services as a risk.
> Labor's policy is for the NBN Co to roll out fibre to 93 per cent of Australian premises, with the rest to be served by a mix of fixed wireless and satellite.
> "Trends towards 'mobile-centric' broadband networks could have significant long-term implications for NBN Co's fibre offerings, to the extent that some consumers may be willing to sacrifice higher speed transmissions for the convenience of mobile platforms," the Greenhill Caliburn report warns.




gg


----------



## trainspotter

One last time for comedy purposes.

NBNMyths wrote _"And again, the NBN shouldn't produce a commercial return. That's not the purpose of it."_

So here we go…we are building the NBN and everything is great. Taxpayer money flows like a river after the dam broke. Telstra still has one asset that everyone’s overlooked. Data. *The bottom line is the NBNco is a business that needs to give a return*. In the Telco business the 80/20 rule applies also. There is a large, very profitable base of customers in Australia and Telstra knows where every single one is. They also know where the un-profitable customers are. With the NBN, Telstra can still lay fibre themselves. At a cost but, they don’t have to re-wire all of Australia. If 40 billion is the price tag to do 90% of Australia. 5 billion seems a respectable guess to re-wire say…the CBDs or business parks, where the *most profitable *customers are? 

Do you think Telstra will watch it's profits evaporate? They have shareholders to answer to !! No brainer .... of course they are going to be in competition to NBNCo. And they already have all the aces up their sleeve. 

It's not difficult to do some back-of-the-envelope calculations to work out what the access price can be. The Government has said that the entire $43 billion enterprise will be sold to private investors five years after the network is built, and those private investors will want a commercial return on their money. Picking a number out of the air, 8% of $43 billion is about $3.44 billion per annum. Divide that over the 8 million premises expected to receive an NBN service to get $430 per household per annum, or about $36 per month. That's assuming that the network costs nothing per annum to operate, never needs to be maintained, and carries no additional debt which needs to be serviced from operating income, so perhaps bump it up to $50 per month per service to be conservative and bump it up again if take-up isn't 100%: What if commercial returns must be yielded from 4 million premises instead of 8 million? 50% connectivity is more than likely citing Tasmania as a reference point. So therefore it is going to cost $100 per month to return 8% on your money. Factor in some maintenance and debt servicing arrangements and "Viola" ...... $150 per month is not that hard to calculate. This is for a private enterprise to own the NBN. Unlikely IMO.

Please tell me WHICH International investors are going to want to take up this wonderful opportunity to shell out 43 billion dollars for a lousy 8% return? 

So therefore this must be a *NATION BUILDING EXERCISE* NBNMyths ....... Just like Senator Conroy said. And just like you have eluded to as well.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Wireless broadband is already prohibitively expensive.  What will 4G cost?  Anyone?


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> *Wireless threat to National Broadband*
> 
> THE growing popularity of wireless internet could have a "significant" impact on the economics of the National Broadband Network, according to Labor's own corporate advisers.
> And they have warned the government that the risks associated with the taxpayer-funded NBN rollout warrant extra layers of scrutiny over the $35.9 billion project.
> As Telstra prepares to unveil a massive upgrade to its mobile network to increase capacity and provide download speeds comparable with the NBN, a government-commissioned review has found competition from alternative technologies is a key risk to the NBN Co's ambitions to rapidly sign up homes.
> Telstra will today announce plans to usher in the nation's first commercial release of super-fast 4G mobile technology, which will be deployed in capital-city CBDs by the end of the year.
> The telco giant will roll out the so-called LTE, or Long-Term Evolution standard, which is capable of peak download speeds as high as 150 megabits a second, *although speeds fall rapidly as more people use the network.*
> The NBN promises a network capable of delivering 100mbps to most Australians, with the potential to hit 1000mbps.
> Next-generation wireless is at the heart of President Barack Obama's plan to make wireless available to 98 per cent of US homes.
> 
> gg





Oh, man. The wireless thing again? This really has been done to death. Although at least they quoted the most important issue:

There are some important things to consider from the above report:

• NBN co have already factored in that 15% of homes will take a wireless-only option.  Greenhill Caliburn have not made any mention that such an estimate is in any way suspect. Read the report for yourself.

• The 150Mbps speed of LTE is per cell. Not per user. So with just 100 users on the cell, and you're down to 1.5Mbps! Bearing in mind that Telstra currently have ~7,000 towers in Australia, that would mean an average of 2,800 people per tower. So if only 10% of the population were on the net at the same time, then LTE will give each of them a speed of just ~500kbps. This is why there are no telco experts saying you can replace a fixed network with a wireless one. There's also the cost factor, of course.

*I'm on a "42Mbps" Telstra NextG connection right now, so I thought I'd run a speed test for you:*






*Hmmm. 42Mbps is really 1.1Mbps*. And there, my friends, is why wireless can't replace fixed.

• The Telstra NextG network already covers >98% of our population, at theoretical speed of 42Mbps. This is miles ahead of the US 3G system, which only covers 75% of their population and offers theoretical speeds of 7.2 to 21Mbps. This is why Obama is targeting funding at wireless. It's not to replace their (generally excellent) fixed network, it's to supplement it.

If only newspaper reporters would consult people who actually know what they're talking about when it comes to telecommunications.


----------



## bellenuit

NBNMyths said:


> • NBN co have already factored in that 15% of homes will take a wireless-only option.  Greenhill Caliburn have not made any mention that such an estimate is in any way suspect. Read the report for yourself.




Of course it could be that the NBN figures have no credibility as they are based on starting with the result wanted and then working back to find data to generate those results.



> The 150Mbps speed of LTE is per cell. Not per user. So with just 100 users on the cell, and you're down to 1.5Mbps! Bearing in mind that Telstra currently have ~7,000 towers in Australia, that would mean an average of 2,800 people per tower. So if only 10% of the population were on the net at the same time, then LTE will give each of them a speed of just ~500kbps. This is why there are no telco experts saying you can replace a fixed network with a wireless one. There's also the cost factor, of course.




We have already seen that the technology might make big towers redundant in the future, so 7,000 towers may have no bearing on what eventually may be in place.

*Cell Phone Towers to be Replaced by Tiny Antennas*

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_822332.html

Additionally, your figure assumes that if only 10% are on at the same time, they are all transferring data to/from the net at the same time. I am on the net now and for the duration of composing this reply, my data transfer has been negligible. The same will apply to those on line that are reading this reply, unless they are running some background net task at the same time. 

Perhaps the reason no Telco expert is saying you cannot replace a fixed network with a wireless one is because no one is suggesting that. The opponents to the NBN are arguing that the net in Australia should be allowed to advance based on the demands of users, not on the dictates of a central bureaucracy. It could, though very unlikely, end up as a complete fixed network with minimal wireless connectivity, but let that be based on how technology evolves in this area, rather than a bet using enormous public funds made by some ideologue who thinks he can foretell with accuracy where the net will be in 15 to 20 years time.

Its hard to think that this clip is just 17 years old. That the internet was a complete unknown to even those in the media industry....

*What's The Internet?*

http://www.openculture.com/2011/01/whats_the_internet_thats_so_1994.html


----------



## Knobby22

bellenuit said:


> Of course it could be that the NBN figures have no credibility as they are based on starting with the result wanted and then working back to find data to generate those results.
> 
> 
> 
> We have already seen that the technology might make big towers redundant in the future, so 7,000 towers may have no bearing on what eventually may be in place.
> 
> *Cell Phone Towers to be Replaced by Tiny Antennas*
> 
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_822332.html
> 
> 
> Perhaps the reason no Telco expert is saying you cannot replace a fixed network with a wireless one is because no one is suggesting that. The opponents to the NBN are arguing that the net in Australia should be allowed to advance based on the demands of users, not on the dictates of a central bureaucracy. It could, though very unlikely, end up as a complete fixed network with minimal wireless connectivity, but let that be based on how technology evolves in this area, rather than a bet using enormous public funds made by some ideologue who thinks he can foretell with accuracy where the net will be in 15 to 20 years time.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.openculture.com/2011/01/whats_the_internet_thats_so_1994.html




Its a good point but there is also the counterpoint being the country will be comparitively left behind.

Look for an example at fast trains :- go to Europe and Japan, fast trains everywhere.
The USA have just announced they want fast trains - really, they should have had them before anyone. In Australia, we will never get one between Melbourne and Sydney without government help. 

The result, we have an antiquated train system.


----------



## NBNMyths

More acclaim from international telecommunications experts. This time it's Professor Tim Wu, a senior advisor to the US FTC on telecommunications:

Headline: *NBN is 'visionary', Congratulations: Wu*

_"I think it's a daring and fantastic plan, and yes, if it works out the way it's supposed to I think it'll be fantastic and will set a model for the rest of the world,"_ said Tim Wu, US-based telecommunications policy advocate and author of The Master Switch: The rise and fall of information empires. _"I think the countries that go forward with these kinds of things are going to have the advantage in the 21st century."_

Speaking on this week's Patch Monday podcast, Wu dismissed concerns that spending billions of government dollars on a centrally controlled network went against free market principles and was out of proportion with US spending.

_"Give me a break! You see America, it's all talk here, because I mean how many hundreds of billions does the American Government spend on roads? The military infrastructure built by the United States is massive. The truth is, the United States spends enormous monies on public infrastructure. They just spend it in ways that are different from other countries, and spend comparatively little on communications for reasons that are completely mysterious to me,"_ he said.

http://www.zdnet.com.au/nbn-is-visionary-congratulations-wu-339309182.htm


----------



## DB008

I wonder who the person behind "NBNMyths" handle is? 
Is it Mr. S Conroy? Someone in the Labor party? Or just a punter who loves Labor and really does like the NBN that much?

So much support for a scheme that l honestly think is a waste of tax payers money. Hey, when is the Pacific Highway between Sydney-Brisbane getting upgraded? 
You all know the one l'm talking about, every time there is a horrible accident on it, all the pollies jump on board and make another promise of upgrading it....but nothing eventuates. 

K. Rudd did make it an election promise, if l recall correctly.

http://www.ballinaadvocate.com.au/story/2010/02/19/rudd-pledges-pacific-highway-upgrade/


----------



## sinner

This thread stinks.

Your behaviour ****s me trainspotter. I honestly find it disgusting.

However it has spurred me into providing my own input:

As an IT/data ops with ongoing experience in high throughput connectivity in the Parkville area of Melbourne (this area is slowly turning into one giant medical collaboration campus) transferring lots and lots and lots of high-res MRI data: 
I can say and see *we as a country need a revamp of communications network to bring us in line with the rest of the developed world *NOW**.

However, with that said.

1. I don't think the current Govt or even Opposition are the right people for this job. We need real visionaries willing to change the business landscape of this country. Not career politicians.

2. The whole NBN plan seems f*n stupid, start to finish. I'm not sure exactly who is barracking for it, and are they doing it only through a sense of "oh this is the best this Govt could possibly offer, let's just take it". The Parkville area of Melbourne will be undergoing it's own "mini NBN" type transformation over roughly the same timeframe and guess what: the plan is impressive, forward looking, robust, sustainable, inexpensive (relatively) and actually meets defined requirements of a user base. NBN itself ticks none of those boxes. FTTH would have been forward looking 10 years ago. 

I would say the NBN plan is more like grandoise, unsustainable, expensive (relatively) without meeting a single defined requirement of any userbase.

3. Seriously. Wasn't it only a year or two ago we were up in arms about douchebag Conroy trying to unfeasibly filter the internet? How the hell are we trusting this same idiot to implement a giant ubiquitous network with an even more giant "Govt" sticker slapped on the front? 
3. a) Buttplug Conroy is probably drooling at just how fast the NBN will allow him to see who is complaining what a douche he is on twitter so he can have them arrested for sedition under our anti sedition laws.
(excuse the profanity here, I *really* hate Conroy)
3. b) The Govt has done nothing except portray itself as the most backwards looking technical luddite possible. We had to get a list of what ACMA blocks from wikileaks, that's right, as an Australian citizen you can't even know you're breaking the law. Are we supposed to rally around this portrayal as the Govt to lead us into a new technical age? 

*Yeah right!* This Govt can't even work out how to set the clock on the DVD player and even if they could would make us turn the TV off at 8:30pm before the adult movies start.

4. Take a look at: Japan, Sth Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, France, Iceland, etc. 
4. a) Take a look at our NBN implementation plan, and compare to the implementation plans of these countries. Leave your comment. If you haven't, then STFU because you have no idea of the historical basis and are talking out of your ****.
4. b) Corollary: population density is way higher. We as a country aren't idiots. Hell, I actually worked at the CSIRO lab where 802.11 was invented (you know, that wireless protocol that the *whole world* uses), I am pretty sure we could come up with an ingenious solution fitting our population density that acts as an example to the rest of the world rather than a follower.

5. Here is the thing, Govt. In 2008, there was a GFC (even though in 2007 you said it was all good). Central Banks and economists around the world encouraged Govts like you to spend. Print some money and spend. Best way to kick start the economy you said (we had no choice in agreeing or disagreeing it seems).

What did we ask for, as the people of Australia? Almost unanimously, we asked for infrastructure. Spend our money which you borrowed from our futures, *on* our futures. 

What did you do? F***. You basically wasted it. In 10 years time there will be no way anyone will be able to point to a building or road and say Govt was wise to have built that during GFC for our futures.

Now you are trying to implement this futuristic infrastructure project , after spending all the money that should have been spent on stuff like this in the first place. 

Maybe someone needs to show you this website:
http://www.debtclock.com.au/

Just in case you missed it.


----------



## todster

DB008 said:


> I wonder who the person behind "NBNMyths" handle is?
> Is it Mr. S Conroy? Someone in the Labor party? Or just a punter who loves Labor and really does like the NBN that much?
> 
> So much support for a scheme that l honestly think is a waste of tax payers money. Hey, when is the Pacific Highway between Sydney-Brisbane getting upgraded?
> You all know the one l'm talking about, every time there is a horrible accident on it, all the pollies jump on board and make another promise of upgrading it....but nothing eventuates.
> 
> K. Rudd did make it an election promise, if l recall correctly.
> 
> http://www.ballinaadvocate.com.au/story/2010/02/19/rudd-pledges-pacific-highway-upgrade/




Do you want a cost benefit analysis with that too


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Gringotts Bank said:


> Wireless broadband is already prohibitively expensive.  What will 4G cost?  Anyone?




Bueller?    ......Bueller?


----------



## So_Cynical

NBNMyths said:


> If only newspaper reporters would consult people who actually know what they're talking about when it comes to telecommunications.




I doubt that would sell many papers.


----------



## Julia

sinner said:


> (excuse the profanity here, I *really* hate Conroy)



So do I.  He outdoes all his colleagues in terms of cherrypicking stuff to quote and paraphrasing to suit his own ends.



> In 10 years time there will be no way anyone will be able to point to a building or road and say Govt was wise to have built that during GFC for our futures.



Exactly so, and why the Australian electorate is presently to reluctant to trust any project the government now comes up with, including the NBN.

Great post, sinner.


----------



## DB008

todster said:


> Do you want a cost benefit analysis with that too




Sure, why not?


I think that "sinner" pretty much 'hit the nail on the head'.

For medical purposes, fine, get the ultra fast speed you need for ERT services. But why does an average home need 100mb/s?


----------



## So_Cynical

DB008 said:


> But why does an average home need 100mb/s?





Multi channel HD live video streaming
200+ player game servers hosted in Seoul
200+ player game servers hosted by you

In short pretty much anything you would want to do is possible...the mind boggles with the working from home possibility's.


----------



## todster

DB008 said:


> Sure, why not?
> 
> 
> I think that "sinner" pretty much 'hit the nail on the head'.
> 
> For medical purposes, fine, get the ultra fast speed you need for ERT services. But why does an average home need 100mb/s?




OK i live in Perth show me the cost benefits Sydney to Brissy to me?
Nation building in the 1900s


----------



## drsmith

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Doc,
> 
> It's been done by the ALP and they are ignoring it publically.
> 
> As I said in the first post of this thread, it has been decided at a higher than elites level, that it is to be scrapped. *"We just need the NSW election out of the way for this to happen" Quote, unquote from my highly placed source.
> *



The rope to the NSW ALP suould be cut with the hope that it sinks without a trace.

What are you smoking north of the Tropic Of Cancer ?
There's more chance of Macquarie going broke than there is of the NBN being scrapped. Delays and even cancellations to some areas is perhaps the only political way out for the ALP. This will happen anyway as, I suspect, the ALP government us unlikely to last the duration of the rollout.

Watching Stephen Conroy announcing it's cancellation though would in itself be worthy of  cancellation.


----------



## Happy

drsmith said:


> ...
> Watching Stephen Conroy announcing it's cancellation though would in itself be worthy of  cancellation.




I just cannot believe that anybody can commit so much funds without much scrutiny.

This is democratically elected dictatorship.


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> I wonder who the person behind "NBNMyths" handle is?
> Is it Mr. S Conroy? Someone in the Labor party? Or just a punter who loves Labor and really does like the NBN that much?






			
				Sinner said:
			
		

> I am pretty sure we could come up with an ingenious solution fitting our population density that acts as an example to the rest of the world rather than a follower.




You're 1/3 right. I am a punter who "really does like the NBN that much"

I certainly don't "love labor", but federally I have voted for them more often than not.

I really know very little about Conroy, don't think I've ever watched him speak. I think his proposed filter is a moronic, stupid idea, if perhaps well intentioned. I've certainly never voted for him, because I have never voted Labor in the senate (Where's Don Chipp when you need him.

All that said, I'm quite open to viable alternatives to the NBN. But, I have not seen any proposed. 
The coalition plan (if you can call it that) is dismal.
The greens basically support the NBN.

Mobile broadband isn't viable.
Copper is at end of life.
HFC is as expensive as the NBN, and not as good

Perhaps a WiFi/WiGig-style grid network would be an option, but there isn't anyone of note proposing such a thing, it would require a massive rollout of fibre for backbone anyway, and I don't know if it would be practical from a OSS/BSS point of view. I would think that if such a network was a viable option, then someone smarter than me would have proposed it.

Even the CSIRO, who have *developed a nice new wireless broadband technology* are saying it's only viable for low-density areas.


----------



## Bill M

NBNMyths said:


> All that said, I'm quite open to viable alternatives to the NBN. But, I have not seen any proposed.
> The coalition plan (if you can call it that) is dismal.
> The greens basically support the NBN.
> 
> Mobile broadband isn't viable.
> Copper is at end of life.
> HFC is as expensive as the NBN, and not as good



I'm with you mate. I phoned up Telstra this morning again to see if I could get an ADSL connection to my house here on the Central Coast. They said all the ports were full in the exchange (as usual) and I had no other option but wireless. I've been on their wireless 3G network for around 18 Months and it is not an ideal system. It lags in downloading and the signal locks up on wet rainy days and I can't get anything. Anyhow I told Telstra that if I can't get ADSL then please cut off my phone and they did.

There are thousands of people living in my suburb and this area in general. It is a growth area and we can't get reliable internet. Turnbull and co. did nothing to address these shortfalls for all those years they were in power. Now someone wants to do something and he's against it, what a tosser. Bring on the NBN, the sooner the better.


----------



## sinner

sinner said:


> 2. The whole NBN plan seems f*n stupid, start to finish. I'm not sure exactly who is barracking for it, and are they doing it only through a sense of *"oh this is the best this Govt could possibly offer, let's just take it".*






> All that said, I'm quite open to viable alternatives to the NBN. But, I have not seen any proposed.
> The coalition plan (if you can call it that) is dismal.
> The greens basically support the NBN.
> 
> Mobile broadband isn't viable.
> Copper is at end of life.
> HFC is as expensive as the NBN, and not as good
> 
> Perhaps a WiFi/WiGig-style grid network would be an option, but there isn't anyone of note proposing such a thing, it would require a massive rollout of fibre for backbone anyway, and I don't know if it would be practical from a OSS/BSS point of view. I would think that if such a network was a viable option, then someone smarter than me would have proposed it.




Q E D.

If this is your reasoning for adopting a pro NBN stance, I am against. I don't want a crappy NBN just because people thought they couldn't do any better. As a trader, I often look to history as a guide to the future. In this case, I see no historical precedent other than the complete and utter luddite nature of various Australian govts.

NBN *could* open up endless telecommute opportunities, but that is contingent on the Govt not screwing up their role in this. A few on this thread seem to be quite willing to ignore all prior transgressions and give the Govt another go at molesting us. Trying to call a top in Govt idiocy. In case you missed it, the trend is up! We need to put these f***** to the fire, and then find some visionaries to change the country.


----------



## NBNMyths

sinner said:


> Q E D.
> ...I don't want a crappy NBN just because people thought they couldn't do any better....




You might have a preferred alternative, but I don't think you can call the current proposal  "crappy"! It's has been widely acclaimed by telecommunications professionals as an excellent concept. Fact is that no-one of any note has proposed anything any better.



> In case you missed it, the trend is up! We need to put these f***** to the fire, and then find some visionaries to change the country.




 Great idea, but where shall we find them? The coalition had 18 broadband plans in 11 years, and didn't really achieve anything over that time.

Their current plan would have to rate as amongst the worst. FYI, for people unaware of what the current coalition policy is, in a nutshell:

• Spend $6.3 Billion (with no return) over 6 years providing grants to the private sector to update the existing copper network to remove ‘blockers’ that prevent access to ADSL2+ services in some areas(such as pair gains and RIMs). In non-remote areas where ADSL2+ still cannot be delivered economically, they will fund fixed (not mobile) wireless networks in lieu of ADSL. These networks should provide 97% of premises with a _theoretical peak_ speed of 12Mbps. Use $750M of the $6.5bn to fund an "improved" satellite service to the remaining 3% (no minimum speed or price control)

• Contract to build/lease a national open-access fibre backhaul network

• Examine the mandating fibre-optic for new developments 

• No uniform pricing policy, except in the case of _fixed-wireless-in-lieu-of-ADSL_, which should be offered at a "comparable" price to ADSL2+.

• No mandate for open-access, except for fixed-line improvements funded under the policy. ie, Not for HFC cable, fibre, existing ADSL2+ or satellite.

• No plans for any future upgrades beyond the above.​


----------



## joea

Bill M said:


> I'm with you mate. I phoned up Telstra this morning again to see if I could get an ADSL connection to my house here on the Central Coast. They said all the ports were full in the exchange (as usual) and I had no other option but wireless. I've been on their wireless 3G network for around 18 Months and it is not an ideal system. It lags in downloading and the signal locks up on wet rainy days and I can't get anything. Anyhow I told Telstra that if I can't get ADSL then please cut off my phone and they did.
> 
> There are thousands of people living in my suburb and this area in general. It is a growth area and we can't get reliable internet. Turnbull and co. did nothing to address these shortfalls for all those years they were in power. Now someone wants to do something and he's against it, what a tosser. Bring on the NBN, the sooner the better.




As I understand it 3G was developed for voice and not data.
4G is specifically developed for data, and will deliver 100Mbps bandwidth with much higher reliability. contention issues will still apply. zero cost to tax payer.
Cheers


----------



## todster

joea said:


> As I understand it 3G was developed for voice and not data.
> 4G is specifically developed for data, and will deliver 100Mbps bandwidth with much higher reliability. contention issues will still apply. zero cost to tax payer.
> Cheers




No doubt you have to be in the CBD


----------



## joea

todster said:


> No doubt you have to be in the CBD




you maybe correct there!

What makes me wonder is what does Telstra knows.
People say the copper line is obsolete.

The technicans that come in my area are locals. They say the resin that the joins are 
in, is sowly dissolving the copper wire and every join would have to be re - done with another product. 

So is the copper wire stuffed? or is the resin the problem?

I am still wondering if 4G is all it is cracked up to be.

Cheers


----------



## NBNMyths

joea said:


> As I understand it 3G was developed for voice and not data.
> 4G is specifically developed for data, and will deliver 100Mbps bandwidth with much higher reliability. contention issues will still apply. zero cost to tax payer.
> Cheers




And it's the contention that is the issue. For a 4G network to deliver an actual download speed of 100Mbps would be almost impossible. Even the highest "4G" implementation (1Gbps) is shared, so a tower could only deliver 100Mbps if there were only 10 people active on it, along with perfect weather and no topographic or engineering features obstructing the signal. Current 4G implementations are only (per cell) 150Mbps, with 300Mbps not too far away. In which case, you could only get 100Mbps if there were only 1 or 3 people connected respectively. And anyone making a phonecall on that tower would also slow the data speed, since wireless treats a phone call as a data connection (albeit at a lower data rate).

So I guess if you sat at the bottom of a tower, in Cooper Pedy, at 3am on a Monday morning, you might get that sort of speed. Once 4G eventually migrates throughout the network of course.

But all the above is beside the point. Wireless data is a complementary service to fixed, not a competing one. Yes, we'll eventually get a 4G service at no cost to the taxpayer (Except probable rural USO subsidies). But it won't replace our fixed networks.

Delimiter has a wonderfully blunt post covering the issue:

_Let’s get one thing very, very clear straight away: Any form of over-the-air mobile broadband is not – in any way – a replacement for a wired network like the NBN. It’s just not. What it is, however, is a fantastic piece of complementary technology that allows consumers and business the chance to expand their horizons beyond what’s available if you’re limited to development on a PC chained to desk.

Of course, the idea of having two similar but different technologies existing at once and providing similar services is completely beyond the seemingly small minds of those opposing such a situation. _

From http://delimiter.com.au/2011/02/15/lte-will-kill-the-nbn-just-as-unicorns-are-real/


----------



## todster

joea said:


> you maybe correct there!
> 
> What makes me wonder is what does Telstra knows.
> People say the copper line is obsolete.
> 
> The technicans that come in my area are locals. They say the resin that the joins are
> in, is sowly dissolving the copper wire and every join would have to be re - done with another product.
> 
> So is the copper wire stuffed? or is the resin the problem?
> I am still wondering if 4G is all it is cracked up to be.
> 
> Cheers




I think one would lead to the other through oxidization corrosion


----------



## DB008

todster said:


> OK i live in Perth show me the cost benefits Sydney to Brissy to me?
> Nation building in the 1900s





Sure, and l'll get an example of a federally funded project in any state that doesn't benefit me in NSW. The list can go on forever....


----------



## sinner

NBNMyths said:


> You might have a preferred alternative, but I don't think you can call the current proposal  "crappy"! It's has been widely acclaimed by telecommunications professionals as an excellent concept.




Right...

Sooo...vested interests who will profit from the venture tout it as an excellent concept.

This is national infrastructure we are talking about. If it was a actually a good plan, you can be quite sure you would have no issue selling it to the populace at large as a good plan!

That is of course, unless you were willing to argue that we as a nation are so unused to the concept of a Govt looking further than the next election into our futures, that we are unsettled and therefore naturally resistant.

In which case I would still be prompt to question both the ability and the motives of this Govt in proposing the plan.

For the record, I am not a telecommunications expert but am and have been involved in many projects which are both on the infrastructure and technology scale in this country, the scope of which were all *expanding communications ability*.

I think your words "widely acclaimed" paint with slightly too broad a brush, (no pun intended) and make you sound like a shill (although I'm not actually proposing you are).

My own evaluation of the plan is that it is an awesome plan, great, perfect...if it was proposed 10 years ago. Which is pretty much in keeping with our countries trend of technological adoption. 

The Govt has proposed exactly bubkis in exactly how this is a good plan other than a patronising version of "build it and they will come". Where are the proposals for changes to small business regulation? Where are concessions and incentives for e-business to set up shop here as opposed to say, *anywhere else in the world that can be administered from Aus?*. Powerful retail lobby is making noise about GST online, Govt remains pretty much silent on the issue. Uncertainty sure is a great climate for entrepreneurs.



> Fact is that no-one of any note has proposed anything any better.
> 
> Great idea, but where shall we find them? The coalition had 18 broadband plans in 11 years, and didn't really achieve anything over that time.




Right. Q E D on my earlier point, * 2. 

This is a huge strawman, setting up an even crappier plan by even crappier politicians as a relative basis reasoning for why this plan is good.


----------



## IFocus

DB008 said:


> Sure, and l'll get an example of a federally funded project in any state that doesn't benefit me in NSW. The list can go on forever....




Over here in WA we just hear a big gurgling sound of Victoria and NSW sucking the dollars out of WA


----------



## sinner

IFocus said:


> Over here in WA we just hear a big gurgling sound of Victoria and NSW sucking the dollars out of WA




Totally offtopic IFocus, but here you go

http://www.perthnow.com.au/business...-states-boost-wa/story-e6frg2qc-1225984781899

So um....no.


----------



## DB008

IFocus said:


> Over here in WA we just hear a big gurgling sound of Victoria and NSW sucking the dollars out of WA




I agree to an extent.


It is a balancing act IFocus.

2 million people in WA or 7.2 million in NSW.


----------



## NBNMyths

sinner said:


> Sooo...vested interests who will profit from the venture tout it as an excellent concept.




There are a few issues with this statement.

First, if you're a real telecommunications expert, then it stands to reason that you will benefit in some way from the NBN (if it's a good plan). You can't use that as an argument that it's not a good plan. The fact is that telco experts work in the telco industry, and they benefit from telco projects. If you don't work in the telco industry, then you're probably not much of an expert.

What I'm getting at is you can't have it both ways. If you want the opinion of real experts, then you have to accept that they will work in the industry.

Second, there are many experts (eg from overseas) who will not directly benefit from the network who are praising it, and people who would benefit equally from any type of fast network, who are promoting the NBN as the best solution. If it were only money these people were interested in, then they have nothing to gain by promoting FTTP over decent HFC, for example.



> This is national infrastructure we are talking about. If it was a actually a good plan, you can be quite sure you would have no issue selling it to the populace at large as a good plan!




I have to disagree. As is patently clear from the comments surrounding the NBN, much of the population has absolutely no grasp of the technical issues involved. Without such knowledge, it makes it hard to 'sell' a technical project.

That said, the Govt is doing an *atrocious* job of explaining it to them.



> The Govt has proposed exactly bubkis in exactly how this is a good plan other than a patronising version of "build it and they will come". Where are the proposals for changes to small business regulation? Where are concessions and incentives for e-business to set up shop here as opposed to say, *anywhere else in the world that can be administered from Aus?*. Powerful retail lobby is making noise about GST online, Govt remains pretty much silent on the issue. Uncertainty sure is a great climate for entrepreneurs.




I agree that the Govt has done a bad job of selling the benefits, and in facilitating fundamental changes that the network may achieve. In their defence however, it's very early days...

That said, I think things are beginning to change on this front and am hopeful that a momentum has begun:

There is a parliamentary inquiry (submissions close next week) which has been tasked with finding potential uses of the NBN, and what needs to be done to facilitate that potential.

There was a huge CeBIT NBN conference last year and there is a CSIRO one scheduled for Sydney this May. These type of conferences will become more regular as the network is built and applications become more widespread.

The Govt has set up a National e-Health group to look at health applications for the network, and there is funding going towards this initiative.

The NBN is also attracting international attention for high-tech startup funding, which is a pleasant change.​
So while it's been a slow start, I think the above are moves in the right direction. I would hope that there are many submissions to the inquiry supporting sweeping changes to work practises and incentives to enable telecommuting etc which will be facilitated by the NBN. Maybe the Public Service can lead the revolution. 



> This is a huge strawman, setting up an even crappier plan by even crappier politicians as a relative basis reasoning for why this plan is good.




My point (again) is that no-one of any note is proposing a viable alternative to the NBN. Not politicians, nor the telco industry, nor the telco 'experts'. So if none of these people are proposing a 'better' plan, then where shall we get one from? If you ask the telcos, they say "the NBN", if you ask the experts, they say "the NBN". Who else should we ask?

Personally, I would say that this situation is a pretty good indication that such a plan does not exist.


----------



## noco

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I really regret having started this thread.
> 
> The NBN will be scrapped.
> 
> It has been decided by fat old men and baron (sic) women in Queensland, NSW and Victoria, who control the ALP's destiny.
> 
> Once ole Kennealy takes it on board it will be gospel. Jeez, she needs all the traction she can get, not to have the ole Greens outvote the ALP in NSW.
> 
> I digress.
> 
> The NBN is dead.
> 
> Its method of internment is all I was suggesting we discuss.
> 
> gg




gg, I think you are closer to the truth than a lot of peopel realize...It is becoming a 'LEMON' more and more each day. NBN will be useless for lap tops, I-pod and who knows what is around the corner in electronics.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...s-over-broadband/story-e6frg6zo-1226008373847


----------



## todster

noco said:


> gg, I think you are closer to the truth than a lot of peopel realize...It is becoming a 'LEMON' more and more each day. NBN will be useless for lap tops, I-pod and who knows what is around the corner in electronics.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...s-over-broadband/story-e6frg6zo-1226008373847




More than anything it will get rid of printed newspapers like your beloved Australian.


----------



## IFocus

todster said:


> More than anything it will get rid of printed newspapers like your beloved Australian.




The Australian has run a heavy campaign against the NBN, as you say its a direct threat to it and much of the media out there hence the heavy propaganda. 

They run the wireless BS continually to undermined the NBN but forget to tell you that mobile devices alone will soak up most the bandwidth


----------



## noco

todster said:


> More than anything it will get rid of printed newspapers like your beloved Australian.




todster, why do you want to rid the nation of the Australian? That's what was said when TV hit Brisbane on the 3rd Ausgust 1959, everybody would stop reading papers and magazines.
Don't you believe in freedom of speech? 
Is it too critical of the soclialist left Labor Government?
Would you ban the ABC as well? Probably not as they are pro Labor and in the ABC's eyes Labor can't do anything wrong. Just listen to Barrie Cassidy and that idiot David Marr on Insiders.
The NBN is a 'LEMON" and will end up in the same catagory as the 
Fuel Watch
Grocery Watch
Pink Bats
BER
Cash for Clunckers
Green Schemes
MRT
etc., etc.


----------



## tothemax6

noco said:


> The NBN is a 'LEMON" and will end up in the same catagory as the
> Fuel Watch
> Grocery Watch
> Pink Bats
> BER
> Cash for Clunckers
> Green Schemes
> MRT
> etc., etc.



It sure will, no one ever learns anything. We are destined to repeat histories errors because no one is intelligent enough to understand its lessons. 
Some have said that perhaps the right to vote should be subject to an IQ test, but in reality intelligence never prevented men from coming to the completely wrong conclusions: Marx, Singer, Chomsky etc.


----------



## Slipperz

NBNMyths said:


> And it's the contention that is the issue. For a 4G network to deliver an actual download speed of 100Mbps would be almost impossible. Even the highest "4G" implementation (1Gbps) is shared, so a tower could only deliver 100Mbps if there were only 10 people active on it, along with perfect weather and no topographic or engineering features obstructing the signal. Current 4G implementations are only (per cell) 150Mbps, with 300Mbps not too far away. In which case, you could only get 100Mbps if there were only 1 or 3 people connected respectively. And anyone making a phonecall on that tower would also slow the data speed, since wireless treats a phone call as a data connection (albeit at a lower data rate).
> 
> So I guess if you sat at the bottom of a tower, in Cooper Pedy, at 3am on a Monday morning, you might get that sort of speed. Once 4G eventually migrates throughout the network of course.
> 
> But all the above is beside the point. Wireless data is a complementary service to fixed, not a competing one. Yes, we'll eventually get a 4G service at no cost to the taxpayer (Except probable rural USO subsidies). But it won't replace our fixed networks.
> 
> Delimiter has a wonderfully blunt post covering the issue:
> 
> _Let’s get one thing very, very clear straight away: Any form of over-the-air mobile broadband is not – in any way – a replacement for a wired network like the NBN. It’s just not. What it is, however, is a fantastic piece of complementary technology that allows consumers and business the chance to expand their horizons beyond what’s available if you’re limited to development on a PC chained to desk.
> 
> Of course, the idea of having two similar but different technologies existing at once and providing similar services is completely beyond the seemingly small minds of those opposing such a situation. _
> 
> From http://delimiter.com.au/2011/02/15/lte-will-kill-the-nbn-just-as-unicorns-are-real/





http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/industry-sectors/telstras-major-upgrade-of-wireless-network-a-challenge-to-nbn/story-e6frg9hx-1226005976918

This is competition for the NBN right here.

Half a million sign ups in six months!

When the 4G roll out occurs it will make wireless even more appealing.

I am with Telstra now and I get around 17-18 Mbs dl speeds which is perfectly fine.

Quadruple that speed just by upgrading the firmware in the modem? Okay.

Laptops and tablets are the way of the future.

Just wait until they build 4G modems into tablets and netbooks and start giving them away on 24 month plans.

You just throw it in your bag , plonk it on the coffee table like a book.

Desktops connected to an expensive fibre optic network will be used by  data hogs.

Gamers and pirates and businesses.

Time will tell but I'm seeing yet more of my hard earned dollars getting pissed away by the government with the NBN.


----------



## IFocus

Slipperz said:


> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/industry-sectors/telstras-major-upgrade-of-wireless-network-a-challenge-to-nbn/story-e6frg9hx-1226005976918
> 
> This is competition for the NBN right here.
> 
> Half a million sign ups in six months!
> 
> When the 4G roll out occurs it will make wireless even more appealing.
> 
> I am with Telstra now and I get around 17-18 Mbs dl speeds which is perfectly fine.
> 
> Quadruple that speed just by upgrading the firmware in the modem? Okay.
> 
> Laptops and tablets are the way of the future.
> 
> Just wait until they build 4G modems into tablets and netbooks and start giving them away on 24 month plans.
> 
> You just throw it in your bag , plonk it on the coffee table like a book.
> 
> Desktops connected to an expensive fibre optic network will be used by  data hogs.
> 
> Gamers and pirates and businesses.
> 
> Time will tell but I'm seeing yet more of my hard earned dollars getting pissed away by the government with the NBN.




You seemed to have missed this bit 



> But despite the rise and possible threat of mobile broadband to the NBN, Telstra director of Wireless Planning Anthony Goonan said that both fixed and wireless technologies would be complementary.
> 
> "Our view is always that the wireless and fixed line businesses are *complementary*," he said.
> 
> "We think wireless will progress independently of what occurs in the fixed world and how that's impacted by NBN."





And then this



> The upgrade to LTE will initially serve to improve capacity on Telstra's mobile network to enable subscribers more consistent performance from the telco's mobile services.


----------



## NBNMyths

noco said:


> gg, I think you are closer to the truth than a lot of peopel realize...It is becoming a 'LEMON' more and more each day. NBN will be useless for lap tops, I-pod and who knows what is around the corner in electronics.




Useless for laptops huh? I'm sitting here typing this in my lounge room, on my laptop, connected to ADSL via WiFi. Not a cable in sight. Why would this be any different under the NBN (Except that my wifi would be connected to a much faster network)?

I think there's a lot of confusion between "WiFi" and "wireless/mobile broadband (AKA 3G, NextG, 4G, LTE, WiMax)".

WiFi is short range, high speed (currently up to 300Mbps, but 7Gbps is under development). It is connected to a fixed network like ADSL, cable or the NBN. It's the tech used in your home and office wireless networks, and the hotspots at Maccas, Starbucks etc.

"Wireless broadband" is long range and delivered by mobile phone towers.

iPods only have WiFi built in to them. There are no iPods with wireless. 
iPads have two versions, a WiFi-only and a WiFi/3G. The WiFi-only outsells the 3G by 3to1, and the 3G version won't be upgradable to 4G.
Pretty much every laptop has WiFi built in, and some (but very few) laptops have 3G wireless built in. These laptops can't be upgraded to use 4G.



Slipperz said:


> I am with Telstra now and I get around 17-18 Mbs dl speeds which is perfectly fine.
> 
> Quadruple that speed just by upgrading the firmware in the modem? Okay.




I call BS. I'm also with Telstra wireless and here's what I got last week in Suburban Sydney:







*Let's see a link to your 17-18Mbps speedtest result.*


The fastest speed I have ever seen demonstrated on NextG was about 7Mbps. The fastest I have ever personally got was about 2Mbps.

Sorry, but you won't be able to just upgrade your firmware to get 4G. They operate on different frequencies and use completely different technology. You'll need to buy a new modem.

*You wireless advocates really need to understand (no matter how much you want it to be true), that wireless would collapse if you tried to replace fixed lines with it. It's just not possible for it to do the job due to the physical limitations of radio-based technology. No amount of bleating or wishful thinking will change the laws of physics.*

Wireless is a shared service. The network speed is divided amongst everyone using it. The more users, the more it slows down. Worse, they are shared with phone users. Every active phone call and every SMS message gobbles up a little bit of bandwidth too. Now just think what would happen if the current congested mobile network also had to content with everyone's landline phone calls, and everyone's landline downloads.

Imagine if all the kiddies started downloading their 5GB movies over the mobile network!

There's just no-one with a telco technical background claiming wireless can do the job. Doesn't it make you wonder (just a little?) why the only people saying wireless will do it are shock jocks and "journos" from _The Australian_ etc? Where are the telco engineers, the physicists, the scientists? Why don't we ever have them quoted by _The Oz_, or interviewed by Hadlee? Heaven forbid they actually interview someone who knows what they're talking about!


----------



## todster

noco said:


> todster, why do you want to rid the nation of the Australian? That's what was said when TV hit Brisbane on the 3rd Ausgust 1959, everybody would stop reading papers and magazines.
> Don't you believe in freedom of speech?
> Is it too critical of the soclialist left Labor Government?
> Would you ban the ABC as well? Probably not as they are pro Labor and in the ABC's eyes Labor can't do anything wrong. Just listen to Barrie Cassidy and that idiot David Marr on Insiders.
> The NBN is a 'LEMON" and will end up in the same catagory as the
> Fuel Watch
> Grocery Watch
> Pink Bats
> BER
> Cash for Clunckers
> Green Schemes
> MRT
> etc., etc.




No no noco no not just the Australian newspapers in general


----------



## Slipperz

I'm in the CBD. Don't appreciate being called a liar either thanks very much :swear:

The point I am trying to male is the take up of mobile technology is growing.

I'm not suggesting for a minute a mobile broadband network is all we need.

What I am suggesting is the rate of take up for high speed mobile broadband and the devices that use the technology is on the rise and will impact on NBN takeup rates.

500 000 new subscribers to the nextG network in six months? Hello! Might even have a little look at TLS when it goes ex div this week 

And that's the critical issue for the NBN IMHO. How many people actually want it or need it and what are they prepared to pay for it?

37 billion is a big chunk of change and the labor govt has a poor record in spending money wisely on large projects to date.


----------



## Bill M

Slipperz said:


> And that's the critical issue for the NBN IMHO. How many people actually want it or need it and what are they prepared to pay for it?




I want it, need it and will pay for it, why? Because I can't get ADSL and the 3G network is cr@p. It lags and during heavy rains I can't do anything for hours. Is that an acceptable service for a so called first world country? Not everybody lives in the Sydney CBD.


----------



## trainspotter

todster said:


> No no noco no not just the Australian newspapers in general




I remember when the computer was supposed to make the office paperless. That didn't work either. Newspapers will be around for a millenium to come due to them being target specific to their local area. Also due to more people know how to read then use the internet. (think of all the baby boomers)


----------



## bellenuit

NBNMyths said:


> Imagine if all the kiddies started downloading their 5GB movies over the mobile network!
> 
> There's just no-one with a telco technical background claiming wireless can do the job.




Do what job?  Allow all the kiddies to simultaneously download 5GB movies? 

You keep missing the point. No one is saying that wireless is technically superior to fixed fibre when speed/throughput is the only issue. There will be times when wireless is the best solution and times when fixed is the best solution. But let it evolve based on demand. If I am content with a 4G wireless link and am willing to suffer congestion occasionally, why force me to additionally pay my share of the $35B for a link to my home that I don't want? However, if I have a house full of kids that want to frequently download movies, then let me pay the additional costs of a fibre to the home link. 

The risks on the project are huge. This government, and the same could be said for a Lib/Nat government, does not have the runs on the board to deliver on a project of this scale. It could very well blow out to $100B or more going by their track record and could well never be completed successfully. You keep ignoring these important implementation issues.

Letting the net evolve "naturally" as it has done up to now is far less risky. So what if we end up with a not so fast network, but only have laid out $5B. Don't you think the $30B saved could be put to some more beneficial use than just the kiddies downloading movies super fast?


----------



## Bill M

trainspotter said:


> I remember when the computer was supposed to make the office paperless. That didn't work either. Newspapers will be around for a millenium to come due to them being target specific to their local area. Also due to more people know how to read then use the internet. (think of all the baby boomers)




It's getting there TS, I bought my last property in 2009. The whole contract was in electronic PDF form sent to me by email. I now get all my dividend statements and annual reports online. I don't need to go to bank anymore to transfer some $$$ into someone elses account. It will all just get bigger and bigger. I haven't bought a newspaper since 1993, have no idea what one costs anymore. One thing for sure the internet is the way of the future, we just need a reliable service.


----------



## NBNMyths

Slipperz said:


> I'm in the CBD. Don't appreciate being called a liar either thanks very much :swear:




Given the typical NextG speeds, I remain highly dubious that this result is over that network (unless you live directly under the tower). Particularly due to the ping time and NextG's correct location in Sydney (It normally reports as centre of Australia, which shows up in distance to server).

But, giving you the benefit of the doubt, what of the rest of the population that don't have their own personal phone tower and so experience ping times of ~200ms, and download speeds of <2Mbps?




bellenuit said:


> Do what job?  Allow all the kiddies to simultaneously download 5GB movies?
> 
> You keep missing the point.




I might be missing _your_ point, but there are many people claiming wireless can replace fixed services. The entire argument that "the NBN isn't needed because wireless makes it obsolete" is based on this point. If a 1Gbps network will be rendered obsolete by a wireless network, then by extension, the existing 10Mbps (if you're lucky) fixed network must also be rendered obsolete.

For a wireless network to be successful, it requires there to be a fast fixed network. Because the fixed network will be used to do the heavy lifting, while the wireless network is used for the convenience stuff. This is all basic telecoms theory, advocated by pretty much everyone in the industry, everywhere in the world.



> No one is saying that wireless is technically superior to fixed fibre when speed/throughput is the only issue. There will be times when wireless is the best solution and times when fixed is the best solution. But let it evolve based on demand. ... However, if I have a house full of kids that want to frequently download movies, then let me pay the additional costs of a fibre to the home link.




Actually, there are plenty of people saying exactly that.

There is an economies of scale issue here. It's far cheaper and more efficient to roll out the whole network at once than do it piecemeal. Imagine the cost of rolling out one piece of fibre down a road at a time! Then, does the first house have to pay for the whole shared cable?

Man, I'm glad you naysayers weren't around when we were building the phone network. Imagine the outcry! 
_Wasting all OUR money (*$ more per capita than the NBN*, BTW) on a device for just gossiping to your neighbour. Why on earth would we need such a thing, when we can post a letter or just walk up the road instead. What a huge waste of public money. Why should I have to pay a share of it when I don't even want a telephone. What benefits could possibly come from such a device...._



> The risks on the project are huge. This government, and the same could be said for a Lib/Nat government, does not have the runs on the board to deliver on a project of this scale. It could very well blow out to $100B or more going by their track record and could well never be completed successfully. You keep ignoring these important implementation issues.




No, I'm well aware of the issues with Governments building things. But lets not forget that this isn't a Government department with all its associated issues. It's a business, run by a very talented team who have experience with such networks from around the globe. And their costings are backed by KPMG and McKinsey.



> Letting the net evolve "naturally" as it has done up to now is far less risky. So what if we end up with a not so fast network, but only have laid out $5B. Don't you think the $30B saved could be put to some more beneficial use than just the kiddies downloading movies super fast?




The difference now, is that a "natural evolution" requires the spending of big $. Implementing ADSL is generally cheap, because the lines don't change. Add some gizmos to the exchange, and it's done. But the next fixed evolution requires the mass relaying of cable. Now looking back to the HFC debacle of the 90s and the pair gain and rim issues of copper, do you really think that any telco will put up the money to roll out a new network to the population? Telstra won't even get ADSL working for thousands of homes (despite the obvious demand), so what hope is there that they'll ever lay fibre there? 

If we left it to natural evolution, then the CBDs and inner suburbs might get it, and the rest will miss out. Outer suburbs, regional and rural areas will be stuck paying exorbitant rates for services well below what's available in metro areas. Businesses in these areas will continue to suffer, but the service disparity will grow exponentially.

As for the cost...If it goes roughly to plan, then the NBN will provide a return exceeding the cost of the debt attached to it. The Government aren't "spending" $27bn on it, they are financing it. Once it's done, we'll have a superior network which will be a valuable asset, and the debt will be paid off.

I'm amazed that no-one sees the benefits to business that this network will bring. Perhaps that's why business groups are so supportive of it.


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> As for the cost...If it goes roughly to plan, then the NBN will provide a return exceeding the cost of the debt attached to it. The Government aren't "spending" $27bn on it, they are financing it. Once it's done, we'll have a superior network which will be a valuable asset, and the debt will be paid off.
> 
> I'm amazed that no-one sees the benefits to business that this network will bring. Perhaps that's why business groups are so supportive of it.




Just LOL on the "financing" throw away line on this one. A couple of posts ago you claimed it was "earmarked". Now it is financed. RoR has been agreed at approximately 7% ..... chuck in some interest component of say 4% and it is going to take an awfully long time for this thing to payback 27 BILLION DOLLARS. Do the math. 

Me thinks NBNMyths is a little bit more than an avid supporter and pro NBN by choice. Remarkable amount of hyperbole seems to stream with not many facts like this little gem about business groups supporting it which FLIES IN THE FACE of what has been aknowledged.

*THE federal government has conceded that its NBN vision is failing to win business support. *

Parliamentary Secretary Senator Kate Lundy acknowledged the problem during a panel session at the World Computer Congress in Brisbane last week.

After speaking on the government's technology-centric citizen engagement model, Senator Lundy faced pointed observations from Mark Toomey, founder and chief executive of technology consultancy, Infonomics.

Mr Toomey told the senator several key business groups did not understand the economic vision of the NBN.

"I don't think the Australian Information Industry Association does get it, I know that the Committee for Economic Development of Australia doesn't get it, the Australian Institute of Management definitely doesn't get it and the Australian Institute of Company Directors is only barely getting it," Mr Toomey said.

"We still have a massive education job to do in this country to shift from where a few businesses in a few very successful organisations get it, and know that it's a competitive advantage for them, to where all Australian business leaders and governments actually get it."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/aus...-economic-vision/story-e6frgakx-1225930197092


----------



## todster

trainspotter said:


> I remember when the computer was supposed to make the office paperless. That didn't work either. Newspapers will be around for a millenium to come due to them being target specific to their local area. Also due to more people know how to read then use the internet. (think of all the baby boomers)




Well i think they will be looking for growth and baby boomers already buy the paper.
How many young people do you know who buy the paper?


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> Just LOL on the "financing" throw away line on this one. A couple of posts ago you claimed it was "earmarked". Now it is financed. RoR has been agreed at approximately 7% ..... chuck in some interest component of say 4% and it is going to take an awfully long time for this thing to payback 27 BILLION DOLLARS. Do the math.




I've never used the phrase earmarked.

I don't need to do the maths. According to the "maths" it will be repaid in 2034.



> Me thinks NBNMyths is a little bit more than an avid supporter and pro NBN by choice. Remarkable amount of hyperbole seems to stream with not many facts like this little gem about business groups supporting it which FLIES IN THE FACE of what has been acknowledged.
> 
> "I don't think the Australian Information Industry Association does get it, I know that the Committee for Economic Development of Australia doesn't get it, the Australian Institute of Management definitely doesn't get it and the Australian Institute of Company Directors is only barely getting it," Mr Toomey said.
> 
> "We still have a massive education job to do in this country to shift from where a few businesses in a few very successful organisations get it, and know that it's a competitive advantage for them, to where all Australian business leaders and governments actually get it."




Yep, I must work for Conroy. Because I've already said I think his policy for the filter is stupid, and I was here at 11pm on a sunday night typing on an internet forum, and that's what pubic servants are paid to do 

Your article just goes to show, yet again, how one-sided the Australian's reporting about the NBN is. eg:

*Australian Information Industry Association:* 
Ian Birks, CEO: _“Given the high level of significance of the broadband issue, and in particular its resonance with the independents, we now expect to see the roll-out of the NBN prioritised in this government’s term”

“There are immediate returns on offer for every business that will only become more powerful with ubiquitous, high-speed broadband.”_ 


*The Council of Small Business of Australia:*
Executive Director Peter Strong: _“[The NBN] is an equal playing field. You don’t get that too often. We want it, we need it.”_


*The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry:*
Peter Anderson, CEO: _“The instinct in the business community is that there can be a real productivity kick and benefit.” 

_*Google:*
Alan Noble, head of Engineering: _“The NBN will underpin Australia’s digital economy and will be just as vital an enabler of innovation, economic growth and entrepreneurship in the 21st century as national highways and the electric grid were in the 20th century. Simply put, it means a world of opportunities for all Australians”_


*Intel:*
Phil Cronin, Managing Director: _“It’s now time to move beyond debate… the NBN has the potential to deliver significant long term benefits to consumers and small businesses alike”_


*Microsoft:*
_“This NBN will be critical in the years ahead and essential for reducing costs in health and education service delivery. It will also contribute to overcoming the tyranny of distance that exists in rural and regional Australia”_


*Optus:*
Maha Krishnapillai, Dir. Govt & Corp affairs: _“… Broadband is crucial to Australia’s future prosperity and fibre is indisputably the best way to deliver high-speed broadband for the long term. As Tony Windsor said and we agree: ‘You build it once. You build it right. You build it with fibre”. There are still some people querying that there’s going to be some new technology that’s going to replace fibre and as recently as yesterday people saying that fibre is no longer the technology of the future. I’m not exactly sure what parallel universe people live on but fibre will be the way of the future.”_

Paul O’Sullivan, CEO: _“It’s long been our view that the National Broadband Network is economically viable and the release of today’s detailed study from McKinsey and KPMG confirms this. Most importantly the study has found that access to the network will be available to all Australians at a price they can afford, which is essential to the healthy take-up of services on the new network.”_


*Vodafone:*
Vittorio Colao, CEO: _“Australia is taking a very bold step….I honestly think that the vision that in this country the Government has is a very healthy one”_​
I agree that the govt needs to do more education of some business groups, but overall it's being welcomed by the business communty. Interesting that one of the groups quotes by the Oz has publicly announced support for the project.

Also interesting that the Murdoch press was one of the few media outlet that didn't report the CEO of Google's heavy praise of the NBN last week. Wonder why that was?


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> I remember when the computer was supposed to make the office paperless. That didn't work either. Newspapers will be around for a millenium to come due to them being target specific to their local area. Also due to more people know how to read then use the internet. (think of all the baby boomers)






todster said:


> Well i think they will be looking for growth and baby boomers already buy the paper.
> How many young people do you know who buy the paper?




Sorry trainspotter, but before too long newspapers will have gone the way of the dodo.

Circulation has been in decline for the last 20 years, despite the growth in population. On average, paper sales are falling about 2-3% per year, which is about the same rate as people drop off from old age.

Look at the historic titles that have disappeared all together in the last 25 years... The Sun (Syd), The Sun (Vic), The Daily Mirror, The National Times, The Brisbane Tele.

Readership of the Daily Tele in the late 80s was well over a million, but today it's 950,000, despite Sydney's population increasing enormously since then. On a per-capita basis, newspaper sales are in freefall.

In the UK, the biggest selling paper (The Sun) sells a million less copies now than it did in 1994! That's a fall of ~30%! In the US, circulation is falling at 5% a year.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/jun/17/newspaper-circulation-oecd-report

Younger people just don't buy papers, as a rule. Hell, I'm 38 and I can't remember the last time I actually _bought_ a newspaper, and even that was probably just so I had something to read on the plane. Why buy a paper when Google is only a second away, and you can read "papers" online for free anyway.

The problem for the papers, is that with continuing circulation falls, their advertising revenue is plummeting. They can't raise the price because then circulation will fall even further, while their costs remain pretty static. Revenue is falling even faster than circulation:





I'll give them 20 years before the only newspapers left will be freebie local rags. There will probably be online news services, but whether they will bear any resemblance to today's current papers is unlikely.

Networks like the NBN will be the final nail in the coffin of newspapers as we know them.


----------



## Slipperz

NBNMyths said:


> Given the typical NextG speeds, I remain highly dubious that this result is over that network (unless you live directly under the tower). Particularly due to the ping time and NextG's correct location in Sydney (It normally reports as centre of Australia, which shows up in distance to server).
> 
> But, giving you the benefit of the doubt, what of the rest of the population that don't have their own personal phone tower and so experience ping times of ~200ms, and download speeds of <2Mbps?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I might be missing _your_ point, but there are many people claiming wireless can replace fixed services. The entire argument that "the NBN isn't needed because wireless makes it obsolete" is based on this point. If a 1Gbps network will be rendered obsolete by a wireless network, then by extension, the existing 10Mbps (if you're lucky) fixed network must also be rendered obsolete.
> 
> For a wireless network to be successful, it requires there to be a fast fixed network. Because the fixed network will be used to do the heavy lifting, while the wireless network is used for the convenience stuff. This is all basic telecoms theory, advocated by pretty much everyone in the industry, everywhere in the world.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, there are plenty of people saying exactly that.
> 
> There is an economies of scale issue here. It's far cheaper and more efficient to roll out the whole network at once than do it piecemeal. Imagine the cost of rolling out one piece of fibre down a road at a time! Then, does the first house have to pay for the whole shared cable?
> 
> Man, I'm glad you naysayers weren't around when we were building the phone network. Imagine the outcry!
> _Wasting all OUR money (*$ more per capita than the NBN*, BTW) on a device for just gossiping to your neighbour. Why on earth would we need such a thing, when we can post a letter or just walk up the road instead. What a huge waste of public money. Why should I have to pay a share of it when I don't even want a telephone. What benefits could possibly come from such a device...._
> 
> 
> 
> No, I'm well aware of the issues with Governments building things. But lets not forget that this isn't a Government department with all its associated issues. It's a business, run by a very talented team who have experience with such networks from around the globe. And their costings are backed by KPMG and McKinsey.
> 
> 
> 
> The difference now, is that a "natural evolution" requires the spending of big $. Implementing ADSL is generally cheap, because the lines don't change. Add some gizmos to the exchange, and it's done. But the next fixed evolution requires the mass relaying of cable. Now looking back to the HFC debacle of the 90s and the pair gain and rim issues of copper, do you really think that any telco will put up the money to roll out a new network to the population? Telstra won't even get ADSL working for thousands of homes (despite the obvious demand), so what hope is there that they'll ever lay fibre there?
> 
> If we left it to natural evolution, then the CBDs and inner suburbs might get it, and the rest will miss out. Outer suburbs, regional and rural areas will be stuck paying exorbitant rates for services well below what's available in metro areas. Businesses in these areas will continue to suffer, but the service disparity will grow exponentially.
> 
> As for the cost...If it goes roughly to plan, then the NBN will provide a return exceeding the cost of the debt attached to it. The Government aren't "spending" $27bn on it, they are financing it. Once it's done, we'll have a superior network which will be a valuable asset, and the debt will be paid off.
> 
> I'm amazed that no-one sees the benefits to business that this network will bring. Perhaps that's why business groups are so supportive of it.




I don't live under the tower but I am only a few buildings down the road.

I'd take a photo but I don't see the need to prove anything to you.

Your slanderous insinuation can stand for what it is.

Oh no wait you're giving me the benefit of the doubt are you. LOL.

And now because I do actually have the speeds I said I did it's not fair to the rest of Australia. 

Nice work there. 

So now I'm not a liar I'm inconsiderate by my  existence. Is that your inference?

I have not suggested that rural and regional Australia are not in need of an upgrade in their communications infrastructure. In fact posts from some forum members here make it glaringly obvious it's an urgent necessity.

What I was pointing out via the recent article in the Australian is that HALF A MILLION Australians signed on to telstras nextG network in the past six months, a point you blithely ignore.

And now telstra are going to quadruple their speeds by years end. It's an appealing option to a young mobile urbanised population.

Sure your analysts have done their projections.

Just like the high priced analysts projected traffic flows into the cross city tunnel and the lane cove tunnel.

 Both sold into receivership.

Oopsie. Was someone telling porkers there? It would seem these analyst types are pretty good at telling the govt what they want to hear on an inflated contract and assuming zero responsibility when their predictions lead major infrastructure projects to ruin.

Major spend and massive miscalculation much?

And we taxpayers sigh and wring our hands and hope it never happens again.

But wait! Now we are expected to stump up 37 billion after the school hall and home insulation debacles? 

Excellent this should go well.

Now really. 37 billion dollars.

Not the governments money mind you.

My money. And every other taxpayer in Australia.

Whether we are going to get value for money or not remains to be seen.


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> I've never used the phrase earmarked.
> 
> I don't need to do the maths. According to the "maths" it will be repaid in 2034.
> 
> Yep, I must work for Conroy. Because I've already said I think his policy for the filter is stupid, and I was here at 11pm on a sunday night typing on an internet forum, and that's what pubic servants are paid to do
> 
> Your article just goes to show, yet again, how one-sided the Australian's reporting about the NBN is. eg:
> 
> *Australian Information Industry Association:*
> Ian Birks, CEO: _“Given the high level of significance of the broadband issue, and in particular its resonance with the independents, we now expect to see the roll-out of the NBN prioritised in this government’s term”
> 
> “There are immediate returns on offer for every business that will only become more powerful with ubiquitous, high-speed broadband.”_
> 
> 
> *The Council of Small Business of Australia:*
> Executive Director Peter Strong: _“[The NBN] is an equal playing field. You don’t get that too often. We want it, we need it.”_
> 
> 
> *The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry:*
> Peter Anderson, CEO: _“The instinct in the business community is that there can be a real productivity kick and benefit.”
> 
> _*Google:*
> Alan Noble, head of Engineering: _“The NBN will underpin Australia’s digital economy and will be just as vital an enabler of innovation, economic growth and entrepreneurship in the 21st century as national highways and the electric grid were in the 20th century. Simply put, it means a world of opportunities for all Australians”_
> 
> 
> *Intel:*
> Phil Cronin, Managing Director: _“It’s now time to move beyond debate… the NBN has the potential to deliver significant long term benefits to consumers and small businesses alike”_
> 
> 
> *Microsoft:*
> _“This NBN will be critical in the years ahead and essential for reducing costs in health and education service delivery. It will also contribute to overcoming the tyranny of distance that exists in rural and regional Australia”_
> 
> 
> *Optus:*
> Maha Krishnapillai, Dir. Govt & Corp affairs: _“… Broadband is crucial to Australia’s future prosperity and fibre is indisputably the best way to deliver high-speed broadband for the long term. As Tony Windsor said and we agree: ‘You build it once. You build it right. You build it with fibre”. There are still some people querying that there’s going to be some new technology that’s going to replace fibre and as recently as yesterday people saying that fibre is no longer the technology of the future. I’m not exactly sure what parallel universe people live on but fibre will be the way of the future.”_
> 
> Paul O’Sullivan, CEO: _“It’s long been our view that the National Broadband Network is economically viable and the release of today’s detailed study from McKinsey and KPMG confirms this. Most importantly the study has found that access to the network will be available to all Australians at a price they can afford, which is essential to the healthy take-up of services on the new network.”_
> 
> 
> *Vodafone:*
> Vittorio Colao, CEO: _“Australia is taking a very bold step….I honestly think that the vision that in this country the Government has is a very healthy one”_​
> I agree that the govt needs to do more education of some business groups, but overall it's being welcomed by the business communty. Interesting that one of the groups quotes by the Oz has publicly announced support for the project.
> 
> Also interesting that the Murdoch press was one of the few media outlet that didn't report the CEO of Google's heavy praise of the NBN last week. Wonder why that was?




Smells like a Conroy hack job to me. You sirry iriot, not once was this a reference point. Just somehow in your guilt addled mind that you have espoused your preferences onto this subject??? Hard to belive that someone who REALLY likes the NBN would go to such great lengths to defend it as well as have ALL the rhetoric on hand to support such a massive con job on the Australian people. I remember when Keating tried on the "SA  Smart State" programme to divert what was going on in the economy. LOLOLOL. Talk about history repeating itself. You remember this being a cosmopolitan 38 year old don't you? Keating was being whipped in the "unwinnable election". A red herring appeared in the form of buying votes in SA by stating that his Guvmint was going to build this technologically advanced super city where all the big brains can live and conceive how we should be living in the 21st Century. LOLOLOL. Sound familiar???

I also notive that ALL the business's that WANT the NBN have a vested interest .... Intel, Microsoft, Vodafone, Optus, Google and the rest just bleat what they are told.

I do not see Rio Tinto or Australia Post coming out nor do I see Woolworths or NAB extolling the virtues of the NBN ???? Ummmmmmm afterall they are 4 out of 10 of the biggest employers in Australia.

Talk about pear hunting ........ I know ..... let's give the keys to the liqour cabinet to the alcoholic and see if he will agree with you ?????? OF COURSE THEY GONNA AGREE WITH YOU !!!!!!!!!!! Pfffffffffttttttttttttttt ....... Now let's ask the general population if THEY want to spend billions of dollars on a technology they do not want nor understand when they are waiting for a doctor in an overcrowded hospital ... no wait ..... better yet ...... ask the person whose home has just been invaded and ask them if the require a blue cable giving them blindingly fast internet??? OR THE POLICE? Wait a minute , how about a nurse to attend to their cuts and bruises??? I think you will know the answer to this one. 

You remind me of a guy I used to employ. Lazy to the extreme and always blaming as to why he couldn't get the job done because the tools and workplace were inadequate for HIM to realise his full potential. Funny how the other 9 guys on the shift could do the job easily enough. 

"Senator Conroy, like a latter day Basil Fawlty, hires one consultant after another instructing them 'don't mention the cost-benefit analysis', and everyone, just like the dinner guests at Fawlty Towers, does just that highlighting very plainly that they were told NOT to perform such an analysis and in so doing confirming how negligent it is not to ask and answer the fundamental question about the NBN," he said.

But wait there is more ........

Greenhill Caliburn's document did, however, contain a number of caveats about the NBN project. For example, it pointed out that the NBN's successful implementation and financial forecast were subject to a number of *"risks, contingencies and external factors", *such as shifting technologies and consumer preferences, and that there was a lack of "directly comparable precedents globally for the NBN". (brush this aside nothing to see here)

In addition, Greenhill Caliburn also had concerns around the pricing of future products based on the NBN, noting that consumers might push back against a usage-based pricing model, that lower prices might need to be set initially to encourage higher take-up rates, and that retail service provider margins on entry-level NBN services might combine with *lower-than-expected growth* in premium services such as internet delivered television. (brush this under the carpet , inconsequential this stuff)

http://www.zdnet.com.au/nbn-business-case-reasonable-caliburn-339309190.htm

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat ?????????????????

*Don't add Telstra deal to NBN cost: Quigley*

It is unreasonable to add the $13.8 billion payment to Telstra, which National Broadband Network Company (NBN Co) counts as an operating cost, to the $35.7 billion capital expenditure cost of the whole network, NBN Co chief Mike Quigley has said.

The government estimated that the original cost of the network would be $43 billion, however in the 36-page NBN business case summary released by the government last week, this figure was reduced to $35.7 billion.

NBN Co said this reduced cost was due to the Telstra deal, however this led to Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull and NBN critics with the Alliance for Affordable Broadband to add the $13.8 billion deal to the capital expenditure cost for the network to infer that the* network may cost up to $55.2 billion.*

http://www.zdnet.com.au/don-t-add-telstra-deal-to-nbn-cost-quigley-339307580.htm

and this little gem of a statement from Quigley no less,

_"I know but I can't reveal that number,"_ he said.

And my favourite of all time:-

_"This is an asset that will be of value to the nation,"_ he said.

Hmmmmmmmmmm ........ nation building springs to mind.


----------



## So_Cynical

trainspotter said:


> Now let's ask the general population if THEY want to spend billions of dollars on a technology they do not want nor understand when they are waiting for a doctor in an overcrowded hospital ... no wait ..... better yet ...... ask the person whose home has just been invaded and ask them if the require a blue cable giving them blindingly fast internet??? OR THE POLICE? Wait a minute , how about a nurse to attend to their cuts and bruises??? I think you will know the answer to this one.




Errr didn't we just have an election? (asked the people) i seem to remember 1 vote Tony getting his ass handed to him  seems to me like the people were asked if they wanted to spend billions of dollars on a technology they do not want nor understand.

And they said yes. :grinsking


----------



## trainspotter

ROFL ...... did the Independents that handed Labor power go to their electorates with a mandate to bring in the NBN ??? Did Bob Katter or Tony Windsor ask for the NBN or even advise their electorate what it actually was and was it a voting winner for him?? LOLOL.

Did the Greens want an NBN ?? Adam Bandt voted the Labor Party into power. He was the first to declare his hand and the three stooges held out for what they could get.

Nope ....... Labor rolled them like the pork barrels they are.

Man you are really clutching straws now So_Cyclical.

Read this for some facts http://www.arnnet.com.au/article/35...m_independents_over_43_billion_nbn_price_tag/


----------



## Julia

So_Cynical said:


> Errr didn't we just have an election? (asked the people) i seem to remember 1 vote Tony getting his ass handed to him  seems to me like the people were asked if they wanted to spend billions of dollars on a technology they do not want nor understand.
> 
> And they said yes. :grinsking



You are once again ignoring the fact that it was the decision of the independents to give government to Labor.  Because in their rural areas they wanted the reach of the NBN.  Totally to do with their own constituency, not to do with the overall benefit to the country as a whole.


----------



## todster

Julia said:


> You are once again ignoring the fact that it was the decision of the independents to give government to Labor.  Because in their rural areas they wanted the reach of the NBN.  Totally to do with their own constituency, not to do with the overall benefit to the country as a whole.




Oh yeah i remember that now.
That was when Tony was smirking like he had it in the bag Bahaahah
Lying in bed at night dreaming of sleeping in the Lodge.
Red budgie smugglers hanging on the hills hoist overlooking the harbour.
Head nodding like a donkey.


----------



## So_Cynical

trainspotter said:


> Man you are really clutching straws now So_Cyclical.




Tranny you and the rest of the ASF right are the only straw clutchers around here 
and even most of the ASF right have deserted you in this thread.

You asked the question 


Tranny][B]Now let's ask the general population if THEY want to spend billions of dollars on a technology they do not want nor understand[/B] when they are waiting for a doctor in an overcrowded hospital ... no wait ..... better yet ...... ask the person whose home has just been invaded and ask them if the require a blue cable giving them blindingly fast internet??? OR THE POLICE? Wait a minute  said:


> Because in their rural areas they wanted the reach of the NBN.  .




At last...an admission from the ASF right that someone actually wants the NBN....its a miracle.:bowdown::bowdown:


----------



## trainspotter

So_Cynical said:


> Tranny you and the rest of the ASF right are the only straw clutchers around here
> and even most of the ASF right have deserted you in this thread.
> 
> You asked the question
> 
> I provided the answer....Julia is prime minister because 1 vote Tony is a loser, as in lost the election = loser, and a vote for Julia was a vote for the NBN...i mean its pretty hard to see anyone voting for Labor and not voting for the NBN. :dunno: how is it  possible to separate the two.
> 
> Tranny, ASF right = grasping at straws.
> 
> At last...an admission from the ASF right that someone actually wants the NBN....its a miracle.:bowdown::bowdown:




LOLOL ,,,,,,, Is that right ??

*The federal coalition has hit the lead in the latest opinion poll, with a 54 per cent to 46 per cent two-party preferred majority over Labor. *
The Nielsen poll, published in Monday's Fairfax newspapers, shows Labor has suffered a four per cent swing *against it* since the August election. :

On primary votes the coalition holds 46 per cent, Labor is on 32 per cent and the Greens hold 12 per cent. 

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...ead-in-latest-poll-E2SBC?opendocument&src=rss

Ummmmmmmmmm .......... you might wanna read a few posts back where I stated I am *all for* the NBN but NOT AT ANY COST ! Try rolling it out where it willl be most effective/useful/critical/needed/required (insert adjective here) like business hubs and or centres, hospitals, educational facilities (insert required facility here) ........... DERRRRRRRRRRR ......... tell me again WHY DOES the little Aussie Batller NEED 100mbps in their home when according to the Smith Family 11.3% of Australians live in poverty. Do THEY need a blue cable? What benefit is it to them? They want food and shelter and NOT FUGGEN FAST INTERNET !!!!

When are you gonna get it So_Cyclical ........ I don't care about the politics of it ....... I care about the ECONOMICS of it.


----------



## NBNMyths

Slipperz said:


> I don't live under the tower but I am only a few buildings down the road.
> 
> And now because I do actually have the speeds I said I did it's not fair to the rest of Australia.




I'm not saying it isn't fair, I'm just saying it doesn't happen. In other words, mobile broadband isn't a viable alternative for the vast majority of the population, because (quite apart from the exorbitant pricing) it's just too slow.



> I have not suggested that rural and regional Australia are not in need of an upgrade in their communications infrastructure. In fact posts from some forum members here make it glaringly obvious it's an urgent necessity.




It's not just rural and regional Australia. Even in major suburbs, NextG delivers maybe 2Mbps most of the time. I'd be pretty confident that even in the CBD, typicasl speeds are a fraction of what you are getting.

There are plenty of places in the capital cities where you can't even get ADSL, let alone anything faster. Baulkham Hills is an example you may be familiar with.



> What I was pointing out via the recent article in the Australian is that HALF A MILLION Australians signed on to telstras nextG network in the past six months, a point you blithely ignore.



I ignored it because it's meaningless.

It's like saying that _"K-Mart sold 500,000 bicycles in the last 6 months, and this is an indication that people are moving away from cars"_

NextG is primarily a mobile phone network. Without knowing whether those connections were
a) People churning between carriers due to Voda and Optus' disasterous problems
b) People changing due to Telstra's newfound competitive mobile pricing
c) People just buying smartphones with a data pack (eg my wife)

There's absolutely no indication that any of these connections are replacing a fixed broadband service, which is exactly the point.

The "12% mobile only" statistic from the article includes people who have naked DSL through ULL connections, and Optus naked cable connections. In other words, they still have a fixed line, just not a fixed _phone_ line. And it would be a lot higher than that if Naked DSL wasn't restricted to a small fraction of exchanges.

Between 2009 and 2010, the number of residential fixed broadband connections increased by 3%, which exceeds the growth in both number of premises and population. The volume of data downloaded over these connections increase by 50% over the same period.

Given the above (particularly the 50% data increase), do you really think that a service where the largest data pack on offer is only 12GB will cut it for many users as their primary connection?



> And now telstra are going to quadruple their speeds by years end. It's an appealing option to a young mobile urbanised population.




And yet even TELSTRA say that they don't want 4G to replace fixed lines, and will be introducing tools to prevent "bandwidth hogs" such as IPTV, exactly the type of internet uses that are booming at present:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/aus...t-bandwidth-hogs/story-e6frgakx-1226009683543

That said, I'm certainly not denying that for a few low volume users, a solely mobile broadband connection will be their choice. And the NBN has factored in that there will be 15% of such premises. It's pretty clear that businesses will takeup the NBN, because mobile won't cut it for them, and it would also be impractical for families to choose mobile-only.

Once you combine the speed issue with the ever increasing data use (+50% a year, according to the ABS) and the cost (eg: 400GB data on the NBN for $70, versus 12Gb on NextG for $70), there is simply no way most people will replace their fixed broadband with mobile. Technical issues aside, it's too slow, too unreliable, and too expensive.

Any family household also loses the mobility option of wireless broadband. Because if Dad takes the modem to work with him for mobility, then the kids have nothing at home. Thereby removing the final incentive to pay 30 times as much for a slower version of the same thing....



> But wait! Now we are expected to stump up 37 billion after the school hall and home insulation debacles?
> 
> Excellent this should go well.
> 
> Now really. 37 billion dollars.
> 
> Not the governments money mind you.
> 
> My money. And every other taxpayer in Australia.
> 
> Whether we are going to get value for money or not remains to be seen.




Well, actually it's $27bn from the Govt. 

Now I'll give you the insulation thing. While perhaps good in theory, the implementation was atrocious.

But the BER was actually a pretty good program. I know the Right love to bag it, but it did the job with a minimum of problems. Perhaps you don't have kids so you haven't seen the results.

Also not sure why they love referring to it as the "school halls" program, since the building built depended on the needs of the school. Perhaps it sounds worse to call it that rather than the "school buildings program", or the "new classrooms program". My local primary and high schools both got new classrooms, because they already had nice halls. Anyway, I digress. The program cost 12% too much (except in NSW, where the tired incompetent State Govt couldn't manage a chook raffle these days), but it kept us out of recession and delivered new buildings to schools that had languished for many years. Given that it achieved its objectives so well, I don't have an issue with the 12% premium, because it all went back into the economy anyway.

Only 3% of schools were unhappy with what they got. I'm yet to understand how a 3% dissatisfaction rate can possibly constitute a "debarkle".


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths wrote this .... _"It's like saying that "K-Mart sold 500,000 bicycles in the last 6 months, and this is an indication that people are moving away from cars"_

OMFG ........ you just don't get it do you? Let's think about this logically shall we?

If automobiles HAD NOT been invented and were just about to be launched into Australia and the Guvmint insisted WE ALL HAVE TO HAVE ONE and then KMart sold 500,000 bicycles prior to the introduction of the car then I would be a bit nervous as a car dealer/wholesaler/manufacturer.

DO YOU GET IT NOW ????


----------



## boofhead

Trainspotter: I think your analogy is wrong. Fibre isn't only just invented. People had access to fibre before NBN/FTTH announcement. Some greenfields were building it already and some retails ISPs were already offering it. It previously existed. Only now the government wants to push a more uniform system out to the bulk of the market.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> *1949 *I am *all for* the telephone but NOT AT ANY COST ! Try rolling it out where it willl be most effective/useful/critical/needed/required (insert adjective here) like business hubs and or centres, hospitals, educational facilities (insert required facility here) ........... DERRRRRRRRRRR ......... tell me again WHY DOES the little Aussie Batller NEED a telephone in their home when according to the Smith Family 11.3% of Australians live in poverty. Do THEY need a black cable? What benefit is it to them? They want food and shelter and NOT FUGGEN GOSSIP WITH THE NEIGHBOURS !!!!






trainspotter said:


> *2011 *I am *all for* the NBN but NOT AT ANY COST ! Try rolling it out where it willl be most effective/useful/critical/needed/required (insert adjective here) like business hubs and or centres, hospitals, educational facilities (insert required facility here) ........... DERRRRRRRRRRR ......... tell me again WHY DOES the little Aussie Batller NEED 100mbps in their home when according to the Smith Family 11.3% of Australians live in poverty. Do THEY need a blue cable? What benefit is it to them? They want food and shelter and NOT FUGGEN FAST INTERNET !!!!




*The more things change, the more they stay the same:*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCKQdh8qQxM


----------



## Logique

> ...[TS] even most of the ASF right have deserted you in this thread...



TS is ASF Right is he? Anyway he seems to have it covered. 

Geez, 10 pages, backwards and forwards on the NBN, the fonts ever bigger. Can't believe how polarized, it has all become.  

We're a big country, and logistically and financially we're not able to provide instant Korea-like connectivity, nor with a sole and exclusive (and expensive) delivery mechanism.


----------



## sinner

NBNMyths said:


> *The more things change, the more they stay the same:*
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCKQdh8qQxM




Are you serious? 

I am starting to take the concept that you are a Conroy paid shill more seriously.

Can we report maliciously disingenious posts to Joe?


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> NBNMyths wrote this .... _"It's like saying that "K-Mart sold 500,000 bicycles in the last 6 months, and this is an indication that people are moving away from cars"_
> 
> OMFG ........ you just don't get it do you? Let's think about this logically shall we?
> 
> If automobiles HAD NOT been invented and were just about to be launched into Australia and the Guvmint insisted WE ALL HAVE TO HAVE ONE and then KMart sold 500,000 bicycles prior to the introduction of the car then I would be a bit nervous as a car dealer/wholesaler/manufacturer.
> 
> DO YOU GET IT NOW ????




What boofhead wrote, +

Fibre is nothing new. It's being rolled out around the world, as we speak.

In South Korea, where they *already have a 4G wireless network*, they announced last year that *they are spending US$26bn upgrading their fixed fibre network.*

So there you go. They have a car and a bicycle already. Because their bicycle can't replace their car, they are upgrading to a better car. 

Meanwhile, in Australia we currently have a choice between a horse-and-cart or a bicycle....


----------



## NBNMyths

sinner said:


> Are you serious?
> 
> I am starting to take the concept that you are a Conroy paid shill more seriously.
> 
> Can we report maliciously disingenious posts to Joe?




I'm sure the admin of the site can quite easily verify where my IP is located.

Maybe I need to be more clear. I don't care for Conroy. I care for the NBN. I hate Conroy's stupid filter idea.

I find it quite amazing that people are quite happy to believe that anyone opposed to the NBN is doing so of their own volition, but anyone supporting it must be a paid shill.


----------



## trainspotter

boofhead said:


> Trainspotter: I think your analogy is wrong. Fibre isn't only just invented. People had access to fibre before NBN/FTTH announcement. Some greenfields were building it already and some retails ISPs were already offering it. It previously existed. Only now the government wants to push a more uniform system out to the bulk of the market.




OK OK OK boofhead ..... you have got me there. Let's not say INVENTED ..... let's say INTRODUCED forcibly onto the market place. Remember we were talking about selling 500,000 bicycles by KMart ..... it was a "hypothetical" situation.


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> I'm sure the admin of the site can quite easily verify where my IP is located.
> 
> Maybe I need to be more clear. I don't care for Conroy. I care for the NBN. I hate Conroy's stupid filter idea.
> 
> I find it quite amazing that people are quite happy to believe that anyone opposed to the NBN is doing so of their own volition, but anyone supporting it must be a paid shill.




I care for the NBN as well. BUT NOT AT ANY COST. Place it where it is needed. (must be the 10th time I have written this??)

It would appear NBNMyths you are true to your word but you have to admit you DO have an extraordinarily amount of technobabble and facts and figures armed to your disposal. Remember I have previously written I do not care for the politics of the damn thing, I am more interested as a businessman as to the VIABILITY of it. If it does not make commercial sense (other than the Guvmint forecasts) and remember there is no cost benefit analysis available to us to mull over, what is the point?

The telephone analagoy was a joke right? LOLOL ...... They said the same thing about the Hindenburg and look what happened to that ! I do not trust this government (or any other) to implement a project of this scale in this current economic climate. Walk before you can run is the motto. There are too many grey areas that have not been thoroughly explored to just ram it down the throat of Australians. IMO that is.


----------



## sinner

NBNMyths said:


> I find it quite amazing that people are quite happy to believe that anyone opposed to the NBN is doing so of their own volition, but anyone supporting it must be a paid shill.




Actually my opinion is derived solely from observation of your words and behaviour on this thread.


----------



## Slipperz

Interestingly the US is going wireless.

I guess they expect the spectrum freed up from tv to be enough?

Three billion on investment in new wireless technologies as well.

And the plan ends up putting money BACK into the budget via spectrum auction.

Provides their emergency services with their own national communications network too.


http://gigaom.com/broadband/obamas-wireless-plan-favors-broadband-over-tv/


----------



## So_Cynical

Logique said:


> TS is ASF Right is he?




A core member of the gang of 5, you have some doubt about his political leanings?


----------



## trainspotter

So_Cynical said:


> A core member of the gang of 5, you have some doubt about his political leanings?




LOLOL .... now that is just hilarious ...... as opposed to Rudd's Gang of Four?

THE Prime Minister and his three most senior ministers form a kitchen cabinet that takes the key decisions. 

During the Howard years, Australia was run by the 17 or so men and women in the cabinet. *Under the Rudd government, it is effectively run by four.*

The dominance of the strategic priorities and budget committee of cabinet - comprising Kevin Rudd, Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard, Treasurer Wayne Swan and Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner - is a key factor in the centralisation of power in the Rudd government.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/the-rudd-gang-of-four/story-e6frg6z6-1225795556696


----------



## Julia

So_Cynical said:


> A core member of the gang of 5, you have some doubt about his political leanings?



 What a joke:  this from someone who so lacks objectivity about his chosen political party that he can never acknowledge a single fault on their part, regardless of all the evidence to the contrary.


----------



## Mofra

Julia said:


> What a joke:  this from someone who so lacks objectivity about his chosen political party that he can never acknowledge a single fault on their part, regardless of all the evidence to the contrary.



In fairness Julia, that sums up about 90% of ASF; SC merely stands out because he is one of the few lefties posting on a right-wing website.


----------



## wayneL

Mofra said:


> In fairness Julia, that sums up about 90% of ASF; SC merely stands out because he is one of the few lefties posting on a right-wing website.




Eh?

ASF is not a right wing website, it's a stock investing forum.

SC stands out not because he is a lefty, but because when it comes to politics he is a troll.


----------



## Mofra

wayneL said:


> ASF is not a right wing website, it's a stock investing forum.



It's more than fair to say that the majority of ASF posters, and therefore website content, would lean to the right hand side of the political spectrum.

Unless, of course, people regard Fox news as "Fair and Balanced"


----------



## drsmith

NBN articles from The Australian must have thinned a little. Pity, I enjoy reading them.

The majority of ASF posters I would suggest do not participate in political discussion on the forum at all. 

What percentage of the forum membership actually participate in the political threads ?

It's only us die hards that bang on.


----------



## wayneL

Mofra said:


> It's more than fair to say that the majority of ASF posters, and therefore website content, would lean to the right hand side of the political spectrum.




I don't think ASF is predominantly right wing at all!

I think there is a good mix occupying both wings that are near enough to the centre, with only a few rabble rowsers from both extremes.

As has been discussed before, left and right is probably redundant anyway (with the exception of a few ideologues.

Myself for instance (who has been accused of being both right of Genghis Kahn and a Pinko Commy bastard in various places) am simply a classical liberal (as in ideology, not Liberal as in the party). This places me both left and right at the same time. 





Mofra said:


> Unless, of course, people regard Fox news as "Fair and Balanced"




I don't think even those on the right would think Fox News as fair and balanced LOL

But it balances out the left wing (as redundant as that term probably is) bias in other media outlets. 

The troll probably includes me in the "gang of 5", yet I identify far more with Olbermann than O'Reilly.


----------



## Knobby22

wayneL said:


> The troll probably includes me in the "gang of 5", yet I identify far more with Olbermann than O'Reilly.




I wouldn't put Wayne in the right wing camp, if you imagine a 2 dimensional plane with a right and left side, Wayne would be off the page up in the air somewhere (in a good way). 

I think most posters are free thinking though we have one or two who always seem to argue their political parties line consistently and can never be swayed. 
It is a business site so its not surprising there is a little bit of right wing bias.


----------



## NBNMyths

Slipperz said:


> Interestingly the US is going wireless.
> 
> I guess they expect the spectrum freed up from tv to be enough?
> 
> Three billion on investment in new wireless technologies as well.
> 
> And the plan ends up putting money BACK into the budget via spectrum auction.
> 
> Provides their emergency services with their own national communications network too.
> 
> 
> http://gigaom.com/broadband/obamas-wireless-plan-favors-broadband-over-tv/




If you actually read the US Broadband plan (*here*), you'll see that the wireless component is a very small part of it, and has been promoted because the US mobile networks are in such a crisis. The US FCC has actually used the phrase "in peril", and industry experts have said that the crisis may lead to the collapse of the networks by 2013.

Unfortunately spectrum is a finite resource, which is why their plan is also heavily focuses on improving their fixed networks to reduce the load on wireless. The plan is littered with incentives for private industry, State and Local Governments to build and improve cable and fibre broadband networks, and includes the objective for 100 million premises to have access to *actual download speeds of 100Mbps* and *actual upload speeds of 50Mbps* within 10 years. These two objectives in particular are not possible with any current or proposed wireless network technology.

If you have a read through their plan, you'll find numerous references to freeing up access to pit and pole infrastructure to enable faster and cheaper rollouts of cable and fibre-to-the-home broadband networks.

Oh BTW, I was in the city for Carmen last night and took the opportunity to check my NextG speed. I set a new record of 4.7Mbps download and 115ms ping in my hotel room at The Rocks. It's no fixed connection, but not too bad.


----------



## Julia

wayneL said:


> I think there is a good mix occupying both wings that are near enough to the centre, with only a few rabble rowsers from both extremes.



That's how I see it also, and the consistent tendency of those that are such total fans of the government to automatically identify anyone who criticises that government as being right wing is irritating and simply wrong.

I'm happy to laud the government when it gets something right.  Example is Julia Gillard's rapid response to assisting Christchurch.  She acted immediately and her statements of support for New Zealanders amongst this horrific event were measured, reasonable and much more empathic than she managed during the Qld floods.
I've personally felt really grateful for the Australian government's rapid and full support toward NZ when they need it most.  So full marks to them for this.

It's the lack of any objectivity amongst a very few devotees in the Labor camp which reduces their credibility.


----------



## NBNMyths

Slipperz said:


> And the plan ends up putting money BACK into the budget via spectrum auction.




I should also add on this point, that we are doing the same thing here. Every time we auction spectrum, it goes back into the budget. The really big example will be the so-called "digital dividend" 700Mhz spectrum which will be freed up in 2015 after the final analogue TV signals are switched off.
http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD..PC/pc=PC_310656


----------



## trainspotter

I do hope I am part of the "rabble rowsers" (_rouser_ is the correct spelling BTW) section of the far right of ASF. They are so much more fun to hang out with. :

_Meanwhile, Vodafone yesterday became the latest telecommunications company to upgrade its wireless network in an attempt to increase download speeds. It said the upgrade would allow ''theoretical'' download speeds of 42 megabits a second, and further improvements could eventually support download speeds *of up to 150 Mbps*._

My concern for the NBN is that as the Telstra 4G and Voadaphone, Optus et al start delivering faster and faster download speeds over it's wireless networks, the take up rate to residential homes "might" take a solid hit. This will completely stuff the profit forecasting as well as revenue right up the poo shooter.

Yes yes yes as more people use the bandwidth the slower it gets blah blah bloody blah. Average Joe Schmoe in the street doesn't care. 

I want my NBN ........ but I want it where it matters.


----------



## tothemax6

Mofra said:


> It's more than fair to say that the majority of ASF posters, and therefore website content, would lean to the right hand side of the political spectrum.
> Unless, of course, people regard Fox news as "Fair and Balanced"



I believe fox news considers fox news fair and balanced, most consider such a claim hilarious . But yes, since share ownership is by its very nature "about profiting from the work of others", and "private ownership of the means of production", pointing out that a forum devoted to stock trading is probably going to politically lean to the right is not particularly insightful. 


wayneL said:


> As has been discussed before, left and right is probably redundant anyway (with the exception of a few ideologues.



Really? I haven't found that. Left and right always appear fairly clear-cut to me, with the blurring only being caused by lack of logical/moral consistency in the persons beliefs.

By the way, is NBN central-planning-experiment-attempt-23564 scrapped yet?


----------



## wayneL

tothemax6 said:


> Really? I haven't found that. Left and right always appear fairly clear-cut to me, with the blurring only being caused by lack of logical/moral consistency in the persons beliefs.




Consider classical liberalism then. Originally considered as a movement of the left, is now considered extreme right.  Socially they are liberal, a facet of the left. Economically they are liberal, a facet of the right.

So what are they?

What qualifies as left or right?


----------



## wayneL

trainspotter said:


> I do hope I am part of the "rabble rowsers" (_rouser_ is the correct spelling BTW) section of the far right of ASF. They are so much more fun to hang out with. :




Rowsers are a level up from rousers... with secret handshake, secret spelling, the whole shebang. :


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

So_Cynical said:


> Tranny you and the rest of the ASF right are the only straw clutchers around here
> and even most of the ASF right have deserted you in this thread.
> 
> You asked the question
> 
> 
> I provided the answer....Julia is prime minister because 1 vote Tony is a loser, as in lost the election = loser, and a vote for Julia was a vote for the NBN...i mean its pretty hard to see anyone voting for Labor and not voting for the NBN. :dunno: how is it  possible to separate the two.
> 
> Tranny, ASF right = grasping at straws.
> 
> 
> 
> At last...an admission from the ASF right that someone actually wants the NBN....its a miracle.:bowdown::bowdown:





Many of the electorates that voted Labor and Green last election, are getting NBN, and they are not working class areas by any means.

Mundingburra in Townsville gets it and it is full of double income professionals of Don's Party vintage still living in gaga Goughland.

Most working class electorates up here do not get it.

So it is the elite class who occupy Labor, who are lawyers, teachers and doctors wives who will benefit. 

The rest of us will use wireless and be better off eventually for it.

gg


----------



## tothemax6

wayneL said:


> Consider classical liberalism then. Originally considered as a movement of the left, is now considered extreme right.  Socially they are liberal, a facet of the left. Economically they are liberal, a facet of the right.
> 
> So what are they?
> 
> What qualifies as left or right?



Yes but we must use the present day spectrum. Definitions change over time. Back 'in the day', a leftist was simply a social agitator, and rightist a 'change nothing whatsoever' conservative. Clearly this spectrum has no use nowadays (and isn't used), since for example, this would make a maoist to be right wing in current day china (since he would be attempting to 'conserve' communism in china).

What specifically constitutes the right and left, and why these are polar opposites, has been something I have been pondering for some time. So far I have reached the following model:
The Right are those beliefs consistent with humans increasing their position. That is to say, 'pro-life' in the basic biological sense. 
The Left are those beliefs consistent with humans decreasing their position. That is to say, 'pro-death' in the basic sense. 
If you'd like me to detail why this is, I can, but the post will be long and non-NBN related .

The issue is that you are trying to define a group of beliefs according to 'left and right' - whereas this is impossible. An isolated belief can be characterized, for example 'offensive speech should be banned' is clearly Left, 'all property should be private' is clearly Right. However if a (confused) person holds both of these beliefs, he can only be graded on the spectrum. 
Libertarians, for instance (which I believe is more or less the same as a classical liberal), hold beliefs on both sides (although mostly on the right). Regarding them being 'social left', not necessarily. Typically on immigration, left. On abortion, divided. On race/class/gender, right (no affirmative action, no quotas, no disparity targeting privileges). On social conventions, to be logically consistent with 'liberty' they are mostly left (gay marriage fine, incest fine, polygamy fine, public nudity fine etc). On freedom of speech and action, right (full free speech, all non-rights-violating actions fine).


----------



## wayneL

tothemax6 said:


> incest fine




Eh?

I don't think so.

There are essential differences between classical liberalism and libertarianism, though clearly share some ideologies.


----------



## robusta

Sooo 

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...-phyics-pd20110223-EBRYU?OpenDocument&src=rot

Where is the drama?


----------



## nulla nulla

trainspotter said:


> I do hope I am part of the "rabble rowsers" (_rouser_ is the correct spelling BTW) section of the far right of ASF. They are so much more fun to hang out with. :




Bugger, I always thought the "rabble rousers" were the trogladite leftist common working class **** stirrers. Rabble being the great unwashed poor working class etc etc.



> _Meanwhile, Vodafone yesterday became the latest telecommunications company to upgrade its wireless network in an attempt to increase download speeds. It said the upgrade would allow ''theoretical'' download speeds of 42 megabits a second, and further improvements could eventually support download speeds *of up to 150 Mbps*._




I run "local Area Networks" in the home and the office. I started with "Thin Ethernet Cable loops" running at 2 megabits per second. After much research and trial and error I have upgraded to 1 gigabit switches and network cards running through Cat5e cable. Naturaly my connection to the internet is limited to ADSL2+ and the limitations of my ISP program and the distance I am from the exchange.

I have also tried "Wireless" but I find I have greater security on cable than wireless. Also cable does not experience the loss of signal so prevalent with wireless. 

I believe that NBN is the way to go. Copper can now run at up to 10 gigabit per second with the right (very expensive) Server and client network interface cards on the local area network. I consider it unlikely they will get copper any faster on a cost effective basis. However, imo, it is only a matter of time before software is developed and manufacturers produce cheaper server and interface cards for "Cable" giving speeds go to 100 gigabit and beyond. This will happen in local area networks before it happens in wide Area Networks and the Internet. But it will happen and it will be through NBN and not wireless.



> My concern for the NBN is that as the Telstra 4G and Voadaphone, Optus et al start delivering faster and faster download speeds over it's wireless networks, the take up rate to residential homes "might" take a solid hit. This will completely stuff the profit forecasting as well as revenue right up the poo shooter.




The roll out of 4G will benefit small volume users on mobile platforms and laptops and will not replace heavy data users over landlines/cable. Given that most of the people in the ASF site are involved with the share market and probably using live feed to trade, I suspect the serious users will run with landlines.



> Yes yes yes as more people use the bandwidth the slower it gets blah blah bloody blah. Average Joe Schmoe in the street doesn't care.
> 
> I want my NBN ........ but I want it where it matters.




Yeah, I want NBN. I liken it to the development of railways across Australia. It opened up trade between the Eastern State and Western Australia where before they relied on camel trains, or bullock drays or ships )) The only problem being they had narrow gauge in Qld, standard gauge in NSW and broad gauge in Victoria.  With a national rollout of cable we have the opportunity to have a uniform standard that will still have scope to develope and improve for decades to come.


----------



## IFocus

Julia said:


> It's the lack of any objectivity amongst a very few devotees in the Labor camp which reduces their credibility.




Talking of objectivity where is your criticism of Liberal supporters of the same ilk or is that a hidden bias?


----------



## Julia

tothemax6 said:


> The Right are those beliefs consistent with humans increasing their position. That is to say, 'pro-life' in the basic biological sense.



Why do you say this?   e.g. I'm probably slightly to the right of centre in a material and personal responsibility sense, but am pro abortion and pro euthanasia.



> The Left are those beliefs consistent with humans decreasing their position. That is to say, 'pro-death' in the basic sense.
> If you'd like me to detail why this is, I can, but the post will be long and non-NBN related .



Why not start a separate thread for this debate which would be interesting?



> The issue is that you are trying to define a group of beliefs according to 'left and right' - whereas this is impossible.



Exactly so, as I've pointed out above.



> An isolated belief can be characterized, for example 'offensive speech should be banned' is clearly Left,



I wouldn't say this is clearly Left at all.



> 'all property should be private' is clearly Right.



Yep, no argument there but someone else may have a different view.




> However if a (confused) person holds both of these beliefs, he can only be graded on the spectrum.
> Libertarians, for instance (which I believe is more or less the same as a classical liberal), hold beliefs on both sides (although mostly on the right). Regarding them being 'social left', not necessarily. Typically on immigration, left.



Probably disagree here.  



> On abortion, divided. On race/class/gender, right (no affirmative action, no quotas, no disparity targeting privileges)



This should go to the mostly Right convention of personal choice, personal responsibility, but I acknowledge the pro abortion lobby is more often considered Right.



> . On social conventions, to be logically consistent with 'liberty' they are mostly left (gay marriage fine, incest fine, polygamy fine, public nudity fine etc). On freedom of speech and action, right (full free speech, all non-rights-violating actions fine).



Far be it from me to defend the ultra Left but I think to attribute to them that all the above practices are 'fine' is a step too far.
I can't think of anyone I know who would consider either incest or polygamy fine.

So all up, it doesn't seem either reasonable or practicable to attribute any specific characteristics to the political "Left" or "Right".  Most of us are a fairly healthy mixture of both.


----------



## So_Cynical

Mofra said:


> In fairness Julia, that sums up about 90% of ASF; SC merely stands out because he is one of the few lefties posting on a right-wing website.






wayneL said:


> Eh?
> 
> ASF is not a right wing website, it's a stock investing forum.
> 
> SC stands out not because he is a lefty, but because when it comes to politics he is a troll.




That's a little harsh Wayne...even from you! not that i expect you to be objective, but at-least a little realistic would be nice...for a stock market forum ASF has alot of political content and that content is very heavily skewed to the right.

For example lets have a look at how the numbers stack up in the most popular Labor bashing threads.


The Gillard Government - 28 pages
Does Gillard inspire confidence? - 38 pages
Poll: 2010 Federal Election- 64 pages
Does Rudd inspire confidence? - 58 pages (started 24th-May-2008) Oldest bashing thread.
Rudd Government failings vs. achievements - 19 pages (started April-2010)
Poll: Flood Levy - Do you agree? - 14 pages

Total pages 221 at an average age of maybe 1 and a bit years.

--------------------------------------

And for comparison the 6 largest cap stocks. 


BHP - 114 pages (started 14th-May-2005) 
RIO - 31 pages (started 11th-June-2006)
CBA - 20 pages (started 17th-August-2004)
WBC - 8 pages (started 29th-August-2005)
ANZ - 13 pages (stared 27th-April-2005)
NAB - 16 pages (started 16th-July-2004)

Total pages 202 with an average age of about 3 and a half years.

For a stock investing forum, Labor bashing threads sure are popular.  its almost as if the forum is dominated by right wing types who love nothing better than a good olde Labor bashing.


----------



## wayneL

SC

I think your being a bit precious about entirely justified criticisms of the government and the current batch of characters purporting to run the country. ASF is hardly a Liberal party love fest either with the previous mob copping it long and hard too. I would say they "government bashing" threads rather than Labor bashing"

Political threads are longer than specific stock threads because:


There are over 3000 stocks, there is only on gu'mint.
Politics is far more subjective than stock investing. In fact as proven in my 2010 thesis on the subject and elsewhere, socialists/social democrats are absolutely incapable of objective thought. It's genetic. :
Tolerance of trollish posts which provoke multiple replies.
Government policy does affect stock value/price.
Politics is intertwined with economics and the investing environment so it is natural that there is some political discussion.

As far as being a troll: If I wanted to waste the time, I could collate an extensive list of posts from you primarily intended to provoke... and you know it's true.


----------



## GumbyLearner

wayneL said:


> SC
> 
> I think your being a bit precious about entirely justified criticisms of the government and the current batch of characters purporting to run the country. ASF is hardly a Liberal party love fest either with the previous mob copping it long and hard too. I would say they "government bashing" threads rather than Labor bashing"
> 
> Political threads are longer than specific stock threads because:
> 
> 
> There are over 3000 stocks, there is only on gu'mint.
> Politics is far more subjective than stock investing. In fact as proven in my 2010 thesis on the subject and elsewhere, socialists/social democrats are absolutely incapable of objective thought. It's genetic. :
> Tolerance of trollish posts which provoke multiple replies.
> Government policy does affect stock value/price.
> Politics is intertwined with economics and the investing environment so it is natural that there is some political discussion.
> 
> As far as being a troll: If I wanted to waste the time, I could collate an extensive list of posts from you primarily intended to provoke... and you know it's true.




I'm not wasting your time by replying to this am I WayneL.

I think you have a lot knowledge to share with others. As an individual I'm all ears. Keep on articulating mate.


----------



## Slipperz

robusta said:


> Sooo
> 
> http://www.businessspectator.com.au...-phyics-pd20110223-EBRYU?OpenDocument&src=rot
> 
> Where is the drama?




Here is the drama.

This encapsulates the argument perfectly.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/let-a-hundred-flowers-bloom-in-broadband-field-20110223-1b5ib.html

Just keep chucking buckets of your  money at our  socialist government and look the other way, everything will be just fine :


----------



## Logique

Slipperz said:


> This encapsulates the argument perfectly.http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/let-a-hundred-flowers-bloom-in-broadband-field-20110223-1b5ib.html...



Nationalization and centralization by stealth S, and not the only sector of the economy they have their eyes on. Health, mining, banking, all in the frame.

Two other factors I see in action:

- The "..I want super fast broadband and I want it now, the biggest the best, and I don't care what it costs.." crowd, who seem to make up most of the NBN-now foot-stampers.

- Pollies seeking a political legacy, some achievement to hang their hats on, or in fact any achievement, on the back of several false starts.


----------



## Slipperz

Logique said:


> Nationalization and centralization by stealth S, and not the only sector of the economy they have their eyes on. Health, mining, banking, all in the frame.
> 
> Two other factors I see in action:
> 
> - The "..I want super fast broadband and I want it now, the biggest the best, and I don't care what it costs.." crowd, who seem to make up most of the NBN-now foot-stampers.
> 
> - Pollies seeking a political legacy, some achievement to hang their hats on, or in fact any achievement, on the back of several false starts.




Hang on a minute. 

Wasn't that the elephant in the room that just stamped it's foot?

:22_yikes:


----------



## trainspotter

Slipperz said:


> Here is the drama.
> 
> This encapsulates the argument perfectly.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/let-a-hundred-flowers-bloom-in-broadband-field-20110223-1b5ib.html
> 
> Just keep chucking buckets of your  money at our  socialist government and look the other way, everything will be just fine :




I especially liked this part of the article:-

_The government has never been able to explain why, *having promised* to conduct a cost-benefit analysis before undertaking any infrastructure project, it refuses to do one for the biggest project in our history.

It has never been able to explain why, having argued for *more competition* in telecommunications, it is now creating a massive new government-owned fixed-line *monopoly* and legislating to make it virtually impossible for anyone to *offer a competitive* fixed line service._

Didn"t we sell Telstra for this exact same reason that the Government is now thrusting upon us and telling us how good it is to have this business model?

So_Cyclical ....... what's wrong petal? I think Tony Abbott is a goose. There I've said it. I think the Liberals in their current form are just as useless as the existing clowns we have in Guvmint now. There I've said it again. I think John Howard was fortunate enough to have a mining boom and global economics to assist him in wiping out the debt left by the Labor Party. There I have said it thrice now.

The ideaology of the Liberals running the country like a business and keeping debt under control intrigues me. The ideaology of the Labor Party of running up debt and using the country like a giant credit card confuses me.

Me ...... I just like to argue with anyone when they are WRONG ! Flame on peoples.

Why don't you go and start a new thread about the political leanings of ASF and leave the NBN thread for what it really is. A left wing commy pinko bashing exercise over a shiny blue cable that IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT for the future of the country if it is implemented correctly and targets the areas that REQUIRE it.


----------



## trainspotter

I also remember NBNMyths telling everyone in writing a few posts back that he dresses to the Left on occasions as well. No problem with that either.

Can't we just have one thread where politics does not enter into it please. I was quite enjoying NBNMyths aknowledgements and detailed responses. Some of the technobabble was beyond my tiny brain but HEY .... it was stimulating at least.

AND the detail was extraordinary. He has a plethora of information at his fingertips which means he is very very studied on the subject. Should go on Mastermind or something like that. I can see it now:-

MagnÃºs MagnÃºsson - NBNMyths your topic is a ....... "SHINY BLUE CABLE"

NBNMyths - Yes that is right but it is not really that shiny.

MagnÃºs MagnÃºsson - Whatever 

:jump:


----------



## awg

tothemax6 said:


> Really? I haven't found that. Left and right always appear fairly clear-cut to me, with the blurring only being caused by lack of logical/moral consistency in the persons beliefs.




haha..I am like Genghis Khan on some things and all the way with Gough on others.

peeps tend to become more conservative as they age 

If I wasnt too lazy, would chuck up a new thread with poll..left/right/(neutral/dunno/mixed)

re the NBN, I am likewise confused


----------



## NBNMyths

Slipperz said:


> Here is the drama.
> 
> This encapsulates the argument perfectly.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/let-a-hundred-flowers-bloom-in-broadband-field-20110223-1b5ib.html
> 
> Just keep chucking buckets of your  money at our  socialist government and look the other way, everything will be just fine :




No, it encapsulates Turnbull's position perfectly. As usual, his article is full of errors and deception. eg:
_"Right now 30 per cent of Australian homes are passed by the hybrid fibre coaxial pay TV cables of Telstra and Optus. These systems can, and in some places do, run at 100Mbps, the highest speed promised by the new network."_​
1. Incorrect. It's more like 25% of homes, but only in a few areas of a few cities.

2. While the _network_ can run at 100Mbps, user speeds cannot. HFC is a shared network, and the 100Mbps is per node of the network. So unless you're the only user on that node, you won't get anything like 100Mbps. This is why Optus and Telstra don't advertise 100Mbps cable speeds anymore.

3. The highest speed promised by the NBN is 1Gbps, not 100Mbps.

4. There is currently no agreement or even proposed agreement to decomission the Optus HFC network for broadband connections.

I just picked one paragraph and found four demonstrably false or misleading statements.

Then there Turnbull's curious statements like:
_"The right approach to our broadband needs should not be one size or one technology fits all. It should target under-serviced areas immediately and *bring them up to the highest standards available in our cities."*_​
Ummm. Isn't that what the NBN is all about?

The Coalition plan takes "under serviced areas" to 12Mbps, which is most certainly not _"the highest standards available in our cities"_. Turnbull is openly contradicting himself, first saying that cities can currently get 100Mbps, then saying that _a)_ We don't need that; and _b)_ that's what "under-serviced areas" should have, even though his own policy doesn't deliver such speeds. 


I can keep going if you'd like.


----------



## Mofra

Logique said:


> - The "..I want super fast broadband and I want it now, the biggest the best, and I don't care what it costs.." crowd, who seem to make up most of the NBN-now foot-stampers.



I see this as an unfair generalisation. If any generalisation is going to me remotely correct (a difficulty in itself), it would be the pro-NBN crowd largely being involved with the industry, and those against it largely being not (on this thread anyway).

Nullas' post on the last page is an excellent example of a reasoned industry view. 
Additionally yes there is a political agenda attached to the pros and cons, but any government that actually puts a plan in place for anything that lasts longer than their term in office is sadly a rare occurance on the modern Australian political landscape and needs to be acknowledged.


----------



## Boggo

This NBN joke is proving to to be just that, another broken promise that is either driven by the greens or influenced by a liberal stronghold (seat of Grey) that they have decided to bypass.

What a farce.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/...-miss-out-on-nbn/story-e6frea83-1226011065944


----------



## trainspotter

Disappointing that these places are bypassed even though the shiny blue cable is running down the highway not that far away (according to the article).

Who decided on the 7% to miss out on this nation building exercise?

Why are they putting it above ground to create visual pollution? I thought they were utilising Telstras pits and subterranean network?

If the NBN fibre optic cable is being run in conjunction over the electricity poles does this mean that the fibre optic cable will run along the power cable connecting your house?

Anyone?


----------



## nulla nulla

trainspotter said:


> So_Cyclical ....... what's wrong petal? I think Tony Abbott is a goose. There I've said it. I think the Liberals in their current form are just as useless as the existing clowns we have in Guvmint now. There I've said it again. I think John Howard was fortunate enough to have a mining boom and global economics to assist him in wiping out the debt left by the Labor Party. There I have said it thrice now.
> 
> The ideaology of the Liberals running the country like a business and keeping debt under control intrigues me. The ideaology of the Labor Party of running up debt and using the country like a giant credit card confuses me.
> 
> Me ...... I just like to argue with anyone when they are WRONG ! Flame on peoples.








You need to be more carefull in your contrarian posts TS, Waynel might think you are a nasty troll. 



Mofra said:


> Nullas' post on the last page is an excellent example of a reasoned industry view.




Thanks Mofra, it's nothing personal or political, it is just good business.



NBNMyths said:


> 3. The highest speed promised by the NBN is 1Gbps, not 100Mbps.




Imagine being able to trade, live, approximately 100 - 400 times faster than you can now. The fellows trading spi, currency etc etc would be able to execute more trades on tighter margins than they currently do. The opportunities for private individuals to set up robot trading system could get scary. Even us humble traders on the xao would be able to react to upward or downward spikes where we now miss more opportunities than we hit.

But...yes there is a but. The biggest handicap to internet speeds, will not be the cable or the isp you connect through. The biggest handicap to internet speed will be the server speed at the other end of your connection. A transfer over a 1 gigabit capable cable will still only run at todays speeds if the server at the other end is only running at 10-100 megabits. The slowest common denominator will determine your download/upload speeds.


----------



## Slipperz

trainspotter said:


> Disappointing that these places are bypassed even though the shiny blue cable is running down the highway not that far away (according to the article).
> 
> Who decided on the 7% to miss out on this nation building exercise?
> 
> Why are they putting it above ground to create visual pollution? I thought they were utilising Telstras pits and subterranean network?
> 
> If the NBN fibre optic cable is being run in conjunction over the electricity poles does this mean that the fibre optic cable will run along the power cable connecting your house?
> 
> Anyone?




I kinda presumed they would put it underground.

Common sense and asthetics would see a bit of money being spent on putting power and communications underground.

Storm proof our power and communications services and make our living environment better.

Hanging our critical infrastructure on poles at the mercy of an increasing volatile climate is hardly the optimal solution.


----------



## Slipperz

NBNMyths said:


> No, it encapsulates Turnbull's position perfectly. As usual, his article is full of errors and deception. eg:
> _"Right now 30 per cent of Australian homes are passed by the hybrid fibre coaxial pay TV cables of Telstra and Optus. These systems can, and in some places do, run at 100Mbps, the highest speed promised by the new network."_​
> 1. Incorrect. It's more like 25% of homes, but only in a few areas of a few cities.
> 
> 2. While the _network_ can run at 100Mbps, user speeds cannot. HFC is a shared network, and the 100Mbps is per node of the network. So unless you're the only user on that node, you won't get anything like 100Mbps. This is why Optus and Telstra don't advertise 100Mbps cable speeds anymore.
> 
> 3. The highest speed promised by the NBN is 1Gbps, not 100Mbps.
> 
> 4. There is currently no agreement or even proposed agreement to decomission the Optus HFC network for broadband connections.
> 
> I just picked one paragraph and found four demonstrably false or misleading statements.
> 
> Then there Turnbull's curious statements like:
> _"The right approach to our broadband needs should not be one size or one technology fits all. It should target under-serviced areas immediately and *bring them up to the highest standards available in our cities."*_​
> Ummm. Isn't that what the NBN is all about?
> 
> The Coalition plan takes "under serviced areas" to 12Mbps, which is most certainly not _"the highest standards available in our cities"_. Turnbull is openly contradicting himself, first saying that cities can currently get 100Mbps, then saying that _a)_ We don't need that; and _b)_ that's what "under-serviced areas" should have, even though his own policy doesn't deliver such speeds.
> 
> 
> I can keep going if you'd like.




You'll have to excuse me if I suggest you can keep your ideas of true and false to yourself.

I'm not even sure half the babble you keep spouting is the truth.

In fact you probably are lying through your teeth about a lot of this.


----------



## boofhead

The Telstra conduits/pits NBN will use are probably more city centric. I know as a child watching Telecom put the overhead lines underground they would cut the PVC tubing so it could wrap the wires then dirt thrown over it. It has no strength to hold shape so you can't push the fibre through it - it could be flattish in places. Also could push against the current copper wiring and damage it. Also it has long been said NBN will use overhead and underground.

As for the trading. Raw speed may help. Latency will be an issue too - that is why major institutionals put servers physically closer to stockmarket servers.


----------



## IFocus

Slipperz said:


> You'll have to excuse me if I suggest you can keep your ideas of true and false to yourself.
> 
> I'm not even sure half the babble you keep spouting is the truth.
> 
> In fact you probably are lying through your teeth about a lot of this.





Rather than accuse do some home work, interesting watching myths using facts and others getting personal rather than than argument using facts.

You know when it gets personal the other side no longer have a viable argument.


----------



## IFocus

trainspotter said:


> Disappointing that these places are bypassed even though the shiny blue cable is running down the highway not that far away (according to the article).
> 
> Who decided on the 7% to miss out on this nation building exercise?
> 
> Why are they putting it above ground to create visual pollution? I thought they were utilising Telstras pits and subterranean network?
> 
> If the NBN fibre optic cable is being run in conjunction over the electricity poles does this mean that the fibre optic cable will run along the power cable connecting your house?
> 
> Anyone?




Fiber can be directly buried, its actually black.

Fiber is already strung all round the place its not new!


----------



## NBNMyths

Boggo said:


> This NBN joke is proving to to be just that, another broken promise that is either driven by the greens or influenced by a liberal stronghold (seat of Grey) that they have decided to bypass.
> 
> What a farce.




Just goes to show that you can never please everyone. 

Some people are complaining that the NBN is too big and expensive, and very few need it. 

Now we have other people complaining that it's too small because they are missing out. Imagine the uproar if we extended fibre to 100% of premises, and the cost went to $80bn!




trainspotter said:


> Disappointing that these places are bypassed even though the shiny blue cable is running down the highway not that far away (according to the article).
> 
> Who decided on the 7% to miss out on this nation building exercise?
> 
> Why are they putting it above ground to create visual pollution? I thought they were utilising Telstras pits and subterranean network?
> 
> If the NBN fibre optic cable is being run in conjunction over the electricity poles does this mean that the fibre optic cable will run along the power cable connecting your house?
> 
> Anyone?




The method that the 93% was decided is in the NBN business case, and has absolutely nothing to do with who holds what federal seats.

They calculated the population total of every city/town with a population of > about 1000 people. This came to about 90% of Australia's population. They then added every town with a population of >500 _where that town was positioned along the path of the NBN backhaul fibre_. This took the calculation to 93%.


Most of the NBN cabling is underground. The photo in the article is from the Tasmanian trial sites. 

The bus case says that 75% of the rollout will be underground, which is wherever Telstra have existing ducts and pits. So wherver phone lines are above ground, the NBN will be as well. Wherever phone lines are underground, the NBN will be too.

Here's some pics from Brunswick, and here are a few from Kiama where it's mostly UG:


----------



## Boggo

NBNMyths said:


> Just goes to show that you can never please everyone.
> 
> People are complaining that the NBN is too big and expensive, and very few need it.
> 
> Now we have people complaining that it's too small because they are missing out. Imagine the uproar if we extended fibre to 100% of premises, and the cost went to $80bn!




The size is reducing but the cost is staying the same, effectively the first signs of the expected cost blowout that we expect from this temporary regime.


----------



## Boggo

boofhead said:


> Also it has long been said NBN will use overhead and underground.




Maybe they could just put it through peoples ceilings, they have some experience in that area


----------



## tothemax6

NBNMyths said:


> Just goes to show that you can never please everyone.
> 
> Some people are complaining that the NBN is too big and expensive, and very few need it.
> 
> Now we have other people complaining that it's too small because they are missing out. Imagine the uproar if we extended fibre to 100% of premises, and the cost went to $80bn!



Can NBNMyths please state his position on central-planning versus a free market - i.e. allocating resources by force vs by choice of the individuals involved. These conflicts are automatically resolved in a free-market, since people choose where to put their money via the concept known as "buying". You into that, NBNMyths? This "buying" thing? Or you more into "take your stuff using my guns, and dish it out to whomsoever I want according to my tastes"? 
I want an Australian space program and a navy actually capable of fighting with some chance of winning. How about we divert all this NBN money into this? Rather than dealing with our issues with the big, swinging around baton known as 'two party democratic mixed socialism-capitalism', why don't we use the super tight and efficient "men choose what they will do with their own money" system? 

FCK the NBN. I might even make this my new signature...

And by the way, I don't think you even get the position of people like me. I would love a fiber in my home. A big juicy fiber spewing data into my home at 1GB/s. Believe me I would use it. But I want to buy this with MY plastic notes. I don't accept the morality of taking those notes from those who don't care if they download at 1TB/s or 1kB/s. I am not a thief, and I consider it a good thing that I am not.
FCK the NBN. FCK the NBN.


----------



## Julia

Slipperz said:


> I kinda presumed they would put it underground.
> 
> Common sense and asthetics would see a bit of money being spent on putting power and communications underground.
> 
> Storm proof our power and communications services and make our living environment better.
> 
> Hanging our critical infrastructure on poles at the mercy of an increasing volatile climate is hardly the optimal solution.




I couldn't agree more.  Just think of the grief that would be saved every time there's a storm/cyclone because of power lines being wrecked by falling trees etc.


----------



## joea

Slipperz said:


> I kinda presumed they would put it underground.
> 
> Common sense and asthetics would see a bit of money being spent on putting power and communications underground.
> 
> Storm proof our power and communications services and make our living environment better.
> 
> Hanging our critical infrastructure on poles at the mercy of an increasing volatile climate is hardly the optimal solution.




How Fibre was installed to the home was a debate on how long it lasted as an aerial versus underground.
Underground is a problem(associated with cost of digging up all and sundry) on existing buildings, but not on new ones.

As the fibre is rolled out, I have read that they will not put a splice in, unless they have 1000 subscribers. So all small towns will be bypassed.

We have been compared to South Korea by Conroy.

My son is in Ulsan City  South Korea working on a oil and gas project, and his room is fully integrated with high speed broadband, tv, radio. He actually has a little Mac gadget in his pocket, that controls the complete show in his two room apartment.
Incidently the apartment is no cost to him, just food and beer.

So we have a long way to go in Australia.

Cheers


----------



## trainspotter

IFocus said:


> Rather than accuse do some home work, interesting watching myths using facts and others getting personal rather than than argument using facts.
> 
> You know when it gets personal the other side no longer have a viable argument.




Ummmmmmmmmm ........ not quite there old ****. NBNMYths flat out accused Slipperz of being a liar about his internet speed that he was obtaining. Slipperz posted a speed test and there was no apology from NBNMyths when he was proven wrong.

You really need to keep up old chap. I also notice with NBNMYths when proven wrong it is completely dismissed or overlooked or ignored. 

Don't get me wrong ..... I am learning a great deal from this government department spreading hyperbole all over ASF. Tis a joy to read.

*Thanks to all for the great responses about why the fibre is being strung up with the power lines as well as WHY the smaller towns are missing out on the NBN.*

If you look really closely IFocus you will see the cable is BLUE and not BLACK. Oh well ........ I must not have a viable argument as I am getting personal now.

Ummmmm you also wrote this _"Fiber is already strung all round the place its not new!"_ ........ I wont bother correcting the obvious spelling mistake as this would seem pithy. SO ...... where is this fibre "strung all over the place" and what does it do already? Why aren't we utilising the fibre "strung all over the place" and who owns it?

You can't just let rip with these statements without having some facts attached.


----------



## trainspotter

Nice pictures of the shiny blue cable NBNMyths ....... you must be really really really close to this to be able to obtain these kind of piccys????

As well as having such wonderful information to spout out to all and sundry. Pictures, links, unnerving technical information and an air of dismissive arrogance. 

C'mon ..... don't be shy ....... you can tell us who you really are and or work for.


----------



## Mofra

tothemax6 said:


> I want an Australian space program and a navy actually capable of fighting with some chance of winning. How about we divert all this NBN money into this? Rather than dealing with our issues with the big, swinging around baton known as 'two party democratic mixed socialism-capitalism', why don't we use the super tight and efficient "men choose what they will do with their own money" system?



The Navy? I have no doubt that there is no bigger waste of Australian taxpayer's dollars than many of the programs the Navy undertakes. 

All the talk on NBN/Asylum seekers are coming to get us/Building schools/Labor stuff ups are nothing compared to the porkbarrelling gravy train the Navy (and wider ADF) operate under with little/no accountability for funds spent.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> Nice pictures of the shiny blue cable NBNMyths ....... you must be really really really close to this to be able to obtain these kind of piccys????
> 
> As well as having such wonderful information to spout out to all and sundry. Pictures, links, unnerving technical information and an air of dismissive arrogance.
> 
> C'mon ..... don't be shy ....... you can tell us who you really are and or work for.




Google is your friend. NBN install pics are from:

http://www.itnews.com.au/Gallery/247703,nbn-co-underground-lead-ins-to-kiama-homes.aspx


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

re NBNMyths



trainspotter said:


> Nice pictures of the shiny blue cable NBNMyths ....... you must be really really really close to this to be able to obtain these kind of piccys????
> 
> As well as having such wonderful information to spout out to all and sundry. Pictures, links, unnerving technical information and an air of dismissive arrogance.
> 
> C'mon ..... don't be shy ....... you can tell us who you really are and or work for.




I'm pretty sure this guy was up at a NBN Show last year in Townsville, in fact I'm sure I spoke to him at the Aitkenvale Library when the luvvies, lawyers, public servants and doctors wives from Mundingburra were being told they would be getting NBN before the workers. 

I may even have a pic from my box brownie.

gg


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

trainspotter said:


> Nice pictures of the shiny blue cable NBNMyths ....... you must be really really really close to this to be able to obtain these kind of piccys????



Not necessarily. When my phone went out last year due to flooding in the pits, the Telstra technician was happy to have a chat - they probably don't have much customer interaction. They just do their job. He apparently averaged around 700km per week fixing faults. He showed me the corroded copper connections and the gel they put up the "bell" cover. So you probably only have to ask... after all, it is tax-payer funded infrastructure after all.


----------



## So_Cynical

While this video is not directly related to the NBN its a great eye opener on the future, watch it and get an understanding of the inevitable and the data needs of the digital future.
~


----------



## NBNMyths

Slipperz said:


> You'll have to excuse me if I suggest you can keep your ideas of true and false to yourself.
> 
> I'm not even sure half the babble you keep spouting is the truth.
> 
> In fact you probably are lying through your teeth about a lot of this.




Quite happy to back them with references:


*Cable premises passed:*

Telstra's cable network *covers 2.5 million premises*. The previous link also explains how the HFC network speed is shared amongst a node of users.

The Optus HFC network covers 2.2 million of the same premises, but Optus *say* that only 1.4 million of those passed are  actually able to be connected to it.

According to the *ABS*, there were 8.42 million residential premises in Australia in 2006, with a growth of 8.2% over the previous 5 yrs. Assuming statis growth, that now puts us at ~9.2 million premises.

As a %, 2.5m is *27%* of 9.2m. In addition to that, we have no idea how many of Telstra's "2.5m passed" premises can actually takeup a connection if they choose to. Given that only 63% of Optus' passed network is connectable, it could actually be far lower than 20% overall who can access the existing cable networks.


*Cable network speeds:*

Telstra *say* their cable network offers speeds of up to 30Mbps.

Optus won't give a minimum speed at all. They will only *say* that "76% of our cable broadband subscribers can access an _average_ of 8Mbps."

That's even worse that I thought! 24% of them can't even get 8Mbps! So much for Turnbull's "100Mbps".


*NBN Speed 1Gbps:*

See *this article*. You can also find details of the offering and pricing of the 1Gbps service in the NBN *business case*. See pages 61, 101 and 103.


----------



## NBNMyths

Boggo said:


> The size is *reducing* but the cost is staying the same, effectively the first signs of the expected cost blowout that we expect from this temporary regime.




Actually, the size of the NBN fibre network has been increased, not reduced.

Initially, the NBN was going to provide fibre at *100Mbps* to *90%* of premises. See this press release from April 2009, when the NBN was announced:
*http://www.minister.dbcde.gov.au/media/media_releases/2009/022*

The *KPMG-McKinsey implementation study* from 2010 recommended fibre go to 93% of premises as it could be done within the $43bn initial estimate.

The Govt/NBN accepted that recommendation, and so the fibre component was *increased to 93%*. And it was *subsequently announced* that the fibre speed would be increased to *1Gbps*. The remaining (7%) will receive 12Mbps via wireless or satellite, which is the same speed as originally proposed.


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> re NBNMyths
> 
> 
> 
> I'm pretty sure this guy was up at a NBN Show last year in Townsville, in fact I'm sure I spoke to him at the Aitkenvale Library when the luvvies, lawyers, public servants and doctors wives from Mundingburra were being told they would be getting NBN before the workers.
> 
> I may even have a pic from my box brownie.
> 
> gg




Since I've never been to Townsville, I find it hard to believe that you spoke to me there! Seems this post is as accurate as the first one in this thread! ::..... Which is growing more inaccurate by the day, with the awarding of the Queensland datacentre contract, the announcement last week that NBN has bought spectrum for the 4% rural wireless component, and is close to signing a 4G supplier.


----------



## NBNMyths

tothemax6 said:


> Can NBNMyths please state his position on central-planning versus a free market - i.e. allocating resources by force vs by choice of the individuals involved. These conflicts are automatically resolved in a free-market, since people choose where to put their money via the concept known as "buying". You into that, NBNMyths? This "buying" thing? Or you more into "take your stuff using my guns, and dish it out to whomsoever I want according to my tastes"?
> I want an Australian space program and a navy actually capable of fighting with some chance of winning. How about we divert all this NBN money into this? Rather than dealing with our issues with the big, swinging around baton known as 'two party democratic mixed socialism-capitalism', why don't we use the super tight and efficient "men choose what they will do with their own money" system?




Well, what if I don't want a Navy? Why should the Government spend billions of MY money on 50-year-old Seasprite helicopters that the US were scrapping?

What if I don't want to contribute to a Pacific Highway, or railway lines, or reticulated water supplies, or a telephone network or an electricity grid? 

What if I'm not having any kids, so I don't want my money spent on public education? Or public hospitals?

All of these things have been/are being built by Governments, not by the "free market". They are there because they offer a benefit to society in general. We take all of them for granted as functions of Government. 

The NBN is a natural replacement for the ageing copper communications network, which was built by the Government 60 years ago. Why are communications any less of an "essential" Government service than water, electricity, sewer, roads, rail etc?

It's all well and good to say that the "free market" should do everything. A utopian society where there is no cross-subsidy and it's entirely user-pays. You get what you pay for. Nothing more, and nothing less.

Well, a good society doesn't work that way, because it would be a horrible place to live, for most of the residents.

The "free market" would never deliver services outside the major population centres, where the money can be made (witness the HFC rollouts). This would lead to massive disparities in service levels and standards of living the further one moved from the big cities. Even larger disparities in real estate pricing, overcrowding in the cities, and a loss of quality of life for many Australians who can't afford to live where all the decent services are.


----------



## Bill M

joea said:


> My son is in Ulsan City  South Korea working on a oil and gas project, and his room is fully integrated with high speed broadband, tv, radio. He actually has a little Mac gadget in his pocket, that controls the complete show in his two room apartment.
> Incidently the apartment is no cost to him, just food and beer.
> 
> So we have a long way to go in Australia.
> 
> Cheers



Too right we have. The other day it rained up here in the Hunter, no internet for half an hour. Way to go Australia....... Wireless is not a real good long term option for households. 


tothemax6 said:


> I want an Australian space program and a navy actually capable of fighting with some chance of winning. How about we divert all this NBN money into this?



You have got to be kidding me, I wouldn't want my tax dollars going to a mickey mouse Aussie space program and as for the Navy, too much has been wasted there already. Meanwhile we country folk can't get anything but dialup and downtime on wireless, way to go again Australia. 



NBNMyths said:


> What if I don't want to contribute to a Pacific Highway, or railway lines, or reticulated water supplies, or a telephone network or an electricity grid?
> 
> What if I'm not having any kids, so I don't want my money spent on public education? Or public hospitals?



And that's just it isn't it? Many people don't want a lot of things but for the betterment and advancement of the general population we say nothing because the majority will benefit from such programs. 

The sooner the NBN is up and running the better.:goodnight   Gee I hope it's not raining tomorrow.


----------



## Slipperz

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Telstra-NBN-wireless-India-pd20110224-ED4EF?OpenDocument&src=kgb


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> My concern for the NBN is that as the Telstra 4G and Voadaphone, Optus et al start delivering faster and faster download speeds over it's wireless networks, the take up rate to residential homes "might" take a solid hit. This will completely stuff the profit forecasting as well as revenue right up the poo shooter.
> 
> Yes yes yes as more people use the bandwidth the slower it gets blah blah bloody blah. Average Joe Schmoe in the street doesn't care.




But Average Joe will care if the speeds don't live up to what's promised, and he will also care about the price of the service.

For a Telstra NextG standalone broadband connection (ie: not bundled with a fixed phone), you pay a total of $89.95 per month for 12Gb of data.

For an iiNet standalone NBN connection (at a speed of 25Mbps) you pay a total of $29.95 per month for 20GB of data. Pay another $10 and you get a phoneline as well, and free national/local calls included.

How do you think Average Joe will feel about paying 3 times as much, for just over half the data delivered almost certainly at a lower speed. Is mobility worth that much? And what good is Joe's mobility when he's taken the card with him, and his family is at home with no connection?

Now if I were Average Joe, I'd have an NBN connection/phone (for $40), and a smartphone with a gig or two of data (on a ~$45 plan). Now for a total of $85/month I have fixed line with free calls _plus_ fast fixed broadband _plus_ a mobile phone with data when I need mobility. *And I'm getting this for less money than a mobile broadband connection by itself!*

I have no doubt that there will be _some_ people who will be mobile-only. But they will be a small, specific minority. Not just because wireless is slower, but also because it's much more expensive.




trainspotter said:


> Ummmmmmmmmm ........ not quite there old ****. NBNMYths flat out accused Slipperz of being a liar about his internet speed that he was obtaining. Slipperz posted a speed test and there was no apology from NBNMyths when he was proven wrong. You really need to keep up old chap. I also notice with NBNMYths when proven wrong it is completely dismissed or overlooked or ignored.
> 
> If you look really closely IFocus you will see the cable is BLUE and not BLACK. Oh well ........ I must not have a viable argument as I am getting personal now.
> 
> Ummmmm you also wrote this _"Fiber is already strung all round the place its not new!"_ ........ I wont bother correcting the obvious spelling mistake as this would seem pithy. SO ...... where is this fibre "strung all over the place" and what does it do already? Why aren't we utilising the fibre "strung all over the place" and who owns it?




While I remain somewhat sceptical about NextG delivering sustained speeds of 17-19Mbps to anyone, I said I'll give the guy the benefit of the doubt. But the real point (even assuming _he_ is getting that speed reliably) is, that the _vast majority_ of people aren't getting anything like it. There's no point promoting an option as viable based on _the exception_ rather than _the rule_. And the rule is that NextG delivers average speeds to most users of well under 5Mbps:


























There is plenty of fibre around, but it's generally either backhaul. There is very little running down suburban streets except for the fibre components of the HFC (hybrid fibre-coaxial)networks. Some new housing estates have had fibre for a while, but it's not "strung up", it's underground.

And it can be black or blue (or any other colour you'd like) depending on the brand:::


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> Since I've never been to Townsville, I find it hard to believe that you spoke to me there! Seems this post is as accurate as the first one in this thread! ::..... Which is growing more inaccurate by the day, with the awarding of the Queensland datacentre contract, the announcement last week that NBN has bought spectrum for the 4% rural wireless component, and is close to signing a 4G supplier.




So what is your interest in all this?

You should come north of Moonee Ponds, mate,  Australia is not all bitumen.

gg

gg


----------



## trainspotter

ROFL ........ $29.95 per month for the NBN with 20 gig of data! Man you are really going the hard sell on this one. Want a set of steak knives with that? But wait there is more. You are the DEMTEL man I am sure.

Telstra can give you 50Gb of data for $49.95 per month with an existing fixed phone. You say NBN can give me $39.95 witrh 12Gb. How you say it again .... meh. 

Why have 500,000 people signed up for the 4g then in the last 6 months? As per your previous post you dismissed this with some crazy analogy about Kmart selling bicyles.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/business...challenge-to-nbn/story-e6frg2qu-1226006185345

http://www.smartcompany.com.au/inte...erts-say-fixed-connections-still-crucial.html

Then there the was the reference about how the invention of the telephone is comparable to the NBN? 

"Airships are the way of the future" ....... sound familiar? Where are they now ? http://www.airships.net/futurism

_I said I'll give the guy the benefit of the doubt. But the real point (even assuming he is getting that speed reliably)_

You just can't get the grasp of it can you? Would it kill you to say ...... "Whoops, I was wrong on this one now wasn't I. Here I was slagging off about speeds that are not possible (according to you that is) and well GOSH DARNIT there comes along PROOF (Slipperz posting speed test) that what I have said is WRONG. 

The you argue over what Malcolm Turnbull said about percentages? Last time I looked 27% is a lot closer to 25 than it is to 30 if you really want to split hairs. 

Anyhoooooooooo ......... the shiny blue/black/pink/idontcare cable is snaking across our great brown land faster than Divine Brown went down on Hugh Grant. We will have to wait and see if this is going to be the saviour of our telecommunications nation or whether or not it will be the great white elephant that stamped it's feet that bankrupts this country both politically and financially.


----------



## DB008

Bill M said:


> Too right we have. The other day it rained up here in the Hunter, no internet for half an hour. Way to go Australia....... Wireless is not a real good long term option for households.



I don't think that you can compare South Korea with population, density, size of country to Australia in terms of rolling out a national infrastructure project like the NBN. That would be like apples and oranges mate. 

South Korea;
Land size   100,000 km²
Population  48 million
Density      491 per km²

Australia
Land size    7.6 million km²
Population  22.5 million
Density      2.8 per km²


----------



## trainspotter

"I fear that the ultimate horror show here is that NBN 2.0 collapses in six years time and the only company that is big enough to buy the mess is Telstra. So after $30B+ of tax-payer funds the government of the day offloads this white elephant to Telstra and we are left back in the 1980s completely at the mercy of one fixed line infrastructure owner and a whole bunch of RSPs and regional and remote Australia are screwed over… yet again."

http://www.commsday.com/commsday/?p=1410

Very interesting reading this article.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> "I fear that the ultimate horror show here is that NBN 2.0 collapses in six years time and the only company that is big enough to buy the mess is Telstra. So after $30B+ of tax-payer funds the government of the day offloads this white elephant to Telstra and we are left back in the 1980s completely at the mercy of one fixed line infrastructure owner and a whole bunch of RSPs and regional and remote Australia are screwed over… yet again."
> 
> http://www.commsday.com/commsday/?p=1410
> 
> Very interesting reading this article.




It is interesting reading, although the author has been a vocal NBN critic from day 1, and at the time the article was written was part of a consortium trying to get Govt/opposition support for a subsequently announced alternative NBN plan from which he stood to gain. The plan was lacking detail and pretty much mocked by the industry.

Conflict of interest aside, perhaps the biggest issue is that it was written 5 months ago, before the structural separation of Telstra legislation went through, and also before the content of the other NBN legislation was known.

But for the sake of argument, let's say Slattery is right, and "the govt of the day" wants to offload it.

First, Telstra won't be allowed to be a vertically-integrated monopoly once the agreed structural separation deal goes through their shareholders meeting (Which it will, since it's in their interests, has the support of the management, and the Govt can prevent them buying any more wireless spectrum if they don't approve it). So if Telstra were to buy it, it would have to operate like the NBN Co, as a wholesale-only network allowing equal access for any ISP to offer retail services. 

Sect 577A of the new Act says: _Telstra will not supply fixed‑line carriage services to retail customers in Australia using a telecommunications network over which Telstra is in a position to exercise control_

Second, the NBN Companies Bill currently before parliament specifically prevents the NBN being sold UNTIL IT IS COMPLETE. It also mandates that the NBN is wholesale-only. Assuming this bill passes into legislation, for the govt of the day to sell the NBN before completion would require a change in the legislation and therefore approval of the senate. Given the support by Labor, Greens and indies, I think such a change would be unlikely. And a legislative change allowing the new owner to market retail services is even more unlikely, given that it would restore the vertical telecoms monopoly that everyone (even the Libs) now agree is a bad thing.


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> So what is your interest in all this?
> 
> You should come north of Moonee Ponds, mate,  Australia is not all bitumen.
> 
> gg
> 
> gg




As I've said, I just back the NBN (or something like it). I think we need it for the future, and I don't want my kids growing up in a country that is decades behind the rest of the developed world, when that world is growing more dependent on the internet every day.

Mooney Ponds?? I live about 11 hours North of there already....And as for dirt roads, I think I could safely say I've driven many more km on dirt over the years than most Australians. In fact, I've never owned a vehicle that isn't a 4WD, and they have all seen more than their share of bulldust (and not from me)... 

Unfortunately though, I've never made it all the way up the East coast, Mackay has been my EC limit so far... The best laid plans and all that. Maybe when the kids are old enough I'll get around to it. I'll drop in for a cuppa, and we can discuss shiny/dull blue cable


----------



## sinner

NBN CEO will be at the National ICT forum spruiking his wares. Conroy will be there too.

Anyone interested in attending can register here

http://www.asialink.unimelb.edu.au/calendar/events/featured/national_ict_forum

At the Sidney Meyer building on University of Melbourne Parkville campus.


----------



## sails

No surprises here - just more of the same from labor - from the ABC today:



> Tasmania's main business lobby has attacked the rollout of the National Broadband Network (NBN) saying it has been bungled.




More here: Business slams 'bungled' broadband rollout


----------



## drsmith

Cracks ?

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...-report-pd20110321-F6PLL?OpenDocument&src=hp8


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

drsmith said:


> Cracks ?
> 
> http://www.businessspectator.com.au...-report-pd20110321-F6PLL?OpenDocument&src=hp8




Julia and Wayne are considering ditching it, my sources tell me.

It needs to be done now, they feel, to let the odour settle before an election next year.

gg


----------



## nulla nulla

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Julia and Wayne are considering ditching it, my sources tell me.
> 
> It needs to be done now, they feel, to let the odour settle before an election next year.
> 
> gg




You reckon this smells more than the Carbon Tax proposal?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

nulla nulla said:


> You reckon this smells more than the Carbon Tax proposal?




If the NBN gets up, it will keep the ALP out of government for 2 generations.

Its a barra on a lamp post.

Hung out, smelly, useless and dry.

gg


----------



## sails

Garpal Gumnut said:


> ...Its a barra on a lamp post.
> 
> Hung out, smelly, useless and dry.
> 
> gg




Lol - sounds like carbon tax, mining tax, flood levy, border policy (does it still exist?), pink batts, ber, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.

All seem to be policies made on the run.  With labor MPs not permitted to cross the floor, it raises the question if the usual consultative processes are applied to any new policy which potentially leaves a labor leader free to dream these things up in their sleep and then rush out and call them policy without at least filtering the initial flaws with their own party BEFORE announcing such hare brained schemes.

It seems very likely that it is all about theory and very little about practical application, IMO of course...


----------



## tothemax6

Is it scrapped yet? It doesn't sound particularly scrapped.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

tothemax6 said:


> Is it scrapped yet? It doesn't sound particularly scrapped.




It's a dead parrot mate.

gg


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> Cracks ?
> 
> http://www.businessspectator.com.au...-report-pd20110321-F6PLL?OpenDocument&src=hp8




lol cracks

Its a multi billion dollar project and one of Aust largest and most complex infrastructure builds.


----------



## drsmith

Garpal Gumnut said:


> If the NBN gets up, it will keep the ALP out of government for 2 generations.



I'm trying to imagine Tony Abbott as PM for 2 generations.

What's happened to NBNMyths ?


----------



## trainspotter

drsmith said:


> I'm trying to imagine Tony Abbott as PM for 2 generations.
> 
> What's happened to NBNMyths ?




Can't keep up with the bandwidth his website has generated with skeptics from Telstra who are blogging him endlessly. Some dude calling himself "Telecom Engineer" is tearing him a new asshole and pointing out that what is written aint necessarily so. Oh well.


----------



## IFocus

drsmith said:


> I'm trying to imagine Tony Abbott as PM for 2 generations.




Its easy we will all become Catholics eating bananas using Morse code for communications waiting for him to actually make a decision other than to say no..


----------



## drsmith

IFocus said:


> Its easy we will all become Catholics eating bananas using Morse code for communications waiting for him to actually make a decision other than to say no..



Don't you start.

Tony for 2 generations is better than Juliar for 5 minutes.


----------



## sails

IFocus said:


> Its easy we will all become Catholics eating bananas using Morse code for communications waiting for him to actually make a decision other than to say no..




If that logic follows through, then are we all now unmarried fabians without children...lol

And what about Gillard's frequent changes of mind?  That's hardly good decision making.

lol IFocus, I thought you were capable of more reasoned debate than resorting to such silly labor style propoganda...


----------



## Boggo

Now that the time has blown out by two years does that mean that the cost also has or do they work for free for the two years.
This thing is going to end in tears.
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/breaking-news/nbn-given-two-year-deadline-extension/story-e6frea73-1226027725321


----------



## trainspotter

NBN Co requires an extra 2 and a half years to connect an extra 1 million homes as well as some "greenfield" areas. This is representative of 3% of the overall total infrastructure. 2020 is the new completion date.

2 and a half years = 3% or 1 million new connections. Do the math people ...... something is not adding up here ??


----------



## derty

trainspotter said:


> NBN Co requires an extra 2 and a half years to connect an extra 1 million homes as well as some "greenfield" areas. This is representative of 3% of the overall total infrastructure. 2020 is the new completion date.
> 
> 2 and a half years = 3% or 1 million new connections. Do the math people ...... something is not adding up here ??



 It might make a little more sense to you if you consider that Australia's population is not homogeneously distributed across the surface of the continent.


----------



## IFocus

The dogs bark but the caravan moves on.........



> Key NBN bill passes the Senate




Sheeez even the "Australian" now calls it $36 bil




> Key NBN bill passes the Senate
> 
> 
> 
> ONE of two key pieces of legislation relating to the operation of the $36 billion National Broadband Network has passed through the Senate.
> 
> The government yesterday moved to extend sitting hours and recall the Senate today, as it battles to push through two NBN-related bills before a six-week parliamentary break.
> 
> The NBN Companies bill was passed this morning with the support of the Australian Greens, independent senator Nick Xenophon and Family First senator Steve Fielding.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ssses-the-senate/story-fn59niix-1226027981936


----------



## todster

derty said:


> It might make a little more sense to you if you consider that Australia's population is not homogeneously distributed across the surface of the continent.



Wow thought i read somewhere that it just rolled into Gero and your still moaning.
Run it past my ranch


----------



## todster

todster said:


> Wow thought i read somewhere that it just rolled into Gero and your still moaning.
> Run it past my ranch




Sorry was aimed at Trainspotter missed by that much!


----------



## sails

todster said:


> Sorry was aimed at Trainspotter missed by that much!




What's with the nasty personal attacks this morning, Todster??

Drink too much last night?  Head hurting???

Your response seems completely off topic, IMO...


----------



## trainspotter

todster said:


> Sorry was aimed at Trainspotter missed by that much!




Bwaahahahhahahahahaaaaaa ........ got me big Fella. Yeppers ...... we had Conroy et al here with the Guvmint plane and mafia staff cars and flag waving ceremonies.

Flicked the switch on Westnet and what happened??? NUFFIN. LOL It did not work. Computer glitch. ROFL. Many technogeeks running around in circles faster than a hamster in a wheel later and guess what? NUFFIN. WOOOOPS ..... minor technical issue really ....... anyways ...... on with the show. 

Oh yeah ...... Westnet and it's parent company iinet have to spend 5 million of their own money to make it work. PMSL.

Your'e cool todster .... your'e cool.


----------



## todster

sails said:


> What's with the nasty personal attacks this morning, Todster??
> 
> Drink too much last night?  Head hurting???
> 
> Your response seems completely off topic, IMO...




Moaning a nasty personal attack?
Do you live in a convent


----------



## todster

trainspotter said:


> Bwaahahahhahahahahaaaaaa ........ got me big Fella. Yeppers ...... we had Conroy et al here with the Guvmint plane and mafia staff cars and flag waving ceremonies.
> 
> Flicked the switch on Westnet and what happened??? NUFFIN. LOL It did not work. Computer glitch. ROFL. Many technogeeks running around in circles faster than a hamster in a wheel later and guess what? NUFFIN. WOOOOPS ..... minor technical issue really ....... anyways ...... on with the show.
> 
> Oh yeah ...... Westnet and it's parent company iinet have to spend 5 million of their own money to make it work. PMSL.
> 
> Your'e cool todster .... your'e cool.




Thanks mate but are you going to connect?


----------



## todster

sails said:


> What's with the nasty personal attacks this morning, Todster??
> 
> Drink too much last night?  Head hurting???
> 
> Your response seems completely off topic, IMO...




Top left hand corner will indicate time of post.
least i know the time


----------



## professor_frink

might be time to tone it down a little todster.


----------



## trainspotter

todster said:


> Thanks mate but are you going to connect?




The shiny blue cable has only been terminated to the Tarcoola sub exchange at the moment. Backhaul I believe ?? 

Still a looooooooooooooooooooooong way to go before they drag the fibre up and down the streetscape todster. When it does happen I will probably be living in another country by then.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

trainspotter said:


> The shiny blue cable has only been terminated to the Tarcoola sub exchange at the moment. Backhaul I believe ??
> 
> Still a looooooooooooooooooooooong way to go before they drag the fibre up and down the streetscape todster. When it does happen I will probably be living in another country by then.




It's the biggest scam since pink batts.

A huge financial impost on the country and will lead to higher taxes.

gg


----------



## tothemax6

Garpal Gumnut said:


> A huge financial impost on the country and will lead to higher taxes.



And with the carbon tax and flood levy, we can successfully conclude that the policy of the labor party is 'FCK YOU AUSSIES! WE LUST FOR YOUR PAIN". 
Which of course, leads us to the conclusion that Australian voters are predominantly uneducated morons and self-righteous masochists, with the balance being made up of the minority of sane people.


----------



## trainspotter

tothemax6 said:


> And with the carbon tax and flood levy, we can successfully conclude that the policy of the labor party is 'FCK YOU AUSSIES! WE LUST FOR YOUR PAIN".
> Which of course, leads us to the conclusion that Australian voters are predominantly uneducated morons and self-righteous masochists, with the balance being made up of the minority of sane people.




*HEY !*

I resemble that remark. As an Australian voter that is. Will the person who voted for Julia Gillard please stand up and be counted.

*The company responsible for the National Broadband Network rollout has been likened to a secret society and accused of failing to properly market super-fast broadband.*

A federal parliamentary inquiry into the NBN has heard the average take-up rate in the three Tasmanian towns connected under stage one is only 50 per cent.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/03/11/3162150.htm


----------



## drsmith

I reckon the government will announce the detail of the deal with Telstra tomorrow or early next week.

It will make a handy distraction from the electoral disaster of NSW Labor.


----------



## trainspotter

*NBN Co will launch a public education campaign after acknowledging a lack of understanding about the network. *

The campaign comes as the NBN moved back into the political spotlight, with federal parliament debating amendments to legislation allowing the broadband network to be built.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/business/bre...it/story-e6frfkur-1226029481795#ixzz0jRw1AFsm


----------



## Greg

Looks like we're one step closer with two of the NBN bills passing through the lower house last night, according to this news update on 7.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/video/national/watch/24691619 

Oakshott and Windsor seem to have helped to secure standardised pricing to all locations. Good if you live in the bush, I guess.


----------



## drsmith

Greg said:


> Oakshott and Windsor seem to have helped to secure standardised pricing to all locations. Good if you live in the bush, I guess.



With respect to future technologies, it's not enshrined in the legislation.

There was a lot of debate about this in the House of Reps yesterday.


----------



## sails

I read somewhere that parliament was recalled yesterday and that some coalition ministers could not get back due to prior appointments thinking that parliament would not be sitting.  Also understand that it wasn't televised as usual.

I can't find any info now on this - does anyone know if this is what happened?  If so, it looks a bit like a sneaky tactic by Gillard to get her NBN bill passed with opposing MPs away and also keeping the tactic off the air.

Does anyone know what happened?


----------



## drsmith

sails said:


> Does anyone know what happened?



The usual pairing arrangements were used where parliamentarians were not in the house.

Having listened to some of the proceedings on ABC Radio National yesterday, Messers Oakshott and Windsor won't be changing sides anytime soon.


----------



## Mofra

drsmith said:


> Having listened to some of the proceedings on ABC Radio National yesterday, Messers Oakshott and Windsor won't be changing sides anytime soon.



Windsor on 6pm with George Negus had a few pearlers. 
He mentioned there was no chance of switching sides to the coalition until Abbott actually stood for something.
He also noted he would review his support *when* Turnbull takes over as leader. Had to chuckle, but also live in hope that the Libs actually elect a leader people can feasibly consider as an alternate PM.


----------



## sails

Mofra said:


> Windsor on 6pm with George Negus had a few pearlers.
> He mentioned there was no chance of switching sides to the coalition until Abbott actually stood for something.
> He also noted he would review his support *when* Turnbull takes over as leader. Had to chuckle, but also live in hope that the Libs actually elect a leader people can feasibly consider as an alternate PM.




Windsor is clearly labor at heart and would also prefer to have the more labor friendly Turnbull as opposition leader.

I still don't think Oaskeshott and Windsor would change sides even if Turnbull became opposition leader again as there are still others on the LNP side that they detest apart from Abbott.  I think that bit is all talk in an effort to get rid of Abbott who seems to be a thorn in labor's side.  

Abbott may not be the most suitable in some areas, but he is standing up for the views of many Aussies who do not want Gillard's dictatorial ideas or taxes.  I don't believe Turnbull would represent the conservative masses sufficiently.

So IMO, at this stage, Abbott is the best the LNP have so that Ms Gillard doesn't get everything her own way.  Who would believe anything Windsor said either?  Didn't he betray the majority in his own electorate?


----------



## ozbrit

I wouldn't say that Tony Windsor was a Laborite at heart nor for that matter is Oakeshott. What has happened with Windsor is he's had to a certain extent 'run the gauntlet' by sniping Nationals in and out of his seat as the Nats see him as an impostor, I think that that has created a certain anti-National psyche with him. Windsor relies on Labor and others tactically voting for him, it's the only way that they can beat the National candidate in a seat like that.  Oakeshott has been able to do this in Port Maquarie, but with a lot of Conservative voters who didn't imagine he'd go and prop up a minority Labor Government.

Both Independents are publicity seekers who want to be loved. Oakeshott has well and truly blown things, I wouldn't even be surprised if and when he loses his seat the ALP then finds him a safe replacement.

Tony Windsor depending on the swing and whether he chooses to actually run could get re-elected with a much reduced majority. He is a true Independent who retains a reservoir of goodwill on the tablelands particularly with the many voters who don't see themselves as being dyed in the wool Conservatives.

Tony Abbott fought a good election, but I can't see how he can take the Coalition any further. There are a lot of voters out there who have no trouble voting Coalition but reckon he's neither fluent, tactical or tricky enough to put the red headed cheat on the deck.

I don't see either Independent jumping ship, but they might just go down with it.


----------



## Julia

ozbrit said:


> Both Independents are publicity seekers who want to be loved.



Agree.   They are milking their positions for all they're worth.



> Tony Abbott fought a good election, but I can't see how he can take the Coalition any further. There are a lot of voters out there who have no trouble voting Coalition but reckon he's neither fluent, tactical or tricky enough to put the red headed cheat on the deck.



I don't think  you'll find much disagreement on this, but if the Libs were to change leaders, who do you think would be better?   This is the difficulty.



> I don't see either Independent jumping ship, but they might just go down with it.



They have too much at stake to jump, even if they were politically so inclined which they're not.  If another election were held, they would both lose their jobs imo.


----------



## trainspotter

Last week, Labor senators on a communications committee defended proposals to *protect NBN Co from competition*, arguing the telcos *needed to be prevented* from targeting lucrative markets and leaving the government business enterprise with high-cost, low-revenue customers.

http://www.skynews.com.au/politics/article.aspx?id=592703&vId=

Is this legal? You betcha when the Guvmint wants it their way !


----------



## IFocus

sails said:


> Windsor is clearly labor at heart and would also prefer to have the more labor friendly Turnbull as opposition leader.




Winsor supported Nick Greiner in NSW not that long ago


----------



## So_Cynical

sails said:


> Abbott may not be the most suitable in some areas, but he is standing up for the views of many Aussies who do not want Gillard's dictatorial ideas or taxes.  I don't believe Turnbull would represent the conservative masses sufficiently.




Just outa interest...if Turnbull was to lead the coalition into the next election would you vote for him? if you couldn't,  who/what party would be a realistic alternative for you and the conservative masses.?


----------



## sails

So_Cynical said:


> Just outa interest...if Turnbull was to lead the coalition into the next election would you vote for him?




Nope - may as well vote labor, IMO.  It seems that it is mainly labor voters who keep calling for Turnbull to come back and I doubt they would actually vote liberal no matter who was in leadership.   There is much anger over this carbon tax, and while Turnbull agrees with labor on it, I don't think he will get much support from coalition supporters.



> if you couldn't,  who/what party would be a realistic alternative for you and the conservative masses.?




I can't speak for the conservative masses, but can only hope the coalition don't do anything so stupid...lol.  I certainly wouldn't be voting labor or greens. 

And to vote for a minor party would only have preferences going to the libs so that wouldn't work.  So, I really don't know...  Hope I don't have to make that decision...


----------



## So_Cynical

sails said:


> I can't speak for the conservative masses, but can only hope the coalition don't do anything so stupid...lol.  I certainly wouldn't be voting labor or greens.
> 
> And to vote for a minor party would only have preferences going to the libs so that wouldn't work.  So, I really don't know...  Hope I don't have to make that decision...




^ This was the point i was trying to make ^

The bulk of the the conservative masses have nowhere else to go and any vote that did go further to the right would simply flow (2 party preferred) back to the coalition anyway.

With 1 vote Tony as leader the coalition gets only maybe 45% of the centre vote, with Turnbull as leader i reckon they will get 50% or more and thus win Government....seems a no brainier to me.


----------



## qldfrog

so cynical: agree with you can not vote abbott nor would I vote for a mullah; same same in my opinion, would vote turnbull


----------



## sinner

qldfrog said:


> so cynical: agree with you can not vote abbott nor would I vote for a mullah; same same in my opinion, would vote turnbull




Yes, yes, Turnbull is a Mullah therefore what we want is a nice respectable ex JP Morganite, he's sure to do right by us


----------



## Julia

qldfrog said:


> so cynical: agree with you can not vote abbott nor would I vote for a mullah; same same in my opinion, would vote turnbull






sinner said:


> Yes, yes, Turnbull is a Mullah therefore what we want is a nice respectable ex JP Morganite, he's sure to do right by us




What is the 'mullah' you both refer to?
Wikipedia advises it is a muslim.
I am missing the relevance.


----------



## So_Cynical

Julia said:


> What is the 'mullah' you both refer to?
> Wikipedia advises it is a muslim.
> I am missing the relevance.




A Mad monk is as close as your going to get to a 'Mullah' in Australian politics.


----------



## trainspotter

So_Cynical said:


> A Mad monk is as close as your going to get to a 'Mullah' in Australian politics.




WOW ........ that is a long bow to draw !


----------



## sails

So_Cynical said:


> ^ This was the point i was trying to make ^
> 
> The bulk of the the conservative masses have nowhere else to go and any vote that did go further to the right would simply flow (2 party preferred) back to the coalition anyway.
> 
> With 1 vote Tony as leader the coalition gets only maybe 45% of the centre vote, with Turnbull as leader i reckon they will get 50% or more and thus win Government....seems a no brainier to me.




So_Cynical, I have replied to your post above in the Tony Abbott thread as this thread is about NBN and not about an indepth discussion on coalition leadership, so thought it better to respond there.  

Here's the link:  https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16184&p=623001#post623001


----------



## sails

Here is what some high school students think of NBN:

Full aticle from SMH: Students shrug off NBN as a 'waste'



> The school surveyed 380 of its students and found they were prodigious internet users, with 99.5 per cent of them on Facebook. But year 11 student Alex Klammer believes the $35.9 billion broadband network is a waste of money.




And they ae not happy with Conroy's proposed internet filters.  These kids will soon be able to vote and it's good to see young people thinking for themselves...


----------



## derty

sails said:


> Here is what some high school students think of NBN:
> 
> Full aticle from SMH: Students shrug off NBN as a 'waste'
> 
> 
> 
> And they ae not happy with Conroy's proposed internet filters.  These kids will soon be able to vote and it's good to see young people thinking for themselves...



I guess they are entitled to use "Students" in the title as they did identify two students who thought it was a waste. 



> But year 11 student Alex Klammer believes the $35.9 billion broadband network is a waste of money... Alex was not the only Diamond Valley College student to question the value of the NBN.
> 
> ''I personally think the money could be used for better things like hospitals,'' said year 9 student Ashleigh Gentles,


----------



## ozbrit

I believe a lot of the spin by the Government over the NBN and it's benefits to Australian society is ridiculously overstated.

My wife and me love the Internet, we're also frustrated as hell with Telstra and their pair-gain telephone lines which excludes so many Aussies from having a decent wired Internet service. Instead, we rely on wireless broadband from the local Optus tower. Both of us have $39/8GB p/mth subscriptions. to even stream a youtube clip at it's lowest quality is painful with buffering occurring every 10 secs or so. In view of this, we would stand to gain from NBN in our street more than most.

That said, I view the NBN as being the proverbial sledge-hammer to crack a nut. The largest group of supporters for the NBN imo being nerds, gamers and movie down loaders. A 1500/500kbps connection is plenty good enough for emails, web browsing and education research in my experience. Though, those of us who like to VOIP (if given the chance) or stream audio would like a bit more than that 

If the Coalition had been more synpathetic to people like us and recognised that Telstra's ADSL network even in Capital City suburbs was something akin to a Swiss cheese, they may have convincingly won the NBN debate with voters and possibly got the Independents onboard as well.

grants from the public purse to fix ADSL blackspots, optic fibre to all CBD's, Universities, Hospitals and Trading estates (within reason), plus the upgrading of ADSL1 to ADSL2+ where prcticable, then wireless broadband for the more rural locations might have been a realistic and much cheaper alternative plan to the NBN. 

So the NBN it is, I say bring it on, we're only a hundred k's up the coast from Coffs Harbour one of the NBN hubs for NSW, but looking at it from an unselfish standpoint, I don't need FTTH, just a reliable copper connection would do it for me.


----------



## trainspotter

*NBN Co halts network construction tender *

The company building the National Broadband Network has been forced to halt a tendering process to find construction companies to lay the planned fibre around the nation, after negotiations broke down with 14 suppliers over price.

“We have said all along that we are building an NBN, but not at any price,” said NBN Co head of Corporate Services Kevin Brown in a statement distributed this morning by the company. “We have thoroughly benchmarked our project against similar engineering and civil works projects in Australia and overseas, and we will not proceed on the basis of prices we are currently being offered.”

The NBN Co executive said the company had an obligation to its shareholders — “indeed, to all taxpayers” — to ensure it carefully managed their investment in the NBN, and was serious about the costs involved. He noted that NBN Co did not believe that the prices being proposed by the construction companies reflected capacity constraints in the industry.

Brown noted NBN Co was confident it could secure better value for money “by going a different route”. The potential new approach would take into account “recent supply chain arrangements, volume certainty, a gainshare for continuous improvement, and involve a national construction footprint,” said Brown.

*A spokesperson for NBN Co was not immediately available to clarify what the executive’s statement meant.*

http://www.itwire.com/it-industry-news/strategy/46245-nbn-co-halts-network-construction-tender

*Soaring costs halt tenders for NBN*

THE company in charge of the $36 billion national broadband network has frozen negotiations over vital contracts, citing exorbitant demands from construction companies.

The taxpayer-owned NBN Co wrote to 14 construction firms yesterday, saying a tender process was ''suspended'' indefinitely because none of their proposals had acceptable prices.

NBN made the drastic move because it believed the bidders were trying to gouge excessive profits from the taxpayer-backed project, using rising labour costs from the resources boom as an excuse. 

While NBN is instead working on a ''Plan B'' to finish the work more cheaply, the suspension has reignited the political furore over the project's price tag, *which critics say is vulnerable to soaring wage demands*.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/soaring-costs-halt-tenders-for-nbn-20110331-1cnl3.html?skin=text-only

How do you say it again? ................ meh ! PMSL.


----------



## drsmith

Another wobbly wheel for the government ?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/04/05/3182679.htm?section=justin


----------



## sinner

Very amusing.





Why yes, I do keep notes on some things some members sometimes say 

Quigley was even on the wires saying NBN labor would be harder to obtain because of higher demand for labor due to flood/cyclone rebuilding.


----------



## sptrawler

The only viable company with the workforce equiped to carry the project out is Telstra. Just don't know how they would sell that one to the voters. LOL


----------



## trainspotter

As the NBN costings will not form part of the Labor Guvmint budget and it has always been touted by Senator Conroy as a "stand alone project" then surely the companies that bothered to tender will not be allowed any sort of compensation?

Wonder where Head of Construction Flannigan will pop up next now that he has headed for the hills?


----------



## sptrawler

Yes trainspotter it will be interesting, the Guvmint will probably don't want to use tlstra but they are probably the only ones that can bring it in anywhere near budget. But they won't want to give anymore money to tlstra because of opposition and electorate backlash. However if they don't they will be ripped off and the result is the same.
Basically it is the same as us punters, sometimes you make a decision and it turns to excrement the N.B.N is starting to smell that way.
If the Government had the time over I am sure they wouldn't have floated Telstra. I think they would be better off spending $48billion buying it back than throwing another$36billion into telecommunications.
If they offered long sufferingTelstra shareholders $4 a share with a tax writeoff it would be cost neutral to them and it would allow everyone to quit the crap.
By the way trainspotter why are we talking in code (Guvmint) (tlstra) LOL


----------



## Julia

The Radio National program "Australia Talks" yesterday was on the NBN.
It began with a quite fascinating argument between two blokes called Kevin, one of whom represents NBN Co. and the other is an independent telecommunications commentator.  The latter does not hold back in his condemnation of the project.
Well worth a listen.

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/australiatalks/stories/2011/3178037.htm


----------



## trainspotter

_"John Lindsay, the manager of regulatory and corporate affairs at Internode, said under NBN's product and pricing construct, the network would be *10 times as expensive* as existing wholesalers were today for corporate and business grade services."

"At the weekend, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy said Internode should have raised its *"important" *concerns earlier in submissions to the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission."_

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...he-ante-over-nbn/story-fn59niix-1226033611312

Ummmmmmmmmmm they did raise "important" concerns Senator Conroy but were dismissed by your good self as detractors of this visionary nation building exercise. 

All together now .................... *sigh*


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

trainspotter said:


> _"John Lindsay, the manager of regulatory and corporate affairs at Internode, said under NBN's product and pricing construct, the network would be *10 times as expensive* as existing wholesalers were today for corporate and business grade services."
> 
> "At the weekend, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy said Internode should have raised its *"important" *concerns earlier in submissions to the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission."_
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...he-ante-over-nbn/story-fn59niix-1226033611312
> 
> Ummmmmmmmmmm they did raise "important" concerns Senator Conroy but were dismissed by your good self as detractors of this visionary nation building exercise.
> 
> All together now .................... *sigh*




ts , it is going to get much worse, quite soon.

My sources tell me there is an air of impending doom about the Minister's lackeys, some cracks appearing, a la batts.

And in the inimitable style of the arch cynic, Sir Humphrey Applebee, the following quote, from our existing Prime Minister..



> Prime Minister Julia Gillard declined to be drawn on the resignation of Mr Flannigan, who had 25 years experience in the infrastructure services sector.
> 
> "A senior figure in the national broadband network has resigned and as he has gone to look for other opportunities, he said: 'This is a *courageous* and visionary project'," she told reporters in Brisbane.














http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-new...ed-to-be-more-transparent-20110406-1d41h.html

gg


----------



## Slipperz

juliar disgusts me. then again so do all her cronies. Our country could do so much much better. labor is utterly disheartening and in the house  oakenshot is the absolute complete and utter  electoral disgrace of the 21st century in this nation. In 900 years noone could possibly be less unrepresentative of his electorate than him.


----------



## sptrawler

Yes the funny thing with Labor is when you are really young and starting out in life you vote for them because you have an absolute belief in their comitment to help the battler. Then you work hard do without and save your pennies. Maybe decide to live in a remote area to get extra income and experience and try to get a supervisors job. But because you live in these godforsaken places you get no breaks you earn reasonable money but pay a fortune for all the basics, food, rent etc. Then the govrnment calls you a fat cat so you get hammered. You buy a property to try and reduce your rent outgoings. Then the govrnment gives the o.k for fly in fly out and your property is worthless the community suffers because the councils get less rates but more people to support. The local sporting clubs can't get regular members and players. 
What a fabulous job we are doing of building a better Australia if things keep going the way they are all you will have across Australia is a service station every 200klms. Julia said before the last election this fly in fly out has to stop it is breaking down our society.
Well what has she done, sod all, just glib one liners to get fly in fly outs to vote for her. As usual Labor is full of interlectual dip $???ts that want to give money to lazy sods and punish workers who are trying to get out of the $???t pit. THEY ARE A DISGRACE AND NEED THROWING OUT. By the way the misspelt Government was intentional as it is not a Government just a group of dicks that have never represented the WORKERS even in their union capacities.
Well that got a lot off my chest and by the way I live in a city.


----------



## sails

Isn't this exactly what many were concerned about with labor going to so much effort to hide any sort of due diligence on the NBN? 

From the Australian: NBN builders fear blowout 



> CONSTRUCTION companies pitching to build Labor's National Broadband Network say the cost of capital works for the mammoth project could surge more than 50 per cent above forecasts to as much as $20 billion unless the NBN Co drastically revamps its *bungled tender process.*




It appears they are bungling the tender process - how do they think they can possibly build such a major infrastructure?  Especially in the light of so many other bungled projects.


----------



## Slipperz

sails said:


> Isn't this exactly what many were concerned about with labor going to so much effort to hide any sort of due diligence on the NBN?
> 
> From the Australian: NBN builders fear blowout
> 
> 
> 
> It appears they are bungling the tender process - how do they think they can possibly build such a major infrastructure?  Especially in the light of so many other bungled projects.




Not looking good is it...http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/NBN-cost-fears-escalate-report-pd20110407-FPP78?OpenDocument&src=hp4&src=amm

That's two pretty critical managers walking away mid project???


----------



## drsmith

Garpal Gumnut said:


> ......it is going to get much worse, quite soon.



I still don't think it will be scrapped as such.

More like a partial retreat (Labor might say honorable retreat) than a full scale capitulation.

Labor will fear being out of office for a generation if they walk away from it altogether, let alone the shorter term wrath of the independents.


----------



## So_Cynical

Slipperz said:


> Not looking good is it...http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/NBN-cost-fears-escalate-report-pd20110407-FPP78?OpenDocument&src=hp4&src=amm
> 
> That's two pretty critical managers walking away mid project???




Well who would of thought that a major infrastructure build (one of the biggest in our history) could possibly run over budget and have a cost blow out. 

Cos that's never happened before?


----------



## drsmith

At the retail level, comparison between Internode's ADSL2+ plans and their NBN fibre plans make for interesting reading.

http://www.internode.on.net/residential/adsl_broadband/easy_broadband/
http://www.internode.on.net/residential/fibre_to_the_home/nbn_plans/

Even at the entry level, the NBN plans become much more expensive than the ADSL2+ plans as the GB's go up. For example, 200GB entry level NBN is as expensive as 600GB ADSL2+, unbundled.


----------



## noco

So_Cynical said:


> Well who would of thought that a major infrastructure build (one of the biggest in our history) could possibly run over budget and have a cost blow out.
> 
> Cos that's never happened before?




Well So_Cynical, a large majority of the Australian voters would have thought it would blow out, just like everything else Labor puts their grubby hands to. Labor always seems to make you believe they are doing something when they are really doing nothing but wasting tax payers money and you do not need me to elaborate on their past.
Just hit everyone with higher taxes to pay for their mistakes.


----------



## sails

noco said:


> Well So_Cynical, a large majority of the Australian voters would have thought it would blow out, just like everything else Labor puts their grubby hands to. Labor always seems to make you believe they are doing something when they are really doing nothing but wasting tax payers money and you do not need me to elaborate on their past.
> Just hit everyone with higher taxes to pay for their mistakes.




I think it's not just the blow out itself - it's the massive cost in the first place that many feel is unjustified.  Further blow outs on top of that make NBN look even more like a massive white elephant.


----------



## joea

On Four Corners (i think ) Monday night we have Conroy and NBN.
Cheers


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> At the retail level, comparison between Internode's ADSL2+ plans and their NBN fibre plans make for interesting reading.
> 
> http://www.internode.on.net/residential/adsl_broadband/easy_broadband/
> http://www.internode.on.net/residential/fibre_to_the_home/nbn_plans/
> 
> Even at the entry level, the NBN plans become much more expensive than the ADSL2+ plans as the GB's go up. For example, 200GB entry level NBN is as expensive as 600GB ADSL2+, unbundled.




Dr .. can you and other under informed posters in this thread please stop it with the bulls!it comparisons and other scare tactics...the above download quota comparison is a apples and oranges comparison.
~


----------



## trainspotter

Ummmmmmm why is it they are using the MAXIMUM NBN can provide and the MINIMUM that ADSL2 can provide?? Huh ??? Read the comparison carefully. *"Theoretical peak download NBN"* vs *"Minimum speed Internode"* ........ they are talking about SPEED which has FUGGAL to do with the amounts can downloaded for a price.


Apples and Oranges my @rse.


----------



## So_Cynical

trainspotter said:


> Ummmmmmm why is it they are using the MAXIMUM NBN can provide and the MINIMUM that ADSL2 can provide?? Huh ??? Read the comparison carefully. *"Theoretical peak download NBN"* vs *"Minimum speed Internode"* ........ they are talking about SPEED which has FUGGAL to do with the amounts can downloaded for a price.
> 
> 
> Apples and Oranges my @rse.




I used the NBN maximum because thats all i could find...please feel free to trawl the internode site and post up the minimum speeds if you can find them.

I quoted the minimum speed for DSL because its very relevant to the "easy" Internode plan (i was actually on this plan for 3 years) under the T&C agreement that's the minimum Internode guarantee so is at the core of the pricing model.

Found some speed info for the Easy plan

    * 13.4% achieve a download synch speed of higher than 20 Mbps
    * 27.7% achieve a download synch speed of between 15 Mbps and 20 Mbps
    * 22.1% achieve a download synch speed of between 10 Mbps and 15 Mbps
    * 23.0% achieve a download synch speed of between 5 Mbps and 10 Mbps
    * 13.8% achieve a download synch speed of less than 5 Mbps

http://www.internode.on.net/residential/adsl_broadband/easy_broadband/performance/

Anyway clearly apples and oranges with NBN around 14 > 18 times faster.


----------



## trainspotter

Sure thing it is faster. This was not the issue at hand.

600MB = $109.95 = ADSL2

200MB = $109.95 = NBN 

You download quicker and reach your $$$ spend download quicker as well. The dollar spend on ADSL2 you get more bang for your buck. Yes yes yes it is slower but unless you are video conferencing or gaming ........ WHO CARES?

Maximum "theoretical" NBN vs Minimum "proven" ADSL ??? Now this is definitely apples and oranges country ???


----------



## sptrawler

The other thing that has to be factored in is the capital outlay. Approx $40 billion to give you what you already have just faster what does Joe average need super high speed internet for. Is there anything that you are desperate to download that you have to have it 5 minutes quicker.


----------



## trainspotter

In the time for sptrawler to respond I have purchased and paid for 4 items on ebay, logged into the security system of my shop for a live feed, downloaded 14 emails (8meg), watched a trailer for Hangover 2 on youtube and done my internet banking and replied to this thread. Yeppers ..... lets spend 26 billion of my money to do this faster.


----------



## nulla nulla

trainspotter said:


> In the time for sptrawler to respond I have purchased and paid for 4 items on ebay, logged into the security system of my shop for a live feed, downloaded 14 emails (8meg), watched a trailer for Hangover 2 on youtube and done my internet banking and replied to this thread. Yeppers ..... lets spend 26 billion of my money to do this faster.




And that is just the benefit for one user. Conservatively, multiply it by 2.5 million users and then work out the national improvement in financial productivity. Nevermind the kiddies on facebook or the dorks downloading pr0n, the benefit to business is huge.


----------



## JTLP

trainspotter said:


> In the time for sptrawler to respond I have purchased and paid for 4 items on ebay, logged into the security system of my shop for a live feed, downloaded 14 emails (8meg), watched a trailer for Hangover 2 on youtube and done my internet banking and replied to this thread. Yeppers ..... lets spend 26 billion of my money to do this faster.




Look mate you'll be happy when you get than extra item on ebay for only $40 billion more ok? For an extra $10 billion i'll give you an extra email. Uncosted will be another trailer if you want to watch it.

You're all whingers - let's build 2 NBN's so we can go even faster!


----------



## trainspotter

The little Toshiba laptop will require a hyperdrive retro fitted to keep up !!  The smoke is billowing out of it now with so much pressure in just 4 minutes !! 

Seriously though ........ I applaud the NBN Co for cancelling the tender process as the costings/tenders were too high. I have repeatedly said ....... "I WANT MY NBN ...... but not at ANY cost"

I don't know how the download speed would have made it any faster? You can only read and type and take in so much info at one time.


----------



## Julia

trainspotter said:


> I don't know how the download speed would have made it any faster? You can only read and type and take in so much info at one time.



 Zackly.  Something which seems to be little recognised.


----------



## nulla nulla

trainspotter said:


> Seriously though ........ I applaud the NBN Co for cancelling the tender process as the costings/tenders were too high. I have repeatedly said ....... "I WANT MY NBN ...... but not at ANY cost"




I was pleasantly surprised to see Conroy tell the gaugers where to get off. Maybe there is hope yet.


----------



## medicowallet

nulla nulla said:


> the benefit to business is huge.




Ok so please show me this,

because the many business owners I have talked to have said that faster internet will make no difference to their business, and  major corporations and large businesses already have access to fast internet.

For example, which of the following businesses are hamstrung by ADSL2?

Pharmacy
Doctors
Butcher
Mechanic
Plumber
Baker
Video store

In fact, can you just give me some examples of small-medium businesses who have productivity dependant upon their internet speed, because I can only think of a miniscule handful.

As I said, large businesses already can get fast speeds.

A lot this increased productivity touted is clearly overstated.

I can understand that a few businesses will benefit, but for $40+ billion!!!

$20 billion into services = hospitals, schools
$10 billion into tertiary education and R&D
$10 billion into roads and ports

would no doubt give a much better ROI and revenue streams to allow future investment in other areas of productivity.


----------



## trainspotter

*Old lady digging for "scrap" cuts fibre optic cable*

GEORGIAN police arrested a 75-year-old woman who single-handedly cut off internet connections in Georgia and neighbouring Armenia, the interior ministry in Tbilisi said today. 

The pensioner was digging for scrap metal when she hacked into a fibre-optic cable which runs through Georgia to Armenia, forcing many thousands of Internet users in both countries offline for several hours on March 28.

Many Georgians' internet connections were also briefly cut in 2009 by another scavenger who damaged the fibre-optic cable while hunting for scrap metal in the impoverished ex-Soviet state.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...armenia-internet/story-e6frep1o-1226035351932

Lets hope that Australilalala land doesn't become impoverished


----------



## So_Cynical

sptrawler said:


> The other thing that has to be factored in is the capital outlay. Approx $40 billion to give you what you already have just faster what does Joe average need super high speed internet for. Is there anything that you are desperate to download that you have to have it 5 minutes quicker.




Pretty sure there would of been a similar argument about the car replacing the horse and electric lights replacing whale oil powered lamps....seriously.

The first cars were slow and cumbersome, noisy made strange smells and drove on roads designed and built for horses and cost alot of money, there would of been alot of opinion in favour of the good old trusty horse, probably would of made more short term financial sense to stick with horses too.

You Can't Stop Progress...its inevitable.


----------



## sails

So_Cynical said:


> ...You Can't Stop Progress...its inevitable.




So, over the next few years while they are slowly digging up the ground and laying cable, it is quite possible that new technology providing more reliable and fast wireless might beat them to it.  

Absolutely have to let progress happen.  Seems pretty silly to slow progress down with something expensive that may be antiquated before it's even finished.

It seems a big gamble with $36b - or with blowouts maybe $60b of taxpayer funds.


----------



## Slipperz

So_Cynical said:


> Pretty sure there would of been a similar argument about the car replacing the horse and electric lights replacing whale oil powered lamps....seriously.
> 
> The first cars were slow and cumbersome, noisy made strange smells and drove on roads designed and built for horses and cost alot of money, there would of been alot of opinion in favour of the good old trusty horse, probably would of made more short term financial sense to stick with horses too.
> 
> You Can't Stop Progress...its inevitable.




That's why the US plan to sell tv spectrum for wireless broadband makes so much sense to me. In the major population centres with improved technology wireless will do the job without having to dig a trench to every door.


----------



## boofhead

A major reason Internode list minimum speeds for ADSL and maximum for fibre is because of line speed differences. ADSL available through Telstra only has assurances for minimum speeds - anything over is a bonus and Telstra won't do much to improve speeds. Fibre gives you the listed speed.

NBNCo will enable multicast. Telstra does not provide this to wholesale clients. This allows bandwidth efficient ways to deploy various data streaming services like TV over IP. FetchTV would be one some Australians may be aware of that is currently available. iiNet and Internode offer it. Internode have limits applied to those on Telstra ports.

Hopefully the cancelled fibre tender process can be resolved.

Slipperz: Recent ABS figures showed that wireless isn't displacing wired. They are often used to compliment. It should also be noted wireless is still a developing market whereas wired is reasonably mature - basically saturated.


As for wireless technologies in the next couple of years improving - while discoveries may happen the general rollout to consumers is many years behind. CSIROs recent wireless systems in testing will be useful though.

Some areas are not well suited to terrestial wireless because of geography and geology. While different it can provide some analogies - free to air coverage in Tasmania. Lots of hills and valleys along the coastlines with forests.


----------



## trainspotter

Natural progression and advancement in technologies is inevitable. Spending 40 billion or thereabouts of taxpayers money on a nation building exercise is not the same as replacing motorcars or electric lamps. 

They owned a Telco company once and sold it off and cited the reason that Government should not be a monopoly phone carrier system and now they are going straight back to the same model. 

We need better roads, rail systems, water purification, hospitals, police stations, schools and universitites BEFORE we need a shiny blue cable. 

Conroy is comparing us to South Korea as a litmus test for the case of the NBN.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...tional-broadband/story-e6frg9if-1226004670045

1) We don't have 49 million people
2) We don't have high speed trains
3) Our population density is not the same
4) We are an export of minerals based economy
5) South Korea is a technology based economy


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> Pretty sure there would of been a similar argument about the car replacing the horse and electric lights replacing whale oil powered lamps....seriously.



Did I hit a raw nerve yesterday ?

The success of the car (internal combustion engine) and electricity resulted from technological advances that made the underlying commodity (energy) cheaper.

In the case of the NBN, the raw commodity (quota) is becoming more expensive. The increase is essentially the tax we are being required to pay to fund its construction.


----------



## tothemax6

So_Cynical said:


> Pretty sure there would of been a similar argument about the car replacing the horse and electric lights replacing whale oil powered lamps....seriously.
> 
> The first cars were slow and cumbersome, noisy made strange smells and drove on roads designed and built for horses and cost alot of money, there would of been alot of opinion in favour of the good old trusty horse, probably would of made more short term financial sense to stick with horses too.
> 
> You Can't Stop Progress...its inevitable.



Key difference here - nobody was forced to buy a car. This was back in the good ol' days of 'free enterprise'. 

Regarding stopping progress, I shall quote:
"Usually, terrible things that are done with the excuse that progress requires them are not really progress at all, but just terrible things."
Russell Baker


----------



## sptrawler

Like I have said in previous posts, the $40 billion would be better spent on critical infrastucture. Every one over the Easten States will be screaming when the Cooper basin gas reserves run out, they are seriously depleted already. 
Maybe then they will say the money would have been better spent running a gas pipe from the N.W.Shelf. Or running water from the north of the country down to the south and creating a food bowl in the Pilbara and central west coast. The soil around there will grow anything if you can keep the water up to it. 
That sort of thing is productive and nation building. Making the internet faster has negligable net worth to Australia. *Water and Fuel *are going to be the major issues and throwing in desalination plants is only making the so called greenhouse problem worse.  
They could even try putting in wind farms and have hydrogen plants next to them so that the fuel is being made by renewable energy. Then the hydrogen could be used as an energy storage medium. No that would be too sensible. Lets make the internet faster instead. Fools run by Fools


----------



## white_goodman

sptrawler said:


> Fools run by Fools




the state of modern western societies... thats at the best case, in the worst case they are being terrible for ulterior motives


----------



## So_Cynical

tothemax6 said:


> Key difference here - nobody was forced to buy a car. This was back in the good ol' days of 'free enterprise'.
> 
> Regarding stopping progress, I shall quote:
> "Usually, terrible things that are done with the excuse that progress requires them are not really progress at all, but just terrible things."
> Russell Baker




tothemax6 please tell us how you get around your tax dollars being spent on roads  im fascinated....and who the hell is Russell baker and why should i give a toss about what he says?



drsmith said:


> Did I hit a raw nerve yesterday ?




Raw nerve...no, i just get a little cranky when people such as your self post dishonestly in what can only to assumed to be a very deliberate act of disinformation to push your particular political agenda.


----------



## tothemax6

So_Cynical said:


> tothemax6 please tell us how you get around your tax dollars being spent on roads  im fascinated....and who the hell is Russell baker and why should i give a toss about what he says?



Russell baker is 'some dude'. Just had to put his name under the quote, citation and all that, y' know .

Firstly, your implication is that if something is big and nation-wide, it should be government owned. We should have public rail, electricity, water, telephony, gas, TV, cable, you name it. But then, is not retail big and nation wide? Or mining? Should the government not provide supermarkets, to 'provide for a growing nation' or whatever?
The answer is no, the USSR tried all that.
I would _love_ private roads. Logically, how would private roads compete? If Bobs private road is a slow, congested, bumpy piece of ----, and Jane's private road is a smooth, free-flowing dream-to-drive-on, with no traffic lights and high speed limits, who will go out of business? With public roads, the government effectively maintains a monopoly on roads - a private road has to compete with 'free' public roads, which is completely unworkable. 
Sure, there are limits to the types of roads which can be privatized, such as the small residential type roads. But big roads - we should be able to buy shares in the things.


----------



## prawn_86

tothemax6 said:


> But big roads - we should be able to buy shares in the things.




You can, and a lot of the toll road operators have gone broke. Roads are too expensive to maintain for the amount of tolls charged and motorists are not willing to pay more as they feel they should be free (or paid for by our already high taxes)

Personally i think health, education, transport should all be available free up to a 'good' standard. I think the benefits outweigh the costs. But thats for another thread...


----------



## sptrawler

tothemax6 said:


> Russell baker is 'some dude'. Just had to put his name under the quote, citation and all that, y' know .
> 
> Firstly, your implication is that if something is big and nation-wide, it should be government owned. We should have public rail, electricity, water, telephony, gas, TV, cable, you name it. But then, is not retail big and nation wide? Or mining? Should the government not provide supermarkets, to 'provide for a growing nation' or whatever?
> The answer is no, the USSR tried all that.
> I would _love_ private roads. Logically, how would private roads compete? If Bobs private road is a slow, congested, bumpy piece of ----, and Jane's private road is a smooth, free-flowing dream-to-drive-on, with no traffic lights and high speed limits, who will go out of business? With public roads, the government effectively maintains a monopoly on roads - a private road has to compete with 'free' public roads, which is completely unworkable.
> Sure, there are limits to the types of roads which can be privatized, such as the small residential type roads. But big roads - we should be able to buy shares in the things.




Actually toothemax6 roads used to be put be put in by the government Main Roads Department and local councils used to maintain roads in their shires they also used to put in new sub divisions and drainage and the government used to put in the power and telephone.
Now all of that has been handed over to the private sector and you pay heaps more for your block of land to the developer. You have toll roads, you pay heaps more for your power and telephone.
NOW have your council rates gone down, NO  ARE you paying less tax now that all these things have been removed from government SERVICES.NO
YOU PAY MORE FOR THE SAME.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> Raw nerve...no, i just get a little cranky when people such as your self post dishonestly in what can only to assumed to be a very deliberate act of disinformation to push your particular political agenda.



The speed difference between NBN entry and ADSL2+ was discussed between another poster and yourself yesterday, so there's little point re-covering that ground.

What will make more people cranky over time is paying more for quota when the general trend has been in the other direction. That though is what we get from the bunch of incompetent socialist retards that is our current government.


----------



## sails

prawn_86 said:


> You can, and a lot of the toll road operators have gone broke. Roads are too expensive to maintain for the amount of tolls charged and motorists are not willing to pay more as they feel they should be free (or paid for by our already high taxes)
> 
> Personally i think health, education, transport should all be available free up to a 'good' standard. I think the benefits outweigh the costs. But thats for another thread...




Health, education and roads used to be paid for by taxes and vehicle regos and then made made available for all to use with no further expense.  However, it seems that governments have become so money hungry that the funds originally designated for these purposes have been diverted to other schemes leaving the taxpayer having to pay more than once for the same essential services.

I don't  remember our rego being decreased when road building was taken over by the private sector.  I wonder what our rego is used for now?

I can't see NBN being any different.  The consumer will most likely pay for this thing through increased taxes and also be charged quite heavily for using it...


----------



## trainspotter

drsmith said:


> The speed difference between NBN entry and ADSL2+ was discussed between another poster and yourself yesterday, so there's little point re-covering that ground.
> 
> What will make more people cranky over time is paying more for quota when the general trend has been in the other direction. That though is what we get from the bunch of incompetent socialist retards that is our current government.




*Hear hear* :iagree:


----------



## sptrawler

Your right on the money sails, but guess what, we must keep a lid on wages or inflation will become rampant. . But fortunately that is the benefit of having 75% of ministers ex union bosses they just call in the favours.
Throw the plebs $3000 two years ago and now tax directly and indirectly $5000 out of them. It will be interesting to see if they can pull it off. I personaly think the electorate is better informed and the N.S.W election seems to support that. Bad Government won't cut it just by thinking the electorate is stupid.
The N.B.N was stupid in its conception and I've seen nothing yet that changes my belief. It is a waste of oppurtunity and money that could be used to build something that doesn't enable kids to do online gaming at a faster speed.
Maybe I am just old fashioned and think food, water and shelter is more important.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

It's dead.

Deceased.

Gone to meet it's mayka.

gg


----------



## sptrawler

Priceless......   Witty comedy is funny. Half witted politics isn't.


----------



## drsmith

For the "Bill Gates's", this might be of interest,

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=1675718&r=28860688&u=408887#r28860688


----------



## So_Cynical

The latest announcement from the NBN site below.

"NBN Co announces first service providers for mainland Australia 08 April 2011

NBN Co is on track for the September commencement of commercial super-fast broadband services with the signing of the first retail service providers to connect to the new network for trials on mainland Australia."

http://www.nbnco.com.au/wps/wcm/con...service-providers-for-mainland-Australia.html


----------



## joea

A plan to connect every new home built after January 1st. with fibre cable to the home has been abandoned. 
As we have heard before the last bit will be copper.

The plot thickens.


----------



## drsmith

4 Corners will make for interesting viewing tonight.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...oid-compensation/story-e6frg90f-1226037015201

FTTN was effectively dead once Telstra was rejected from the tender process.



> "The government could spend $15 billion to build a fibre-to-the-node network (and) pay $15 to $20 billion to Telstra for compensation," Senator Conroy told ABC's Four Corners program due to screen on Monday night.
> 
> "Then Telstra could take that money and build a fibre-to-the-home network past you and strand 70 per cent of $15 billion on the side of the road."


----------



## IFocus

drsmith said:


> What will make more people cranky over time is paying more for quota when the general trend has been in the other direction. That though is what we get from the bunch of incompetent *socialist* retards that is our current government.




Which part of the current labor party would you say acts along the lines of the Wiki quote of Socialist

From Wiki



> Socialism is an economic and political theory advocating public or common ownership  and cooperative management of the means of production and allocation of resources.[1][2][3]  A socialist society is organized on the basis of relatively equal power-relations, self-management, dispersed decision-making (adhocracy) and a reduction or elimination of hierarchical and bureaucratic forms of administration and governance, the extent of which varies in different types of socialism.[4][5]  *This ranges from the establishment of cooperative management structures to the abolition of all hierarchical structures in favor of free association.*


----------



## drsmith

IFocus said:


> Which part of the current labor party would you say acts along the lines of the Wiki quote of Socialist



Perhaps the part that wants to build a government owned NBN.

You've declined to question incompetent retards, so, as Meatloaf woud say, 2 out of 3 ain't bad.


----------



## sails

I understand that Ms Gillard was (and possibly still is)a Fabian and, since her MPs have to toe the line even if they don't agree with her policies, I would think we are seeing more of the Fabian influence with a substantial mix of Green.  Still, whatever is behind labor's policies, their track record of managing anything is becomming more dismal by the day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_Society



> The Fabian Society is a British socialist movement, whose purpose is to advance the principles of democratic socialism via gradualist and reformist, rather than revolutionary, means....
> 
> Today, the society is a vanguard think tank of the centre left. It is one of 15 socialist societies affiliated with the Labour Party. Similar societies exist in Australia (the Australian Fabian Society)...




and looks like Swan is into it too:  http://www.fabian.org.au/1.asp







Image above of the Fabian "Wolf in Sheeps Clothing" logo from:
http://www.australiamatters.com/fabian.html


----------



## noco

Have been listening to 4 Corners. Stephen Conroy ramping up on free ABC advertising.Conroy just blowing his trumpet in an endeavour to justify this white elephant spending. He admits it will be a Government monopoly and you and me will have to pay the price whether you like it or not.


----------



## tothemax6

prawn_86 said:


> You can, and a lot of the toll road operators have gone broke. Roads are too expensive to maintain for the amount of tolls charged and motorists are not willing to pay more as they feel they should be free (or paid for by our already high taxes)
> 
> Personally i think health, education, transport should all be available free up to a 'good' standard. I think the benefits outweigh the costs. But thats for another thread...



Well, so long as you launder the idea by ignoring the nature of the payment for these services, all these things can of course be referred to as 'free'.
After all, we all have the option of obtaining things for free - pointing a pistol at someone generally helps.

Like I say, its hard to compete as a private enterprise when people are forced to pay for your competitor . Can you imagine starting a steel mill if the general populace could obtain steel for 'free'?


----------



## Julia

I only watched the first half of Four Corners, got bored and turned it off.  It wasn't saying anything we didn't already know.  Perhaps all the vital revelations occurred in the second half?


----------



## todster

Julia said:


> I only watched the first half of Four Corners, got bored and turned it off.  It wasn't saying anything we didn't already know.  Perhaps all the vital revelations occurred in the second half?




Sometimes can be a fine line between what you already know and what you want to hear


----------



## So_Cynical

Julia said:


> I only watched the first half of Four Corners, got bored and turned it off.  It wasn't saying anything we didn't already know.  Perhaps all the vital revelations occurred in the second half?




Yep a good program that presented the facts without political rhetoric and hysteria...not exactly what the ASF right wanted.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

So_Cynical said:


> Yep a good program that presented the facts without political rhetoric and hysteria...not exactly what the ASF right wanted.




How would you know what any right thinking person wants or wishes.

gg


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> Yep a good program that presented the facts without political rhetoric and hysteria...not exactly what the ASF right wanted.




How can it present the facts without political rhetoric, when Conroy is involved and the the FACT is no one can give us a genuine costing. Add to that no business case or cost base analysis.
The saving grace is it is moving that slowly the next election will be here before we are over our heads in it.


----------



## todster

Garpal Gumnut said:


> How would you know what any right thinking person wants or wishes.
> 
> gg




Easy have a read on ASF same people same argument day in day out.
Create a new thread same people same argument.
Better than stilnox
Go team Tony


----------



## joea

While the four corners presentation seemed to be as old as the hill's and boring, the ABC NEWS site has come out with a major show on NBN.

Titled "NBN Special Presentation". it has 4  sections.

1   Evolution of NBN.
2   FAQ. The NBN.
3   Analysis: Is the NBN Esssential?
4   Infographic - How fibre works.

It appears the Labor government is in campaign mode on NBN, or finally realised
the true circumstances of the slow take up.

As the NBN footprint is being scaled back, the ABC is running a campaign to educate the voters on NBN.
It appears that NBN maybe Labour's last hope.

It is either that , or its a campaign to hold QLD for Labor.

Cheers


----------



## sails

So_Cynical said:


> Yep a good program that presented the facts without political rhetoric and hysteria...not exactly what the ASF right wanted.




I watched some of it, but from what I could see the massive cost and potential further cost blowouts were not discussed.

It was a lovely touchy feely show about a school using it for teaching purposes, the CSIRO would like it, someone else wanted it for their kids to play games  a doctor and patient having a less distruptive online consultation.  But no mention of cost to the taxpayer - it came across as if it was going to be free to all.  How lovely...

Some of the above scenarios would certainly be of huge personal benefit to have a more reliable internet and especially to people living in remote areas, but then I thought it doubtful that people in remote areas will get it anyway - aren't they going to be serviced with 4g wireless?

The show did point out that FTTN was the original plan and it sounds like the more sensible plan with such a low take up rate.  But fears of Telstra undermining them has sent the government on this huge spending spree. Maybe they should buy Telstra back - might end up being less costly to the taxpayer?


----------



## trainspotter

So_Cynical said:


> Yep a good program that presented the facts without political rhetoric and hysteria...not exactly what the ASF right wanted.




Exactly what was to be expected. I especially enjoyed the "NATION BUILDING" catchphrase/rhetoric from both Rudd and Conroy. The other part that piqued my interest was the way that the Labor Guvmint has completely destroyed ANY possible competition for the NBN now and or in the future.

I laughed out loud when the "technology challenged" (we have satellite) farmers out in the sticks were under the impression that they were going to get the shiny blue cable to their front door. just LOL at that one. Nope ... not enough population. You are stuck with sarellite baby.

I smirked at the takeup rate of 13% for the Tasmanian populace for the NBN. "No need to panic Captain Mainwaring" could be heard in the background. They interviewed several Taswegians who did not even own a computer let alone know how to operate one as well as spent a "serious" amount of time looking for people who did. The response to this conundrum "Tasmania is a tough market but we expected this". ROFL.

The FACT that England has had a similar system for several years and less than 17% has taken up this wonderful opportunity to get high speed pr0n ...... ooops I meant info from the internet just really bought it home to me as to how important the proletariat places on this wonderful shiny blue cable and it's capabilities.

I enjoyed how Conroy explained the "behind closed door dealings" with Telstra to outmanouvre them so that they could not compete with the NBN. Hey wait a minute ..... didn't the Guvmint own Telstra but sold it? Now they are going into competition against it? Ooooopppsssssss ....... my mistake ........ NO COMPETITION IS ALLOWED. Shouldn't the ACCC be looking into this? *GOSH* ....... they did and found the Guvmint legislation is quite above board.

Yes yes yes the schools have benefits, the CSIRO have benefits, the hospitals have benefits. AND SO THEY SHOULD. Hook up the NBN to every single one of them and ALL the business's and make this part of society more efficient first. And all of this would be classified as a "Nation Building" exercise which would have the support of the people. THEN worry about Joe Schmoe in the street downloading movies and pornography LATER.  

Be afraid ladies and gentlemen ........ VERY AFRAID.


----------



## boofhead

Tasmanian populace and low uptake? The areas built with fibre are areas that generally have low broadband uptake. Build in the more central population areas and uptake would have been better. Also the areas built have had a lot of issues with companies closing in the last couple of years and are expecting more closures. Towns losing employment options are generally not going to start spending on extra services - they will conserve money.

Another issues why the low uptake is the people are confused. The opponents have put the wrong information in to the minds. People think a connection to the home will cost them. It wouldn't cost them until they start using a service on it. Also people thought it meant the end of their current copper line. That transition is years away and will force them to have the fibre anyway - and will probably cost them to be connected.

Politicians work out of Hobart. Scotsdale and Smithton are about as far as you can get from Hobart. Factual information seems to stop dead and opinions run wild. Governments have sent out so much propaganda in the mail that is sometimes not clearly written or have a meaningful point so now the citizens treat it all as any other junk mail. Straight in to the recycling bin, garbage or compost heap.

The same issues arrise from the gas rollout. Free connection to the home was possible but most didn't take it up.


England has a very similar system? Fibre is only recently started to be rolled out there. The Virgin thing is cable from memory. So it's the same issue as what Bigpong and Optus already have. Have you looked around the internet at what sort of issues various Virgin users have had? Many Virgin customers have no interest in the more expensive and faster speeds because Virgin do all sorts of throttling and conditions.

Infrastructure is a long term thing. When ADSL was first released to the Australian market the 256/64 and 512/128 plans were by far the most commonly used. Most people have now moved on from them in less than 10 years.

NBNCo's greatest impediment is how they manage wholesale.


----------



## IFocus

Stephen Long summarized the 4 Corners NBN quite well on Mondays Drum, Malcolm Turnbull also made an appearance but had to talk over people as they quoted probability numbers at him in answer to his questions.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2011/04/11/3188432.htm


----------



## trainspotter

IFocus said:


> Stephen Long summarized the 4 Corners NBN quite well on Mondays Drum, Malcolm Turnbull also made an appearance but had to talk over people as they quoted probability numbers at him in answer to his questions.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2011/04/11/3188432.htm




Poor old Malcolm ....... reminded me of a Pink Floyd song called "The Thin Ice" from the album "The Wall".

"You slip out of your depth and out of your mind / With your fear flowing out behind you / As you claw the thin ice."

He was clearly out of his depth on this one and spouted nonsense rhetoric.


----------



## drsmith

trainspotter said:


> Poor old Malcolm .......



I would prefer to see Malcolm in a shadow finance role with Joe Hockey put in charge of the Coalition's footy tipping competition, but that's another topic for another day.


----------



## IFocus

drsmith said:


> I would prefer to see Malcolm in a shadow finance role with Joe Hockey put in charge of the Coalition's footy tipping competition, but that's another topic for another day.





Abbott as Prime Minister with Turnbull as Treasurer I still break out in a cold sweat re Abbott but that would be the best I could imagine for a Coalition Government.


----------



## drsmith

IFocus said:


> Abbott as Prime Minister with Turnbull as Treasurer I still break out in a cold sweat re Abbott but that would be the best I could imagine for a Coalition Government.



Tony Abbott's biggest weakness (a bit like Julia) is you don't know what he actually stands for.

Even with Malcolm Turnbull as Shadow Treasurer, they would still have the formidable task of finding a Bill Gates amongst the rest of them.


----------



## Julia

drsmith said:


> Tony Abbott's biggest weakness (a bit like Julia) is you don't know what he actually stands for.
> .



That's certainly true with regard to so called climate change in that he has changed his position multiple times.

But on other matters, isn't he quite straightforward?  i.e. very conservative, devoutly Christian, anti abortion, anti euthanasia, anti illegal immigrants etc.

I think he's way more clear about what he stands for than is Ms Gillard who seems willing to change her 'beliefs' according to the politically expedient flavour of the time.


----------



## trainspotter

drsmith said:


> Tony Abbott's biggest weakness (a bit like Julia) is you don't know what he actually stands for.
> 
> Even with Malcolm Turnbull as Shadow Treasurer, they would still have the formidable task of finding a Bill Gates amongst the rest of them.




Hard to believe he was a lawyer, investment banker than the chair of OzEmail and Goldman Sachs ??? 

Lost me when he told futurist Mark Pesce he needed to “lay off the Kool-Aid” with respect to the technology. Harumph !


----------



## So_Cynical

sptrawler said:


> How can it present the facts without political rhetoric, when Conroy is involved and the the FACT is no one can give us a genuine costing. Add to that no business case or cost base analysis.






sails said:


> It was a lovely touchy feely show about a school using it for teaching purposes, the CSIRO would like it, someone else wanted it for their kids to play games  a doctor and patient having a less distruptive online consultation.  But no mention of cost to the taxpayer - it came across as if it was going to be free to all.  How lovely...




Perhaps its not about the money...perhaps its about a government actually delivering what's needed, what's impossible for the private sector to build/finance, perhaps its about a fair go for all Australians regardless of where they choose to live. :aus:


----------



## sptrawler

Fortunately Labor will be hammered so badly in the next election, the three stoogies could win it. The other saving grace is the greens aligning themselves with labor will crash and burn with them. Whereas if they weren't alighned they would pick up a huge swing.
Getting back to the N.B.N Conroy has confirmed all the speculation we raised a year ago. They cleaned up when they sold Telstra and now they have basically abused their power to to change the laws which were put in to weaken Telstra so their N.B.N can't be competed with. It borders on immoral.
Actually just about all the legislation put in place to force Telstra to give competition a free ride on Telstra, with the aid of the ACCC. Has been reversed to allow the N.B.N to face no competition especially from Telstra. Why because it is a flawed business model and can't face competition.
Conroy even admitted it is better to spend $36 billion than give Telstra $20 billion and compete against them.
Well this forum has called the N.B.N pretty well upto now. 
My next call is that the process will be so slow and the take up so low, remember they are doing country areas first. After the next election there will be a huge rethink and Telstra wholesale(who still own the infrastructure) will be given the ownership of the installed fibre. This will be done on the understanding that they continue with the roll out to commercially viable consumers eg commerce, business and guvment.
It may work out sensible despite the labor idiots.


----------



## So_Cynical

sptrawler said:


> Fortunately Labor will be hammered so badly in the next election, the three stoogies could win it. The other saving grace is the greens aligning themselves with labor will crash and burn with them. Whereas if they weren't alighned they would pick up a huge swing.
> Getting back to the N.B.N Conroy has confirmed all the speculation we raised a year ago. They cleaned up when they sold Telstra and now they have basically abused their power to to change the laws which were put in to weaken Telstra so their N.B.N can't be competed with. It borders on immoral.
> Actually just about all the legislation put in place to force Telstra to give competition a free ride on Telstra, with the aid of the ACCC. Has been reversed to allow the N.B.N to face no competition especially from Telstra. Why because it is a flawed business model and can't face competition.
> Conroy even admitted it is better to spend $36 billion than give Telstra $20 billion and compete against them.
> Well this forum has called the N.B.N pretty well upto now.
> My next call is that the process will be so slow and the take up so low, remember they are doing country areas first. After the next election there will be a huge rethink and Telstra wholesale(who still own the infrastructure) will be given the ownership of the installed fibre. This will be done on the understanding that they continue with the roll out to commercially viable consumers eg commerce, business and guvment.
> It may work out sensible despite the labor idiots.




Dude what are you smoking :bong: 

Telstra fought competition every inch of every step of the way...have a look over there old announcements at the trail of litigation the other telcos had to peruse in order to force Telstra to actually act competitively...over a decade of litigation.

Are you seriously suggesting that Telstra should of been allowed to compete against the NBN? have the NBN lay cables across the road from Telstra for 10's of thousands of miles?....seriously....build 2 NBN's


----------



## sptrawler

Telstra was floated as a *monopoly* by the guvnmnt to get the most amount of money from the mum and dad investors. Then when they had the money the guvnmnt started making laws to enable the overseas multinationals to jump on Telstras network for minimal cost and cherry pick high population areas for maximum return. Rather than force them to install their own infrastructure to compete. 
This made for lazy parasitic competition and discouraged Telstra from spending $ billions of  shareholders money and still have the blood suckers on their backs. But this was fine because the guvnmnt had already picked up $40billion for selling it.
Now you are telling me it is ok for the guvnmnt to legislate to stop a competitor from competing with them. Can't you see the stupidity the N.B.N is in exactly the same position Telstra was. You must be a Conroy fan. 
WHATEVER YOU ARE SMOKING GIVE ME SOME.
I suppose to put it simplisticly . As you said Telstra fought every inch of the way to stop competition getting a free ride on their network. But you are saying it is ok for the Guvnmnt to legislate to stop a competeing network from competeing. Get  real this isn't even pigyback this is real competition the ACCC should be encouraging it. JEEZ THIS IS HARD WORK.


----------



## trainspotter

So_Cynical said:


> Dude what are you smoking :bong:
> 
> Telstra fought competition every inch of every step of the way...have a look over there old announcements at the trail of litigation the other telcos had to peruse in order to force Telstra to actually act competitively...over a decade of litigation.
> 
> Are you seriously suggesting that Telstra should of been allowed to compete against the NBN? have the NBN lay cables across the road from Telstra for 10's of thousands of miles?....seriously....build 2 NBN's




Ummmmmmmmmm did you even watch the program? The "original" concept was to build nodes on every street corner (FTTN) for 4.6 billion which is what Labor took to the election and was voted in on (Rudd) Then from there it was up to the retailers (Telstra)to hook the shiny blue cable up to the houses (FTTP) Telstra was seeking 20 billion in compensation to shutdown their copper network etc. You did watch the program didn't you or were you out the back hooking on the broadleaf entertainment plant?

It was then decided by the government that it did not want Telstra to compete with or receive any compensation so they decided to go it alone and build the worlds most expensive per capita EVER in the history of the world. So 4.6 billion PLUS 20 billion compensation was only 24.6 billion spent for the NATION BUILDING exercise rather than the 36 billion PLUS blowouts it is going to cost now. It was up to PRIVATE ENTERPRISE to sell and install the shiny blue cable to the homes from the nodes and up to the people if they wanted to connect or not (freedom of choice)

As for being "fair to all Australians", I hardly think so .......... it was discussed in great length as to the people that live in the city will be paying more than they should for high speed internet to "compensate" for the people who live in the country to "spread" the overall cost to the proletariat. How is this fair? Or do you live in some Orwellian dream where all animals are equal?

_"Remember, comrades, your resolution must never falter. No argument must lead you astray. Never listen when they tell you that Man and the animals have a common interest, that the prosperity of the one is the prosperity of the others. It is all lies. Man serves the interests of no creature except himself. And among us animals let there be perfect unity, perfect comradeship in the struggle. All men are enemies. All animals are comrades"_ - Animal Farm


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

trainspotter said:


> It was then decided by the government that it did not want Telstra to compete with or receive any compensation so they decided to go it alone and build the worlds most expensive per capita EVER in the history of the world. So 4.6 billion PLUS 20 billion compensation was only 24.6 billion spent for the NATION BUILDING exercise rather than the 36 billion PLUS blowouts it is going to cost now. It was up to PRIVATE ENTERPRISE to sell and install the shiny blue cable to the homes from the nodes and up to the people if they wanted to connect or not (freedom of choice)



Someone watched, but didn't listen. Here's an exert from the transcript:

_STEPHEN CONROY: Over the course of the period of the tender, the GFC absolutely crashed the liquidity in the financial markets. So many of the companies that had indicated that they were - would be willing participants had no funding.

STEPHEN LONG: And to make matters worse, the Government received some shocking legal advice.

STEPHEN CONROY: If we were to go ahead *with the fibre to the node proposal, we would essentially have to, not to put too scientific a point on it, cut the copper. That would've meant effectively that we would've appropriated Telstra's property rights, and under our constitution if you- you have to have fair compensation if you take someone's property rights. And no expert in the field, nowhere in the legal field, commercial field, would give us a suggestion that the sort of bill you'd pay to Telstra was anything less than $15-20 billion*.

STEPHEN LONG: Plus, the expert panel advising the Government warned that a company - read *Telstra - could retaliate by building its own separate network in profitable city areas, killing the value of the fibre to the node investment*.

STEPHEN CONROY: The *Government could spend $15 billion to build a fibre to the node network, pay $15-20 billion to Telstra for compensation, and then Telstra could take that money and build a fibre to the home network past you and strand 70 per cent of $15 billion on the side of the road*.

STEPHEN LONG: And Phil Burgess says that's exactly what Telstra would have done

PHIL BURGESS: Absolutely, that's the way competition works. The only way it'll be stopped is if they have laws that prevent it.

STEPHEN LONG: A month after Telstra was excluded, the panel of experts delivered its report. It said none of the tenders was "...sufficiently well developed to present a value for money outcome."

Labor's election promise of a high speed national broadband network was in disarray. Stephen Conroy's response? To jump on a plane. It was the only way he could get to the prime minister.

STEPHEN CONROY: So on the plane between Sydney and Melbourne and then the next morning on the plane from Melbourne up to Brisbane, we went through what all of the possible options were, what the challenges would be.

STEPHEN LONG: Conroy's pitch - bypass Telstra and build an entirely new fibre network all the way to the home. An option the panel of experts had said was the best "future proof" solution._


----------



## trainspotter

NBN Co is in talks with the *Leighton Holdings Ltd *and Siemens joint venture, Silcar, regarding a prime contractor role, according to a report in The Australian Financial Review newspaper. 

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...-report-pd20110413-FURVB?OpenDocument&src=hp6

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy may have cleared the air on how the current framework for the $36 billion national broadband network came into being but it’s the boss of NBN Co, Mike Quigley – the man running the show with regards to the construction of the network – who is facing the hard questions at the moment. The construction process is already reportedly *four months behind schedule* thanks to a bungled tender process which has claimed casualties on the NBN Co’s executive ranks. Quigley is apparently doing the rounds to convince all involved that *the wheels aren’t coming off just yet* and a new tender process is on its way. 

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...de-oil-refinery-pd20110413-FUSGR?OpenDocument

INVESTORS and analysts are sceptical about *Leighton Holdings' *profit forecast for the next financial year. And there is lingering concern over whether it has raised enough capital. *One day after Leighton unveiled a record loss of $427 million, *more than $1 billion in writedowns and a discounted $757m capital raising, criticism continued to dog the group.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/leighton-forecast-doubts/story-e6frg8zx-1226038108455


----------



## trainspotter

Not sure what you are driving at zzaaxxss3401? Telstra was to receive compensation around 15 - 20 billion fact. Government did not want competition fact. Government did not want to compete with Telstra fact. Under the original "model" Government was to build to node only and private enterprise was to link to houses fact. 

Someone read, but didn't understand.

Yes yes yes Telstra might have cherry picked the eyeballs out of it with their compensation money and "perhaps" installed a secondary fibre optic cable rendering the governemnt one useless ?? We will never know now will we !!!


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

trainspotter said:


> Not sure what you are driving at zzaaxxss3401?



IF the NBN comes past my door, I'll be saying "Connect me baby!".

My point is:
There is limited or no public transport in the country - fact.
There is limited or no access to high-speed broadband in the country - fact.
There are sh*t roads in the country - fact.
There are limited hospital facilities and services in the country - fact.
There is limited educational services for students in the country - fact.
There are higher petrol, food, electricity and internet in the country - fact.
Yet, those living in the country still pay the same % in tax as everyone else - fact.

Country people have been subsidising the cities for years. Finally, those living in the cities will have to subsidise the folks living in the country for a change. Country Victorian tax-payers have already paid for Melbourne's sprawling mess of roads, it's desal plant, and it's Myki fiasco for what benefit to them? Melbourne councils allow market-gardens to be leveled for more houses, only to put brick boxes (with no verandahs), with black roofs and huge air conditioners - increasing the demand for power.

If the roads, hospitals, food prices, and electricity costs aren't going to improve, then at least there's a chance that broadband might. I can then teleconference for work, rather than spending 2 days driving to and being stuck in traffic in Melbourne.


----------



## trainspotter

zzaaxxss3401 said:


> IF the NBN comes past my door, I'll be saying "Connect me baby!".
> 
> My point is:
> There is limited or no public transport in the country - fact.
> There is limited or no access to high-speed broadband in the country - fact.
> There are sh*t roads in the country - fact.
> There are limited hospital facilities and services in the country - fact.
> There is limited educational services for students in the country - fact.
> There are higher petrol, food, electricity and internet in the country - fact.
> Yet, those living in the country still pay the same % in tax as everyone else - fact.
> 
> Country people have been subsidising the cities for years. Finally, those living in the cities will have to subsidise the folks living in the country for a change. Country Victorian tax-payers have already paid for Melbourne's sprawling mess of roads, it's desal plant, and it's Myki fiasco for what benefit to them? Melbourne councils allow market-gardens to be leveled for more houses, only to put brick boxes (with no verandahs), with black roofs and huge air conditioners - increasing the demand for power.
> 
> If the roads, hospitals, food prices, and electricity costs aren't going to improve, then at least there's a chance that broadband might. I can then teleconference for work, rather than spending 2 days driving to and being stuck in traffic in Melbourne.




Excellent retort zzaaxxss3401. Now wouldn't it be better if the Guvmint spent 36 billion dollars on all of the points you have raised BEFORE they whack a shiny blue cable around this great country of ours? I would vote for that irrespective of which political persuasion they represent.


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

http://www.theage.com.au/business/p...b-homes-plan-for-werribee-20110413-1ddcs.html

There appear to be a few frustrated City-zens... what shall they do? Unfortunately, I can but sigh and suggest that this is what happens when you choose (or are forced) to live in the city. I can't think of anything worse than having my house butted up against my neighbour's house and then be forced to commute hours each week just to get to work.

If they're spending 3 hours per day (including waiting for a train or sitting in traffic) just to get to work, that's an extra 15 hours per week they are spending for the same income. Assuming $80,000 pa they could take a $58,000 pa job in the country for exactly the same $/h return and spend more time with their family. Plus they would have lower (non tax-deductible) costs if you consider parking, petrol / travel ticket and medical bills (for stress).

If businesses had access to high speed fibre, they wouldn't need expensive buildings in the city. The same emails, documents and computer programs can be written anywhere. The same spreadsheet calculations work in the country. They wouldn't need a transport distribution centre in the Docklands - Portland has a natural port far deeper than that of Melbourne's and no need to dredge it and it can all be tracked via GPS just down the road. The list goes on.

But then again... why would I want to congest MY country town with City folk! 

I wish someone (independent and factual) could come up with a total cost-benefit analysis for the NBN.


----------



## Julia

We could have a whole separate thread on city versus country.

To be realistic about it, if you choose to live in the country, because you like the space, lack of traffic snarls, high density living etc., then you accept the disadvantages as well.

Don't expect that you should have eg the quality of medical care you would get in a teaching hospital, or the best quality education, and on that same basis don't expect in a country with the geography of Australia you should get the same level of technology.


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

Julia said:


> We could have a whole separate thread on city versus country.



Yep - agreed.



Julia said:


> To be realistic about it, if you choose to live in the country, because you like the space, lack of traffic snarls, high density living etc., then you accept the disadvantages as well.



Why? I don't think you are being realistic. Do you think city people live in the city because they like traffic snarls, high density living, etc... or are you suggesting that everyone in the city should stop complaining about the congestion / poor public transport / lack of police / crime / house prices because it's simply a "disadvantage" of the city?

Either way, according to you, if you don't want the NBN or agree with the price - suck it up! The current government was elected by the majority of the people (under KRudd) and they have elected to spend our tax payers money on the NBN. You don't have a choice.



Julia said:


> Don't expect that you should have eg the quality of medical care you would get in a teaching hospital, or the best quality education, and on that same basis don't expect in a country with the geography of Australia you should get the same level of technology.




Why shouldn't I expect the same level of quality? I'm still an Australian citizen who pays the same % of tax as you. Or should I ask for a tax discount because I'm clearly not getting the same quality of services as you? 

Who's going to fill your fridge with fresh produce or your cupboard with cereals... come on Julia that is such an "us and them attitude". We can't all live in the city otherwise we'll starve! Your comment is like telling all those people heading away for Easter, to simply stay home. Their lack of open space, clean air and a holiday with the family is clearly the disadvantage for living in the City. 

As I've already stated, too many people are focusing on the cost to tax-payers' for the NBN. Apparently it's just too damn expensive? If you all KNOW it's too expensive, what price is acceptable? And future proof? And doesn't have congestion issues or limited bandwidth?

No one (including the Government) is looking at the individual / combined cost savings that the NBN could deliver - now or in the future. Is it because we simply don't know (but apparently the cost to install it is too much)... or is it because we're all a bunch of wingers, we didn't vote for the NBN and the "lucky / smart country" was all a crock? Another reason why our technology heads overseas and we buy it back as an import.

Gotta run... I have to go milk the cow and tend to the vegetables!


----------



## sptrawler

sptrawler said:


> Like I have said in previous posts, the $40 billion would be better spent on critical infrastucture. Every one over the Easten States will be screaming when the Cooper basin gas reserves run out, they are seriously depleted already.
> Maybe then they will say the money would have been better spent running a gas pipe from the N.W.Shelf. Or running water from the north of the country down to the south and creating a food bowl in the Pilbara and central west coast. The soil around there will grow anything if you can keep the water up to it.
> That sort of thing is productive and nation building. Making the internet faster has negligable net worth to Australia. *Water and Fuel *are going to be the major issues and throwing in desalination plants is only making the so called greenhouse problem worse.
> They could even try putting in wind farms and have hydrogen plants next to them so that the fuel is being made by renewable energy. Then the hydrogen could be used as an energy storage medium. No that would be too sensible. Lets make the internet faster instead. Fools run by Fools




Just a note  to support the above idea. In todays West Australian, it is reported the drought in W.A is that bad Alcoa's alumina refinery which uses water in its process. Is having to truck in 1million litres of water a day because its catchment dams and bores are dry. Also Worsleys alumina refinery further south had to be helped out by the W.A water authority with 1billion litres.
Everyone is having a great time on the back of W.A's resources boom, what happens when it dries up. No pun intended. Well at least you will have high speed internet to surf for a job or some food or water.


----------



## Julia

Julia said:


> We could have a whole separate thread on city versus country.
> 
> To be realistic about it, if you choose to live in the country, because you like the space, lack of traffic snarls, high density living etc., then you accept the disadvantages as well.
> 
> Don't expect that you should have eg the quality of medical care you would get in a teaching hospital, or the best quality education, and on that same basis don't expect in a country with the geography of Australia you should get the same level of technology.






zzaaxxss3401 said:


> Why? I don't think you are being realistic. Do you think city people live in the city because they like traffic snarls, high density living, etc... or are you suggesting that everyone in the city should stop complaining about the congestion / poor public transport / lack of police / crime / house prices because it's simply a "disadvantage" of the city?



So you don't think I'm being realistic?  The point of my post was to suggest you are not being realistic if you think you should be able to enjoy all the advantages of the city when you live in the country.

I wasn't commenting about complaints from people who live in cities, didn't even mention this, so just back off with the outrage about that.
For that matter, no I actually never hear people who live in cities complaining much at all about their access to first class healthcare, top cultural activities, and best education.  Yes, there are the obvious disadvantages of traffic etc and local governments need to address this.



> Either way, according to you, if you don't want the NBN or agree with the price - suck it up!



Why the unnecessarily rude and aggressive tone?  If your argument is sound, you do not need to be rude in presenting it.



> The current government was elected by the majority of the people (under KRudd) and they have elected to spend our tax payers money on the NBN. You don't have a choice.



For a start, the current government was not elected under Mr Rudd, but is a result of the Independents taking their long held revenge on the National Party, and therefore going against the wishes of their electorates to side with Labor.

The Libs actually had the greater first preference vote, so your suggestion that the government was 'elected by the majority of the people' is a misrepresentation of the facts.



> Your comment is like telling all those people heading away for Easter, to simply stay home. Their lack of open space, clean air and a holiday with the family is clearly the disadvantage for living in the City.



What on earth do people going anywhere for Easter holidays have to do with the topic???  Just a silly red herring.


----------



## todster

Julia said:


> So you don't think I'm being realistic?  The point of my post was to suggest you are not being realistic if you think you should be able to enjoy all the advantages of the city when you live in the country.
> 
> I wasn't commenting about complaints from people who live in cities, didn't even mention this, so just back off with the outrage about that.
> For that matter, no I actually never hear people who live in cities complaining much at all about their access to first class healthcare, top cultural activities, and best education.  Yes, there are the obvious disadvantages of traffic etc and local governments need to address this.
> 
> 
> Why the unnecessarily rude and aggressive tone?  If your argument is sound, you do not need to be rude in presenting it.
> 
> 
> For a start, the current government was not elected under Mr Rudd, but is a result of the Independents taking their long held revenge on the National Party, and therefore going against the wishes of their electorates to side with Labor.
> 
> The Libs actually had the greater first preference vote, so your suggestion that the government was 'elected by the majority of the people' is a misrepresentation of the facts.
> 
> 
> What on earth do people going anywhere for Easter holidays have to do with the topic???  Just a silly red herring.




The Libs won 40 odd seats and labor 72 feel free to correct me.


----------



## So_Cynical

Julia said:


> We could have a whole separate thread on city versus country.
> 
> To be realistic about it, if you choose to live in the country, because you like the space, lack of traffic snarls, high density living etc., then you accept the disadvantages as well.
> 
> Don't expect that you should have eg the quality of medical care you would get in a teaching hospital, or the best quality education, and on that same basis don't expect in a country with the geography of Australia you should get the same level of technology.




That's really silly stuff julia...almost as silly as Tranny and sptrawler supporting the concept of 2 NBN's  EVERYONE that lives in the country knows there missing out on stuff EVERYONE knows its a different life and while alot of county folk have little interest in the NBN, its a FACT that it will lead to longer life expectancy's and a better quality of life.

For little country towns all over Australia the NBN  will be alot like a new concrete bridge to replace the old wooden bridge on the only road outa town, alot like the helicopter that fly's in once every 3 months or so to pick up an accident victim and fly them to a real hospital...you really notice change in a little country town because you get 1 decent piece of infrastructure about once every ten years or so.


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical what is so silly about two N.B.N's? We already have one (Telstras), the guvnmnt want to put in a second one then disable the first so they have a monopoly. 
They could leave the existing one there, THAT WOULD BE TWO, but then they would have competition. I really can't see what you are talking about when you say I am being silly? Maybe you could enlighten me.
Actually the guvnmnt is so $h**t scared to leave the existing one they had to draft punitive laws and threaten the competion (Telstra) with exclusion from the 4g spectrum. Maybe you have information I don't. 
As for country people paying the same as city Telstra tried to get the ACCC to allow them to charge a flat access price to the parasites on their network(rather than a low price for the city and a high one for the country). Which would stop them Cherry Picking.
But the ACCC wouldn't let them, now the N.B.N comes along and they are granted the very thing Telstra was denied. Just shows what self serving people they all are. 
Telstra was prepared to spend their money to upgrade the system but wanted assurances that they would get a reasonable return on their investment. The ACCC would not give them that and so the trouble began. Now the guvnmnt is building it they legislate to ensure they have no competition and get a reasonable rate of return. To me there is only one here who looks silly. :


----------



## sails

todster said:


> The Libs won 40 odd seats and labor 72 feel free to correct me.




Hahaha Todster - On the abc's 2010 federal election webpage  it is different:

Labor *72* + 3 indies & 1 green
Coalition = *73* + 1 indie.

Coalition was actually just *ahead* on both* primary votes and seats*. 

 Ms Gillard leads a minority government which means labor didn't win and she isn't an elected PM by the people's choice.  Pretty simple really but Ms Gillard seems to think she has some sort of mandate for major changes with NBN being one of them.

This is how I see our current voting system:

Primary votes = the will of the people
2pp = the will of the parties (doesn't always reflect the primary will of the people)
seats won = who forms government.

The 2pp does seem to fudge the will of the people considerably.  It would be better if one could choose who to preference.  It annoys me having to put any number beside  parties to whom I absolutely don't want to give my preferences.


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

Julia said:


> So you don't think I'm being realistic?  The point of my post was to suggest you are not being realistic if you think you should be able to enjoy all the advantages of the city when you live in the country.



Not many "advantages" of the city that I can think of that I would want to enjoy:
* Perhaps riding a tram with the kids - nope not on the list... Ballarat has an older one around Lake Wendouree and far less crowded and often an empty seat.
* Arts / Opera / Museums / Symphony - on the list.
* Exhibitions at Jeff's shed - on the list.
* Visiting the "big smoke" to see the skyscrapers - maybe on the list
That's about it.

Broadband, medical services, education should be available to everyone across this country not just in the cities. As I stated earlier, I pay the same taxes as everyone else, so why can't I expect the same quality of life (or life expectancy)?



Julia said:


> I wasn't commenting about complaints from people who live in cities, didn't even mention this, so just back off with the outrage about that.
> For that matter, no I actually never hear people who live in cities complaining much at all about their access to first class healthcare, top cultural activities, and best education.  *Yes, there are the obvious disadvantages of traffic etc and local governments need to address this.*



I certainly wasn't raging at you Julia, merely suggesting that if I can't complain about the lack of broadband in the country, then commuters in the city can't complain about lack of public transport and/or congestion.

Question: Why do we have traffic problems in the City (all cities)?
Answer: The local council / City Planners failed to plan!
Once again my tax payers' money is going to widen a road or divert traffic because no one has been planning the road infrastructure. They'll fix the symptom, but not the cause.

Now I know why I don't have access to better medical equipment or a University - the funding has been spent on fixing your road. The NBN is a future-proof piece of infrastructure for Australia, if it's allowed to be installed. Finally someone is planning for OUR future... hoorah!



Julia said:


> What on earth do people going anywhere for Easter holidays have to do with the topic???  Just a silly red herring.



Not a red herring... if you want to go away for Easter (out of the City), you'll no doubt want to drive there, eat there, sleep there and fill up your car along the way. When you get there, you'll expect a hot shower (powered by gas / electricity). You might even want to use a mobile phone along the way to tell your friends you're almost there. You expect these services to exist. But you say that country people shouldn't expect the same level of quality as the city for medical / education / broadband because they live in the country. On that note then, I'll go stoke the fire, put the billy on and await your arrival. Hopefully, the horse doesn't throw a shoe on the way. 

------------------
For all those out there that are quite happy for their local council to fix the endless issues associated with City life (crime, congestion problems)  by dipping into the big pool of tax-payers' money available, perhaps you should read Section 9 of the Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act 1999 in order to be better informed.

It states that the object of the Telecommunications Universal Service Obligation (USO) is to ensure that:
* the standard telephone service; and
* payphones; and
* prescribed carriage services; and
* digital data services
*are reasonably accessible to all Australians on an equitable basis, wherever they reside or carry on business*. The section also states that the USO should be fulfilled as economically as possible and that *any losses involved in its provision should be shared among carriers*.

The Act gives the Minister the power to designate a universal service provider with primary responsibility for delivery of the USO. Telstra is the current universal service provider, although the legislation allows the Minister to declare two or more carriers as universal service providers, or regional service providers, with appropriately limited responsibilities.

------------------
NOW before you all start jumping up and down screaming: "...the USO should be fulfilled as economically as possible...", the alternative doesn't include a solution that isn't future-proof, has limited capacity, limited range or degrades under heavy load. Yes, I'm referring to the Opposition's WiMax proposal (this isn't a solution). Also before suggesting that the NBN isn't the most economical, bear in mind that providing a service to 90% of the population (in the cities) doesn't meet the USO.


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

sails said:


> Hahaha Todster - On the abc's 2010 federal election webpage  it is different:
> 
> Labor *72* + 3 indies & 1 green
> Coalition = *73* + 1 indie.




Getting WAY OFF TOPIC, but I believe Todster was referring to the number of Liberal votes.

I find it strange that people mention the Independents holding the balance of power in the current Government. They're independent because they are sick of the fighting and party-line-towing that goes on in the major parties. The Coalition is made up of the Liberals PLUS the Nationals, yet you hear nothing from the Nationals - they're obviously happy simply being a "passenger".


----------



## trainspotter

So_Cynical said:


> That's really silly stuff julia...almost as silly as Tranny and sptrawler supporting the concept of 2 NBN's




Bwahahahhahahah aaaa *gasp* ahhahahhhahaahaah *gag* ahhahahaahhaaa

I believe sptrawler has corrected you in the appropriate manner. As you were. 

Can we please try and stay on topic and not lean toward the political arguments thanks.


----------



## sptrawler

Last week wasn't it reported that the guvnmnt, oh sorry N.B.N, were in talks with Leightons to be the prime contractor.   As they say a week in politics is a long time. This just keeps getting better, Telstra must be having a great time sitting back and watching this pantomine.


----------



## IFocus

Julia said:


> The Libs actually had the greater first preference vote, so your suggestion that the government was 'elected by the majority of the people' is a misrepresentation of the facts.




"A misrepresentation of the facts."

I think this is the........Labor actually won the primary vote in the last election all be it by a slim margin for gods sake I have posted the link at least 5 times.

And no I wont be posting it again look it up.


----------



## IFocus

sails said:


> Coalition was actually just *ahead* on both* primary votes *.




No they were not Labor won the primary vote please look it up..........you are believing Abbott propaganda 

OK here it is ........Mumble from the Australian

Labor wins the two party preferred vote 50.1 to 49.9

http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com...wins_the_two_party_preferred_vote_501_to_499/


----------



## trainspotter

IFocus said:


> No they were not Labor won the primary vote please look it up..........you are believing Abbott propaganda
> 
> OK here it is ........Mumble from the Australian
> 
> Labor wins the two party preferred vote 50.1 to 49.9
> 
> http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com...wins_the_two_party_preferred_vote_501_to_499/




Ahhhhhhhhhhhh I do love a true statement of fact. Glorious by it's compunction to dismiss any obsolete furtive notions of meaning. Tis a piece of art. This is why Labor is in power by the slimmest of margins.

Anyhoooooooooo ....... can we get back on to the NBN please?

http://www.zdnet.com.au/optus-vodafone-we-re-getting-4g-too-339309241.htm

*sniff sniff* Is that 4G I can smell? 

_Vodafone Hutchison Australia (VHA) and Optus have issued a muted reaction to Telstra's plans, which were announced early this morning, to upgrade its flagship Next G mobile network to the Long Term Evolution family of fourth generation (4G) wireless technologies, pointing out they were also in trials of the standard._


----------



## boofhead

What 4G is that? The telco business seems to have variable definitions for what 4G really is.


----------



## trainspotter

boofhead said:


> What 4G is that? The telco business seems to have variable definitions for what 4G really is.




I think it is the LTE version ....... they are not telling what speeds they are getting from it though which makes it a bit of a blatant furphy really. Telstra announced it's version this morning and Vodaphone and Optus jumped on the spectrum bandwagon threatening to dump their version of it only in "selected" areas (read capital cities) 

http://www.zdnet.com.au/telstra-plans-lte-upgrade-before-year-end-339309198.htm


----------



## Julia

Re the numbers for the last election:

Tony Crook, the Nationals member for WA sides with the Coalition, giving them 73 to Labor's 72.


----------



## tothemax6

Is it scrapped yet?

I hope it isn't scrapped, indeed since the NBN is so important, I hope the government doubles our taxes and puts 80% of the total tax revenue into building this. In fact, put all our tax rates to 90%, and put 90% of the revenue into the NBN. Government knows better what to do with our money than we do anyway.

For our own goods, of course.


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

tothemax6 said:


> ...Government knows better what to do with our money than we do anyway.
> 
> For our own goods, of course.



Just like the widening of the West Gate Bridge in Melbourne. Another $310 million spent on a wider bridge for ALL Australians, just to push the congestion problem from the Western suburbs, into the Docklands:
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/west-gate-bridge-revamp-blows-out-20110414-1dg0i.html

VicUrban and VicRoads are both useless. Next they'll bring in a congestion charge to pay for the extra trains needed to alleviate the congestion problem. But cause delays on the train system, because it was never meant to cope with an increase number of trains.

Good luck Melbourne you're gonna need it!


----------



## drsmith

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...e-great-nbn-saga/story-e6frgd0x-1226039357795



> Telstra can, of course, then use that money as a treasure chest to buy market share with even more power than under NBN mark I as it saves on the capex. The government has passed legislation to effectively outlaw cherry-picking - which it could have done under NBN mark I - but within weeks we have already seen how toothless that may be with a group of independents fibre operators revealing in CommsDay that they will exploit the perceived inflexibility of NBN Co and continue to pursue greenfields builds.




Comments ?


----------



## sptrawler

The N.B.N has already conceded that Telstra will have to supply smaller greenfield sites. Which one assumes theN.B.N will have to revisit at a later date. 
Maybe the groups that are revisiting the insulation stuff up and retrofixing that, can then continue on and fix up the N.B.N stuff ups. You never know it might be a new guvnmnt dept," Australian Dept of Guvnmnt stuff ups and non natural disasters". Sounds good to me and they already have excellently qualified candidates to step into the top position. Conroy, Gillard and Rudd, actually the selection process would be very difficult as they are all very highly credentialed in the field.
As for Telstra spending big and creaming the opposition, it would be a mistake with this Marxist guvnmnt in power. They would just come up with a new law that says Telsra and only Telstra is not allowed to spend any money on adverstising and for every new subscriber they have to pay a penalty to the Singapore guvnmnt.


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

Can someone please explain the meaning behind the spelling: Guvnmnt?

What am I missing? 

PS - I'm not being funny... I don't understand the "in" joke.


----------



## sptrawler

As far as I can work out it is shorthand used and developed by the unwashed masses who have trouble with spelling large words. There also appears to be a link to our current encumbered party the history of this I am unsure of.


----------



## noco

sptrawler said:


> As far as I can work out it is shorthand used and developed by the unwashed masses who have trouble with spelling large words. There also appears to be a link to our current encumbered party the history of this I am unsure of.




It is probably the same uneducated people who say "should of" instead of "should have".It is the manner in which Australians pronounce certain words and roll them in together I guess. I for one, am not perfect.

Not withstanding the younger generation of course who seem to be developing their own brand of 'Oz LINGO COS' it suits them to be different, hence the shortened version of 'GUVMINT' which is often the way it it is spoken. Some of the younger ones spell words the way they are prononced. They call it literacy and it all goes back to how good our modern school education system is and that is, it is not up to the standard it was decades ago.


----------



## sptrawler

noco said:


> It is probably the same uneducated people who say "should of" instead of "should have".It is the manner in which Australians pronounce certain words and roll them in together I guess. I for one, am not perfect.
> 
> Not withstanding the younger generation of course who seem to be developing their own brand of 'Oz LINGO COS' it suits them to be different, hence the shortened version of 'GUVMINT' which is often the way it it is spoken. Some of the younger ones spell words the way they are prononced. They call it literacy and it all goes back to how good our modern school education system is and that is, it is not up to the standard it was decades ago.




Spot on NOCO and now we have dropped the multiplication tables from our modern school education system. Apparently at the request of the retail industry. LOL


----------



## noco

sptrawler said:


> Spot on NOCO and now we have dropped the multiplication tables from our modern school education system. Apparently at the request of the retail industry. LOL




Yeah, da call it redin, riten and adin up. Good stuff ha.


----------



## noco

Apology to ASF members. My last post is a bit off the beaten track of NBN. It became side tracked with someone seeking an explaination of 'GUVMINT'.


----------



## Happy

noco said:


> It is probably the same uneducated people who say "should of" instead of "should have".It is the manner in which Australians pronounce certain words and roll them in together I guess.
> .....




"should of"  - this one irritates me, but what can I do?

On the other hand any shorter version of communication message increases speed of the Internet, bringing us back to the topic of this thread.


----------



## Julia

sptrawler said:


> As far as I can work out it is shorthand used and developed by the unwashed masses who have trouble with spelling large words. There also appears to be a link to our current encumbered party the history of this I am unsure of.






noco said:


> It is probably the same uneducated people who say "should of" instead of "should have".It is the manner in which Australians pronounce certain words and roll them in together I guess. I for one, am not perfect.
> 
> Not withstanding the younger generation of course who seem to be developing their own brand of 'Oz LINGO COS' it suits them to be different, hence the shortened version of 'GUVMINT' which is often the way it it is spoken. Some of the younger ones spell words the way they are prononced. They call it literacy and it all goes back to how good our modern school education system is and that is, it is not up to the standard it was decades ago.




I don't know where 'guvmint' came from.  I'd have suggested a more appropriate spelling for the common pronunciation of 'government' is 'gummint'.   The 'v' is omitted.
I think WayneL was on to this long ago.

Just laziness and not on a par in the woeful pronunciation stakes with a Prime Minister who says 'hyperbowl' for 'hyperbole'.!


----------



## sptrawler

Thats Classic Julia.


----------



## noco

Happy said:


> "should of"  - this one irritates me, but what can I do?
> 
> On the other hand any shorter version of communication message increases speed of the Internet, bringing us back to the topic of this thread.




I really cannot go along with that analysis. All that will do is confuse the younger generation in the correct spelling and enunciation of the English language.
The Oxford dictionary pronounces language as 'laeggwadz.'
No wonder kids and some adults become confused.
Sorry once again for getting off the track of this thread.


----------



## sptrawler

noco said:


> I really cannot go along with that analysis. All that will do is confuse the younger generation in the correct spelling and enunciation of the English language.
> The Oxford dictionary pronounces language as 'laeggwadz.'
> No wonder kids and some adults become confused.
> Sorry once again for getting off the track of this thread.




Again I have to agree with you Noco, expediance is no excuse for poor english or trying to justify a poor internet decision.
Maybe Conroy could run remedial english lessons for the internet and sms voters. He may need them.
I am not sure but I may have got us back on thread. Conroy, poor communication skills and N.B.N scrap....ped. They are peas in a pod, just have to wait for the next press release. Actually from Conroy's t.v appeareances I have seen he would have to be considered for a spot in the comedy festival, he is a natural.


----------



## noco

Julia said:


> I don't know where 'guvmint' came from.  I'd have suggested a more appropriate spelling for the common pronunciation of 'government' is 'gummint'.   The 'v' is omitted.
> I think WayneL was on to this long ago.
> 
> Just laziness and not on a par in the woeful pronunciation stakes with a Prime Minister who says 'hyperbowl' for 'hyperbole'.!




Julia, upon reading many of your posts over the past three or so years, I have nothing but great admiration for you in the way you express yourself with the English language. 
Keep up the good work. It is always a pleasure reading your posts in the correct manner they are written.
Sorry once again, perhaps we should start a new tread on the use of the English language.


----------



## trainspotter

I use the word GUVMINT in here quite often. Not that much of a stretch really.

*GUV* - Noun. - Shortened from "guvnor" - (British slang) boss, abbreviated version of Governor.
*MINT*- Noun, - A place where the coins of a country are manufactured by authority of the government.

So therefore GUV - MINT is the Boss's of our country who control the printing press* ie *in this instance they are the fools who have decided to spend 36 billion dollars of tax payers funds on a shiny blue cable while the rest of the infrastructure in Australia is crumbling down around our ears. 

*Wal King speaks the truth:-*

_"In my view, these types of clauses are the slippery side of the industry's dark past, where *unions decide who will work on major projects*, when they work and under what conditions they will work. These clauses will severely diminish the competitive benefits of subcontracting. 

"Can you imagine the potential impact of these types of clauses on major infrastructure projects such as the NBN? *It would be, without a shadow of doubt, a complete and unmitigated disaster."* _

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...al-King-pd20110415-FWSY6?opendocument&src=rss


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

Sorry guys... I have really brought this thread way off track.

Back to the main topic: NBN Rollout Scrapped.

Just to recap:
1. The NBN is a lot of money, but not as much as we spend on other infrastructure projects (over the longer term through maintenance / adjustments - such as road networks) for the use by ALL Australians.
2. The NBN is required in order to curtail the need for people to live and work in the cities.
3. A chance for people in the "bush" to stay connected with the rest of Australia / World.
4. The company building the $36 billion system, NBN Co, now has until December 2020 to build the infrastructure across the vast continent, instead of the original June 2018 date. Rollout now covering 93% rather than original 90% of population.
5. Due to the resources boom, labour costs have increased (for all infrastructure projects across Australia) affecting the cost for a dozen regional rollouts - 1/3 the total rollout cost. The tendered costs were too high. A new tender process is likely for a "national rollout contract" rather than the original "multi-contractor tender". Suggestions that the entire project is a train wreck are overwrought.


----------



## awg

zzaaxxss3401 said:


> 5. Due to the resources boom, labour costs have increased (for all infrastructure projects across Australia) affecting the cost for a dozen regional rollouts - 1/3 the total rollout cost. The tendered costs were too high. A new tender process is likely for a "national rollout contract" rather than the original "multi-contractor tender". Suggestions that the entire project is a train wreck are overwrought.




I think you will find that most of the engineering syndicates have taken such a hammerimg on big projects they will be incredibly wary of under-tendering.

Have a look at Leightons, Downer, McMahon, and others

Also from my knowledge of the Industry, there will be be a severe shortage of specialised telecommunications engineers and technicians, which, if not managed could cause delays ( and I doubt it would be well managed)

I personally dont overall support the NBN, in its present form, as it will not be cost efficient, and for other reasons


----------



## wayneL

The correct spelling is in fact "gu'mint". 

The correct spelling of "government" implies respect for this odious institution, whereas gu'mint is derogatory.


----------



## sptrawler

sptrawler said:


> So_Cynical what is so silly about two N.B.N's? We already have one (Telstras), the guvnmnt want to put in a second one then disable the first so they have a monopoly.
> They could leave the existing one there, THAT WOULD BE TWO, but then they would have competition. I really can't see what you are talking about when you say I am being silly? Maybe you could enlighten me.
> Actually the guvnmnt is so $h**t scared to leave the existing one they had to draft punitive laws and threaten the competion (Telstra) with exclusion from the 4g spectrum. Maybe you have information I don't.
> As for country people paying the same as city Telstra tried to get the ACCC to allow them to charge a flat access price to the parasites on their network(rather than a low price for the city and a high one for the country). Which would stop them Cherry Picking.
> But the ACCC wouldn't let them, now the N.B.N comes along and they are granted the very thing Telstra was denied. Just shows what self serving people they all are.
> Telstra was prepared to spend their money to upgrade the system but wanted assurances that they would get a reasonable return on their investment. The ACCC would not give them that and so the trouble began. Now the guvnmnt is building it they legislate to ensure they have no competition and get a reasonable rate of return. To me there is only one here who looks silly. :




WELL suprise, suprise, the ACCC has granted Telstra flat pricing for city and country. One wonders if it is because Telstra could have taken them to court over discrimination. Guess what the parasitic telcos are spewing, poor things can't cherry pick any more. It is a shame Telstra had to wait so long.
Just another example of the Governments abuse of its power, using the ACCC as political tool instead of it being an independent body. There is no morality in this Government at all, they will cripple a publicly listed company with rulings stripping share holder value. 
Then reverse the very same rulings when they are going to apply to a government organisation, the N.B.N. Another nail in the government coffin I think.


----------



## sptrawler

From my understanding of the anouncement, Telstra will get a big boost to their bottom line. Cost of access to the local loop in the cities up from approx $6.60 to $16.00.
The good thing for the parasites is access prices comes down from $100 in country areas to $16.00, a shame they don't have much interest in country areas.

Well thats my understanding. DYOR.


----------



## nulla nulla

Should be another jump in the tls share price next week. DYOR

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...holesale-pricing/story-e6frg8zx-1226044176709

You would expect Telstra would have to put out a revised earnings forecast?


----------



## Calliope

Gillard to appoint "NBN champions";


> JULIA Gillard's top salesman for climate change action and a former judge are on a shortlist of candidates to promote the $36bn NBN.
> 
> The Australian understands the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy is looking to recruit about a dozen "NBN champions" who would be conscripted to publicly spruik the benefits of the Gillard government's $36bn wholesale fibre network, if a yet-to-be-revealed communications strategy gets the green light.
> 
> Tim Flannery, who earns a salary of $180,000 for three days a week as the Prime Minister's chief climate change commissioner, is one of several high-profile names already identified by the department on an unpublished short-list of potential candidates.
> 
> Retired High Court judge Michael Kirby, a former self-confessed luddite who recently set up a Twitter account that has more than 3000 followers, is also among the contenders as a possible NBN champion.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...irby-to-sell-nbn/story-fn59niix-1226044689325

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/all-spin-for-nbn-champions/story-e6frg71x-1226044676877


----------



## trainspotter

Calliope said:


> Gillard to appoint "NBN champions";
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...irby-to-sell-nbn/story-fn59niix-1226044689325
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/all-spin-for-nbn-champions/story-e6frg71x-1226044676877




Me thinks "NBN Myths" is part of the great machine. A "champion" of what exactly?


----------



## sptrawler

That's magic, maybe the whole government including greens and independents could be given one as a token of our appreciation. 

Wish I was clever enough to throw the occasional picture in. Ah maybe when I retire


----------



## So_Cynical

The latest update from NBNco

28 April 2011 Construction to start on NBN in next seven Tasmanian locations.

"NBN Co today released the fibre maps for construction of the national broadband network in the next seven towns in Tasmania – Deloraine, Kingston Beach, George Town, Sorell, South Hobart, St Helens and Triabunna.

A total of approximately 11,150 homes and businesses are within the fibre footprint across the seven sites.

NBN Co has also announced the construction start dates involving a rolling schedule that makes the most efficient use of the workforce given the geographic spread of the locations. Work kicks off in Triabunna"

read more below

http://www.nbnco.com.au/wps/wcm/con...on-NBN-in-next-seven-Tasmanian-locations.html


----------



## So_Cynical

The latest update from NBNco

13 May 2011 NBN Co selects Fujitsu Australia as New Developments deployment partner.

NBN Co has appointed Fujitsu Australia Limited as its prime alliance partner to deliver fibre infrastructure to New Developments.

Fujitsu has the capacity and scale of operations to meet NBN Co’s unique requirement for the deployment of fibre to a large number of discrete locations across the country simultaneously.

Read more below

http://www.nbnco.com.au/wps/wcm/con...a as-New-Developments-deployment-partner.html


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

For what it is worth, an update on the NBN Fiasco from the latte machine of Power, which passes for our gummint, guvmint,guvment, (choose).

The NBN has been elevated to an Abbott Buster.

No matter what governance or fiscal atrocities are revealed, it will be pursued with the vigour of a napoleonic tilt in to the vast freezing wastes of the East.

It will define the Gillard Government.

All we need is Khemlani, who is waiting in the wings at Abbottabad.

gg


----------



## drsmith

Garpal Gumnut said:


> For what it is worth, an update on the NBN Fiasco from the latte machine of Power, which passes for our gummint, guvmint,guvment, (choose).



Do U still reckon it's toast ?


----------



## medicowallet

Oh the dilemma if you are a contractor.

1. Provide the NBN cable at below your rates.
Or 
2. Install set top boxes.

I'd probably try option 2, but I think you need to have contacts to get that... then again you probably need to have contacts or offer "incentives" to get 1 as well.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

drsmith said:


> Do U still reckon it's toast ?




Until it reaches a point where it is more expensive to unwind, than proceed, it is toast.

There are a few more major scandals a brewin, as there usually is, when there is sit down millions being a thrown at the elites.

gg


----------



## sptrawler

Have to keep this one live just for the laugh. Nothing to add other than the ceo is looking uncomfortable. But that is nothing unusual for anyone affiliated with this government.


----------



## trainspotter

Going live in Armidale today.

_Head of product development at NBN Co, Jim Hassell, says the initial testing will start with just *seven customers* in Armidale, which, he says, is not enough.

But he says that number will expand.

"Over our five first-release sites, we'll have about 1,000 customers," he said.

"We expect at Armidale that up to the end of September, that would be about 200._

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/18/3219637.htm?site=newcastle

Would you not place it in the areas that need it most first (CBD Business Hubs) and with the highest density so you can get the CASHFLOW income stream??? HUH ????


----------



## dutchie

trainspotter said:


> 200.[/I]
> 
> Would you not place it in the areas that need it most first (CBD Business Hubs) and with the highest density so you can get the CASHFLOW income stream??? HUH ????




Why worry, it already has a cash flow income stream - its called the Australian taxpayer!


----------



## trainspotter

*NBN boss 'target of smear campaign' says Conroy *

Alcatel-Lucent was fined $US137 million ($A130 million) last December after a US Securities and Exchange

Commission (SEC) and Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation found it had paid bribes to government officials in Costa Rica and other countries to secure contracts.

Mr Quigley was the firm's Americas president, then president and chief operating officer of the multinational firm between 2001 and 2006, when the events took place.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/business/bre...oy/story-e6frfkur-1226058340165#ixzz0oGNZJRqL


----------



## nulla nulla

Of course that would never happen in Australia, an employee paying bribes to an overseas dictator and his family by way of a false transport company to ensure the sales of Austraslian grain for instance. Nah, wouldn't happen.


----------



## IFocus

nulla nulla said:


> Of course that would never happen in Australia, an employee paying bribes to an overseas dictator and his family by way of a false transport company to ensure the sales of Austraslian grain for instance. Nah, wouldn't happen.




Good memory


----------



## noco

Gillard, Conroy and Windsor made a big deal out the NBN connection in Armidale today with just 7 connections out of about 2500 houses.
Would it not be reasonable to expect that the people of Armidale would have known about this for weeks ahead and Gillard can only get 7 connections on opening day and I believe some of those were on trial only.
If they had half a brain, their priority should have been in a more populas zone that would have brought them in some revenue or was it just to appease Windsor in order for Gillard to receive his continued support.


http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...ments/everybody_in_armidale_means_just_seven/


----------



## sails

I wonder if Windsor was one of the seven - but then he doesn't use a computer, so perhaps he is one of the 2,516 who didn't take it up.



> The facts are that 2523 customers now have the capacity to receive a fibre connection in Armidale but only seven have agreed to receive it.




http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...ments/everybody_in_armidale_means_just_seven/


----------



## derty

Ahh yes, trust Andrew Bolt to tell it how it is.

He just fails to mention that the seven are connected as part of the startup, load, speed and equipment testing. This number will be expanded to 40 as testing and trials continue. *The Armidale NBN is not actually open to commercial connections until September.*

http://www.zdnet.com.au/nbn-armidale-launches-for-7-customers-339315262.htm


----------



## trainspotter

*NBN: One of PM's magnificent seven in Armidale*



> SWITCHING to the NBN is like switching on a brand new computer, at least according to one of the seven people in mainland Australia connected to the $36 billion fibre-optic network.
> 
> Stephen Stroud, a former IT manager now semi-retired, lives in the northeast NSW town of *Armidale, part of federal independent MP Tony Windsor's electorate* of New England.
> 
> When Mr Stroud heard an NBN test site would be built in his area, *he rushed to sign up*, and described his reaction upon being connected as "Wow!"
> 
> Mr Stroud, *a committed online gamer*, said yesterday the government's massive investment was justified.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...even-in-armidale/story-e6frg6nf-1226058699002

Now don't go believeing everything you read on the internet. EVERYBODY in Armidale had the chance to sign up to the NBN prior to being operational. Testing was completed weeks ago for speed voracity etc.

Coinicidence that Armidale happens to be Tony Windsors electorate don't you think? Not according to PM Julia Gillard who said the site was picked prior to the election?? How convenient.

I just loved this statement "Mr Stroud said he was convinced that the NBN would bring opportunities to Armidale, and the rest of Australia, *but conceded there was nothing he could do online now that he had not been able to do before. But now it's faster."*

Yep ........ that's just great isn't it ! 36 billion dollars being spent and sending the country broke ................. *even faster *.


----------



## IFocus

Have been aware of Turnbulls change of of rhetoric as of late about the NBN interesting that he hasn't been wedged by Abbott.

"Opposition arguments against national broadband network may soon be academic"



> The mainland launch of the national broadband network in Armidale yesterday by the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, and Communications Minister, Stephen Conroy, sets the scene for announcements in the next few weeks that will entrench the project, both commercially and politically.
> 
> Negotiations between Telstra and the network's builder and operator, NBN Co, are now largely complete.
> 
> Neither board has signed off on the deal that will see Telstra paid $9 billion to progressively close down its copper wire network as the fibre network rolls out, and make its copper wire ducts and pipes available for fibre. But both now have something they can live with: details will come in a market announcement by Telstra after cabinet has approved the deal.




Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/oppo...be-academic-20110518-1et2a.html#ixzz1Mkc0ANwI


----------



## sptrawler

noco said:


> Gillard, Conroy and Windsor made a big deal out the NBN connection in Armidale today with just 7 connections out of about 2500 houses.
> Would it not be reasonable to expect that the people of Armidale would have known about this for weeks ahead and Gillard can only get 7 connections on opening day and I believe some of those were on trial only.
> If they had half a brain, their priority should have been in a more populas zone that would have brought them in some revenue or was it just to appease Windsor in order for Gillard to receive his continued support.
> 
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...ments/everybody_in_armidale_means_just_seven/




Well noco, Telstra must be really getting worried now, thats another $210 down the gurgler. Actually noticed today Telstra is locking in the $9b payment even if it is scrapped. No wonder the price is going up, I for one still think they are pulling off a blinder. The Gov has lost the plot. lol


----------



## IFocus

The "Australian" getting desperate what a headline........

More staff than customers on NBN books



> THE government company rolling out the National Broadband Network has more staff than it does customers.
> 
> NBN Co, which has 784 staff, has at most 607 customers after Julia Gillard and Communications Minister Stephen Conroy launched the first NBN site on the mainland in Armidale yesterday, with just seven users. And none of the network's users is a paying customer yet.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ers-on-nbn-books/story-fn59niix-1226058566125


----------



## trainspotter

*NBN rollout milestones delayed due to deal with Telstra*



> "Even once you've signed the definitive agreements, there's shareholder approvals that need to be done and there's a process for Telstra to go through that shareholder approval, so there'll be some months between definitive agreements being executed and shareholder approval," he said.
> 
> The deal also involves Telstra receiving compensation for eventually shutting down its copper wire network and cable broadband network, which is to be replaced by fibre optic.
> 
> In Tasmania, where the first towns have been connected to the network, *the take-up rate for the new service has been less than 20 per cent *




http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/16/3218170.htm


----------



## Calliope

trainspotter said:


> *
> I just loved this statement "Mr Stroud said he was convinced that the NBN would bring opportunities to Armidale, and the rest of Australia, but conceded there was nothing he could do online now that he had not been able to do before. But now it's faster."
> *



*

The barefoot gambler looks completely disorganised.





*


----------



## trainspotter

Calliope said:


> The barefoot gambler looks completely disorganised.




I reckon !! But but but he can do it faster now.


----------



## sptrawler

Like I said it would appear Telstra is trying to position itself for a change of government. At this point in time things are looking brighter for Telstra than they have for some time. I tend to think this is due to the expectation of a stuff up with the roll out of the N.B.N. The general public must think it is flying along now 7 people in Armidale are connected. Wow at this rate it will take the rest of the year to finish Armidale. 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...to-9bn-agreement/story-e6frg9hx-1226058512799


----------



## derty

trainspotter said:


> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...even-in-armidale/story-e6frg6nf-1226058699002
> 
> Now don't go believeing everything you read on the internet. EVERYBODY in Armidale had the chance to sign up to the NBN prior to being operational. Testing was completed weeks ago for speed voracity etc.



ts, that's just another News Corp attack piece. It doesn't really say much different to Bolt's piece except that they had to sign up to take part in the trial. Which makes sense, you aren't going to pick people at random. I can't see anywhere a comment regarding testing already being completed.

West Armidale was listed as a one of the initial mainland sites as early as March 2010. So unless they are psychic it is pretty safe to say that this is not an appeasement to Windsor.



> First mainland NBN sites announced
> By Suzanne Tindal, ZDNet.com.au on *March 2nd, 2010
> *
> NBN Co has announced the first sites on the mainland to be connected to the National Broadband Network, sites that will be considered "live trial" areas to test network design and construction methods.
> NBN Co's Brunswick site
> 
> The Brunswick site
> (Credit: NBN Co)
> 
> The test sites will allow NBN Co to look at the effect of conditions prevailing in different areas across the country such as terrain, housing type and density, climate, and existing infrastructure.
> 
> The areas that have been chosen are:
> 
> * Part of the Melbourne suburb Brunswick (around 2600 premises)
> * An area of Townsville covering parts of Aitkenvale and Mundingburra (around 3100 premises)
> * Minnamurra and Kiama Downs, south of Wollongong (around 2600 premises)
> * Part of *west Armidale* including the University of New England (around 2900 premises)
> * The rural town of Willunga in South Australia (around 1000 premises)



http://www.zdnet.com.au/first-mainland-nbn-sites-announced-339301446.htm


----------



## trainspotter

derty said:


> ts, that's just another News Corp attack piece. It doesn't really say much different to Bolt's piece except that they had to sign up to take part in the trial. Which makes sense, you aren't going to pick people at random. I can't see anywhere a comment regarding testing already being completed.
> 
> West Armidale was listed as a one of the initial mainland sites as early as March 2010. So unless they are psychic it is pretty safe to say that this is not an appeasement to Windsor.
> 
> http://www.zdnet.com.au/first-mainland-nbn-sites-announced-339301446.htm





Thanks derty ........ lotta half truths and misinformation out there !!


----------



## sptrawler

Does anyone have any upto date figures of how many more people have connected to the N.B.N in the Tassie pilot areas?
By now the locals should be generating a normal trend especialy with the publicity.


----------



## boofhead

http://www.news.com.au/technology/s...eed-breakthrough/story-e6frfro0-1226062824273

Definately worth a read. Basically Jones is flapping his jaws about a laser transmission record and how it renders NBN outdated. Abbot should read about it. Seems neither understand it.


----------



## sptrawler

boofhead said:


> http://www.news.com.au/technology/s...eed-breakthrough/story-e6frfro0-1226062824273
> 
> Definately worth a read. Basically Jones is flapping his jaws about a laser transmission record and how it renders NBN outdated. Abbot should read about it. Seems neither understand it.




Laser is still concentrated light transmission, to be able to deliver it to the required receptor still requires optical fibre. The speed of light is still the fastest medium we have and the N.B.N is the best way of delivering it.
The reason I am against it is, it should be focused to consumers that require it e.g government, large business and anyone that requires rapid large data movements.
Focusing the roll out would cost a fraction of what the government is proposing. The remainder of the estimated $40billion could be used for NATION Building rather than suspect voter building.
Therein lies the problem for Gillard, she has picked up a lemon from Rudd, who picked up the idea from someone with a vested interest(probably from the union power base). 
The problem now is they have alighned their future to the benefits of faster internet, which a lot of people won't see any benefit from because when you only surf like most users and are limited by the speeds of the sites they are visiting.
Against that is the missed opportunity to spend money on something that could fill the gap when mining jobs dry up.
I feel a bit sorry for Julia because she was the only one that could be put in the breach when Rudd had to be thrown out. But she has still got the same uriah heep (pun)


----------



## trainspotter

> *The report is Labor's hard sell to show how the NBN can be used for far more than downloading movies and playing games.*
> 
> It says high-speed and reliable broadband will change the way people do their job and sets a target to have 12 per cent of people tele-working by the end of the decade.
> 
> The Government believes the NBN will provide the confidence for workers and bosses to increase workplace flexibility. An increase in the number of people who spend half their week working from home would be worth between $1.4 billion and $1.9 billion a year and would cut peak hour traffic by 5 per cent, save 120 million litres of fuel and 320,000 tonnes of carbon.




Read more: http://www.news.com.au/technology/w...nt/story-e6frfro0-1226066044247#ixzz0pUV9JEr2

Just LOL at this one. Where do the get this tripe from?


----------



## wayneL

trainspotter said:


> Read more: http://www.news.com.au/technology/w...nt/story-e6frfro0-1226066044247#ixzz0pUV9JEr2
> 
> Just LOL at this one. Where do the get this tripe from?




And if this is so, why can't this happen now?


----------



## Aussiejeff

trainspotter said:


> Read more: http://www.news.com.au/technology/w...nt/story-e6frfro0-1226066044247#ixzz0pUV9JEr2
> 
> Just LOL at this one. *Where do the get this tripe from?*




"Tripe" usually comes from sheep.

I would tend more to call this load of crap "s***e".

"s***e" usually comes from you-know-where.... 

You'll have to guess the missing letters as this post has been heavily censored to avoid a $240 swearing fine.


----------



## trainspotter

wayneL said:


> And if this is so, why can't this happen now?




You got me? How will a shiny blue cable with blindingly fast upload/download make this any different? Not sure if Australia is ready for 12 percent of the workforce to stay at home and tap away at the keyboard?? Productivity for one would go down the toilet.


----------



## IFocus

trainspotter said:


> You got me? How will a shiny blue cable with blindingly fast upload/download make this any different? Not sure if Australia is ready for 12 percent of the workforce to stay at home and tap away at the keyboard?? Productivity for one would go down the toilet.





Modern businesses running KPI's, responsibilities and accountability do it to death these days there is absolutely no escape, don't deliver they sack you, personal experience at a chemical plant in Perth, 350 odd employees about 150 hang off keyboards, if they can get the bandwidth up then quality teleconferencing that works will replace on-site meetings then no need to go to site simple.

One issue I know they do have is running the all the applications on a central servers that go off to 4 sites, bandwidth is a problem and they pay way to much for what they have.

They actually pay for a separate connection to the sites


----------



## sptrawler

Well my call on it is, Conroy is starting to look a lot more stressed and I guess this is due to incomming data on N.B.N takeup and actual non improvements in end user speeds.
I am looking forward to IFocus feedback when it is rolled out to his company, it sounds like a company that is just gagging for the technology. They will probably power ahead when they get connected, I think not.


----------



## bellenuit

There was an article in The Australian today that mentioned that the government (meaning us the taxpayers) will assume more of the risk of the NBN rollout so that the companies quoting to build the network can bring their quotes back into line.  You may recall that the companies who were accused of gouging a few months ago by Conroy mentioned the excessive risk they had to take on in defence of their quotes. 

Well this isn't a zero sum game. If the government takes on more of the risk, then they should be revising their estimates for the total cost of the project upwards. But nothing has been said in that respect.


----------



## sptrawler

trainspotter said:


> You got me? How will a shiny blue cable with blindingly fast upload/download make this any different? Not sure if Australia is ready for 12 percent of the workforce to stay at home and tap away at the keyboard?? Productivity for one would go down the toilet.




Jeez that 12%, will probably be the 12% of retail workers that end up unemployed.
I can't wait to see a brickie building a house on the N.B.N, Or maybe you can just go into a shop and talk to the assistant on webcam and skype, then they can jump in the car and come down to wrap your purchase for you. The kids can stay home and talk to the teachers on skype, shame we just built all the new tuck shops we won't need them.
Yes you will be able to take your high speed laptop to the switchboard and an electrician will be able to talk you through installing a new electrical cct.
Yes I can see a huge carbon reduction with everyone sitting at home on the computer doing everything. It will take all the cars of the road, imagine the savings, fantastic, good on you Conroy and Gillard.


----------



## sails

sptrawler said:


> ...Yes I can see a huge carbon reduction with everyone sitting at home on the computer doing everything....




Even that will need power.  When that's too expensive, how does Conroy expect us to use the internet at all...perhaps he is thinking of pedal power or, if it's windy enough, we could have a windmill in the back yard...lol.


----------



## sptrawler

It's going to be interesting to see how long it is before the government has to intervene to force people to take it up?
If they don't, it will interesting to see how long before there is a public outcry about the waste of money.


----------



## tothemax6

Is this thing dead yet? 

Can anybody quote any labor project that they have taken up since they were last elected, that was actually good, or at least not outright destructive?


----------



## So_Cynical

sptrawler said:


> It's going to be interesting to see how long it is before the government has to intervene to force people to take it up?
> If they don't, it will interesting to see how long before there is a public outcry about the waste of money.




Force them...you gota be kidding?

Im moving house again and have rented in a suburb 15 Km from Sydney CBD and my local exchange only has 3 providers with DSL2, Telstra, Iinet and TPG...Telstra is 100 bucks a month, IInet is full (DSLAM at capacity) so that leaves me with crappy and cheap TPG  with NBN this just wouldn't happen.

Any idiot that seriously thinks everything is great with internet in Australia...really has no freeking idea.


----------



## NBNMyths

noco said:


> Gillard, Conroy and Windsor made a big deal out the NBN connection in Armidale today with just 7 connections out of about 2500 houses.
> Would it not be reasonable to expect that the people of Armidale would have known about this for weeks ahead and Gillard can only get 7 connections on opening day and I believe some of those were on trial only.
> If they had half a brain, their priority should have been in a more populas zone that would have brought them in some revenue or was it just to appease Windsor in order for Gillard to receive his continued support.
> 
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...ments/everybody_in_armidale_means_just_seven/




I go away for a few months and look what happens. We have Andrew Bolt being quoted like he's some sort of objective, facts-based journalist and more anti-NBN spin than you can poke a stick at.

Let's get a few things straight, shall we:

Armidale was chosen as a site long before the last election. It was announced 6 months before, to be precise. Therefore, any suggestion that it was some sort of sweetheart deal with Windsor is demonstrably false.

Next, all of these 1st release sites (Armidale and Kiama NSW, Townsville QLD, Willunga SA and Brunswick VIC) were chosen as the represent the types of areas that NBN will have to install to when the rollout gets into full swing. They are being used to test contractors (each site had a different one), aerial and underground deployment techniques, pit and pipe suitability, backhaul and backend requirements etc.

There is nothing like the NBN operating in Australia, and the suggestion that it be rolled out in cities as a first step is ridiculous. The whole idea of testing outside cities is to ensure that the rollout is down-pat before moving into the heavily populated areas.

Calling for a metro-lead rollout also ignores one of the whole points of doing the NBN: To improve the network across the country. Most cities already have networks far superior to outer suburbs and regions. Some have cable, and most have assorted providers of ADSL2+. Outside the cities, there's no cable and almost zero ADSL2+ competition. Expect these areas to continue to be prioritised as the rollout progresses.

Also note that politically, the 5 test sites are in 2 Labor seats, 2 Coalition seats and 1 Independent seat.


Next, the BS going on about Armidale only having 7 connected customers....

Well DUH. Again, that's the whole point. They are testing the network, and gradually ramping up connections so they can verify their systems and those of the RSPs. RSPs are only permitted to connect a few customers each week in Armidale until the trial finishes in September/October. These trial customers aren't paying for a service, but they must retain their existing ADSL service for the duration of the trial.

NBN have said that they will deliberately be introducing faults into the systems during the trial period, to test response and recovery systems.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Does anyone have any upto date figures of how many more people have connected to the N.B.N in the Tassie pilot areas?
> By now the locals should be generating a normal trend especialy with the publicity.




As of the first week of May, there were 723 connections in Tassie, of 4,000 passed premises, which equates to an 18% takeup after 9 months of availability.

To put that into perspective, when ADSL was rolled out in 2000-2002, by the end of 2002 there was just 3% takeup across Australia despite it being available at 86% of premises.

In Tassie though, there is still only 4 ISPs offering services. There are no migration plans (ie if you have an ADSL contract, you're stuck with it). Telstra have only connected 100 trial customers, and will not connect any more until they are done testing. Optus aren't participating at all until they start up on the mainland, and neither are TPG.

There is also no phone service over the NBN in Tassie yet, so if you want to keep your phone number you need to keep the copper until the phone systems are online.


----------



## DB008

So_Cynical said:


> Im moving house again and have rented in a suburb 15 Km from Sydney CBD and my local exchange only has 3 providers with DSL2, Telstra, Iinet and TPG...Telstra is 100 bucks a month, IInet is full (DSLAM at capacity) so that leaves me with crappy and cheap TPG  with NBN this just wouldn't happen.
> 
> Any idiot that seriously thinks everything is great with internet in Australia...really has no freeking idea.




I think that you've been taken for a ride mate.

Tesltra, $100 a month for ADSL2? Yeah right....And why do you need ADSL2, what is wrong with vanilla ADSL? http://go.bigpond.com/broadband/69-plan/

IInet, DSLAM, what's wrong with that? 
http://www.iinet.net.au/broadband/plans.html

TPG, good plans and a fair few of my mates use TPG for the generous download limits. Even with TPG ADSL2+ ($29.00) and line rental, it's under $55 per month
http://www.tpg.com.au/products_services/adsl2plus_pricing.php

I use Internode in Sydney (which l think is DSLAM too) and haven't had any problems. My speed has also been recorded throughout this forum, pretty fast.

I'm in Budapest right now and here is the speed l'm getting (through WiFi). Cost is bundled with home line, broadband and pay-tv = $76 per month, that's expensive over here.


----------



## trainspotter

I see we have our NBN Champion back with us after his sabbatical at Camp Conroy.



> The Australian understands the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy is looking to recruit about a dozen *"NBN champions" *who would be conscripted to publicly spruik the benefits of the Gillard government's $36bn wholesale fibre network, if a yet-to-be-revealed communications strategy gets the green light.
> 
> Tim Flannery, who earns a salary of $180,000 for three days a week as the Prime Minister's chief climate change commissioner, is one of several high-profile names already identified by the department on an unpublished short-list of potential candidates.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...irby-to-sell-nbn/story-fn59niix-1226044689325

In response to NBNMyths post about country installation prior to city due to "down pat" control mechanisms beggars belief !!!!!!!



> There is nothing like the NBN operating in Australia, and the suggestion that it be rolled out in cities as a first step is ridiculous. The whole idea of testing outside cities is to ensure that the rollout is down-pat before moving into the heavily populated areas.




Would it not be better to run through CBD first as well as outer lying suburbs (including schools) FIRST because then the "down pat" issues can be tested on a much broader spectrum of business's, homes, demographics, schools, people at a FRACTION of the cost ???????????????? Once proven that it is all tickety boo in shiny blue cable land THEN release it to the great unwashed masses in the country areas who can watch pr0n and play games faster.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> I see we have our NBN Champion back with us after his sabbatical at Camp Conroy.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...irby-to-sell-nbn/story-fn59niix-1226044689325
> 
> In response to NBNMyths post about country installation prior to city due to "down pat" control mechanisms beggars belief !!!!!!!
> 
> Would it not be better to run through CBD first as well as outer lying suburbs (including schools) FIRST because then the "down pat" issues can be tested on a much broader spectrum of business's, homes, demographics, schools, people at a FRACTION of the cost ???????????????? Once proven that it is all tickety boo in shiny blue cable land THEN release it to the great unwashed masses in the country areas who can watch pr0n and play games faster.




Couldn't you find a more recent list of who the actual broadband champions are, rather than an old (and innaccurate - fancy that) article from the Oz?

Here, let me help:
http://www.nbn.gov.au/media-centre/broadband-champions/

Funny, I don't see Flannery or Kirby on there.....

How on earth does testing in a regional centre begger belief? It's basic common sense when you're rolling out a network across the country that you have trial sites that include the topographies and conditions that will exist throughout the rollout.

Armidale is a major regional centre, got the highest opt-in rate and will probably get one of the highest takeup rates of anywhere in the country, especially given that it's a university town. It is an absolutely perfect choice for a test site. The other rural test site of Willunga in SA also got a ~90% opt-in rate.

There is a inner-suburban area being tested (Brunswick in VIC), and surprise surprise, it has the lowest opt-in rate of any of the test sites. So much for your theory.

It is the rural and regional areas who currently have the worst and most expensive services. If I had my way, the cities that already have access to HFC cable would be the _last_ areas to be covered in the rollout. Unfortunately, that probably won't be the case.

Now would you like to argue the NBN based on any factual information, or just stick to your fantasy spin? I'm sure Alan Jones can fill you in about the latest advances in _frikkin laaaasssserrrrs_ that will make the NBN obsolete, and LOLbolt can do the same about _da wireless_.


----------



## drsmith

It will be interesting to see how long it takes, how much it ultimately costs and even if it's ever completed.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/busines...ill-prove-costly/story-e6frfig6-1226067514549


----------



## sails

drsmith said:


> It will be interesting to see how long it takes, how much it ultimately costs and even if it's ever completed.
> 
> http://www.heraldsun.com.au/busines...ill-prove-costly/story-e6frfig6-1226067514549




This is what really gets under my skin with both "climate change"  and NBN theorists.  They all promote their "science" with seeming little thought to practicality.  They don't seem to care whether or not Australia can afford a carbon tax or a NBN.

We would all like to have expensive things, but just because we can reason they are good, doesn't mean that we can blow the budget at the expense of other essentials required for every day life.

If the NBN was a fraction of the cost, I don't think there would be too many objections. I believe the major objection is that Australia is falling deeper and deeper into debt every day and this is not the time to be spending an extraordinary amount of funds on a project with such a massive price tag.


----------



## DB008

drsmith said:


> It will be interesting to see how long it takes, how much it ultimately costs and even if it's ever completed.




Here Here!

Maybe the Government should have launched 10 communication satellites at 200-300 million a pop would have been cheaper and still provided the same coverage?


----------



## medicowallet

sails said:


> This is what really gets under my skin with both "climate change"  and NBN theorists.  They all promote their "science" with seeming little thought to practicality.  They don't seem to care whether or not Australia can afford a carbon tax or a NBN.
> 
> We would all like to have expensive things, but just because we can reason they are good, doesn't mean that we can blow the budget at the expense of other essentials required for every day life.
> 
> If the NBN was a fraction of the cost, I don't think there would be too many objections. I believe the major objection is that Australia is falling deeper and deeper into debt every day and this is not the time to be spending an extraordinary amount of funds on a project with such a massive price tag.




What gets me is that there is no way that productivity will ever be increased to warrant a $50 billion pricetag.

I know multitudes of small business owners, none of which require anything greater than what they currently have.

I know many uni students, who are looking forward to better gaming pings and faster piracy.


All I can see from NBN is consumption, no productivity gains, as any decent sized business already has fast internet.

Stupid government, sold this to the stupid populace.


----------



## IFocus

drsmith said:


> It will be interesting to see how long it takes, how much it ultimately costs and even if it's ever completed.
> 
> http://www.heraldsun.com.au/busines...ill-prove-costly/story-e6frfig6-1226067514549




The realities for a project this size and complexity is that it is unlikely to be on time and wont be on cost. Time and cost will be politicized to death but success engineering wise is about it working, being maintainable and low fault rate.

Before all anti Gov what ever's start squawking like........well a bunch of Galah’s go look at the numbers and time around building the Sydney opera House.

From what I have seen so far the NBN Co seem quite competent


----------



## sails

IFocus said:


> The realities for a project this size and complexity is that it is unlikely to be on time and wont be on cost. Time and cost will be politicized to death but success engineering wise is about it working, being maintainable and low fault rate.
> 
> Before all anti Gov what ever's start squawking like........well a bunch of Galah’s go look at the numbers and time around building the Sydney opera House.
> 
> From what I have seen so far the NBN Co seem quite competent




Maybe for a fiscally responsible government, but with this government with it's spirraling debt and multitude of other seemingly badly managed policies, it leaves one with many reseverations as to their ability to manage such large infrastructure with such a massive price tag.


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> Here Here!
> 
> Maybe the Government should have launched 10 communication satellites at 200-300 million a pop would have been cheaper and still provided the same coverage?




Bu then it wouldn't, would it? The NBN already includes 2 state-of-the-art Ka band satellites at $500 million each. These have a total capacity of 80Gbps each (60 down, 20 up).

So launching 10 would cost $5bn, and give a total capacity for the country of 600Gbps download.

There are 10 million premises in Australia, so that would be an average 0.06Mbps each, assuming perfect conditions and zero loss.

Quick, someone suggest it to Andy and Alan. They're probably silly enough to run with it.


----------



## DB008

Stupider things have been suggested NBNMyths, ie, free set top boxes for inflated prices.


----------



## JTLP

Is NBNMyths one of the government's champions?

This guy is a little too 'clued' in about this bumbling mess to be a regular joe.

Oh geez - I can't wait for Australia to steam ahead with this one!


----------



## IFocus

sails said:


> Maybe for a fiscally responsible government, but with this government with it's spirraling debt and multitude of other seemingly badly managed policies, it leaves one with many reseverations as to their ability to manage such large infrastructure with such a massive price tag.




Sails in the end it will be down to the NBN Co to manage the project and from what I have seen they do have some quality people.


----------



## IFocus

JTLP said:


> Is NBNMyths one of the government's champions?
> 
> This guy is a little too 'clued' in about this bumbling mess to be a regular joe.
> 
> Oh geez - I can't wait for Australia to steam ahead with this one!




Personally I prefer opinions, vague negative comments and hearsay rumors from the Herald Sun and Bolt.

Facts and details who needs them...............


----------



## DB008

NBNMyths said:


> Bu then it wouldn't, would it? The NBN already includes 2 state-of-the-art Ka band satellites at $500 million each. These have a total capacity of 80Gbps each (60 down, 20 up).
> 
> So launching 10 would cost $5bn, and give a total capacity for the country of 600Gbps download.




Launch 20 for $10 Billion, still build NBN - but in areas where it needs to be built, not in my street where l have ADSL2+ already.

Advances in technology also mean that by the time the NBN is complete, Ka-Band Sats will be superseded by Q/V Band Sats?

White Paper #8-701 -Satellite Spectrum - An Overview

I think that a hybrid approach might have been the way to go. Not to mention that Australia could have got it's foot in the door in relation to the space side of things.  At the moment, we are nothing.

I guess, as with all politicians, they have no accountability. If they stuff it up, they get voted out and someone else has to clean up their mess.


----------



## JTLP

IFocus said:


> Personally I prefer opinions, vague negative comments and hearsay rumors from the Herald Sun and Bolt.
> 
> Facts and details who needs them...............




IFocus I rarely weigh into these political debates as everyone has them covered (as well as questions to you)...but seriously...you would have to be one of the most die-hard/one-eyed/would run over their own grandmother - Labor supporters i've ever witnessed. 

You can simply not accept that this minority government is a shambles and has done virtually nothing right. If they were all about prosperity and Australia moving forward - they would have responsibly managed the massive inflows coming in via our very favourable lucky land and made "real changes" to ensure this country can thrive once the minerals are gone/China buys us out...

The way they conduct themselves and draft legislations beggars belief. The 'resource rent' tax and carbon tax are 2 prime examples of Labor shooting for the moon and landing nowhere near the stars...rather their 'rocket' went backwards. Can you agree on these points? You don't have to say they were bad ideas (in which they are but that's my opinion) - can you agree they have been grossly mismanaged?

Julia has asked you numerous questions in which you have conveniently side-stepped...no doubt you will do the same to mine...thus confirming you know you're caught out...


----------



## DB008

JTLP said:


> Is NBNMyths one of the government's champions?
> 
> This guy is a little too 'clued' in about this bumbling mess to be a regular joe.




BINGO!

NBNMyths *is* a person who knows way too much for the average Joe, and is, believe it or not, connected to the Government in regards to this project somehow.


Who the f**k knows about Ka-Band Satellites; upload an download speeds, and the rest..... 

Give me a break, NBNMyths is definitely in Conroy's circle, might even be Conroy himself? How was the ski trip in the US with Stokes mate? LOL

Stephen Conroy's skiing freebie


----------



## NBNMyths

JTLP said:


> Is NBNMyths one of the government's champions?
> 
> This guy is a little too 'clued' in about this bumbling mess to be a regular joe.
> 
> Oh geez - I can't wait for Australia to steam ahead with this one!




I'd be quite happy to be one of the "champion", but I'm not high-profile enough unfortunately.

As for my info, it's all in the public domain. The satellite specs, for example, are in the NBN business case.


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> BINGO!
> 
> NBNMyths *is* a person who knows way too much for the average Joe, and is, believe it or not, connected to the Government in regards to this project somehow.
> 
> 
> Who the f**k knows about Ka-Band Satellites; upload an download speeds, and the rest.....
> 
> Give me a break, NBNMyths is definitely in Conroy's circle, might even be Conroy himself? How was the ski trip in the US with Stokes mate? LOL




If only you blokes knew who I really am and what I do for a crust!...

But I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I don't (and have never) worked for the Fed Govt, NBN Co, any telco or any IT company. Nor do I know anyone who does. Nor do I own any shares in any related company, and nor does anyone I know. The site admin can verify my IP address for all of these posts, if they so desire.

Who knows about the NBN satellite specs? Well, anyone who has bothered to follow the NBN information from reliable sources.

Specs for the satellites are listed on page 71 of the NBN corporate plan. There is a plethora of info on the NBN satellites in numerous news articles.

Everything I have posted in this forum is available in the public domain, because that's where I got it all from. It's not hard.


----------



## sails

IFocus said:


> Sails in the end it will be down to the NBN Co to manage the project and from what I have seen they do have some quality people.




IFocus, we can only hope so.  This country is going deeper into debt and anything the Gillard government seems to touch seems to be costly.

I still think the price tag seems more than Australia can afford at this point in time.


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> If only you blokes knew who I really am and what I do for a crust!...
> 
> But I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I don't (and have never) worked for the Fed Govt, NBN Co, any telco or any IT company. Nor do I know anyone who does. Nor do I own any shares in any related company, and nor does anyone I know. The site admin can verify my IP address for all of these posts, if they so desire.
> 
> Who knows about the NBN satellite specs? Well, anyone who has bothered to follow the NBN information from reliable sources.
> 
> Specs for the satellites are listed on page 71 of the NBN corporate plan. There is a plethora of info on the NBN satellites in numerous news articles.
> 
> Everything I have posted in this forum is available in the public domain, because that's where I got it all from. It's not hard.




not for the fed govt???

How about state govt? any other form of government, unions etc.

You are an ALP lackey.


----------



## bellenuit

NBNMyths said:


> There are 10 million premises in Australia, so that would be an average 0.06Mbps each, assuming perfect conditions and zero loss.




Gee NBNMyths. Is one in every two people; men, women and children; online simultaneously in your modelling? And those online are actually interacting 100% of the time with the internet? No pauses to read the screen or to compose responses or to just be doing something else while logged on? 

Perhaps if your modelling was a bit more realistic you wouldn't need such an expensive system as the NBN.


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> What gets me is that there is no way that productivity will ever be increased to warrant a $50 billion pricetag.
> 
> I know multitudes of small business owners, none of which require anything greater than what they currently have.
> 
> I know many uni students, who are looking forward to better gaming pings and faster piracy.
> 
> 
> All I can see from NBN is consumption, no productivity gains, as any decent sized business already has fast internet.
> 
> Stupid government, sold this to the stupid populace.




All I can say, as a small business owner, is that you mustn't know very many if you think all is hunky-dory with internet speeds in Australia. 

And the statement that "any decent sized business already has fast internet" is clear evidence that you should get out more. Apart from the fact it isn't true, you should also look at the cost of getting "fast internet" when you want it. Given its pathetically slow upload speeds, ADSL2+ is completely useless for any digital media-based business, so that leaves cable or fibre. Cable is only available to about 20% of the population. To give you an example for fibre, the quote I received for a fibre connection for me was $19,500 for the connection, and $4,000 per month for a 100Mbps CIR. I'm about 2km from a telephone exchange in a outer suburban area of Sydney. Now I have no doubt that many medium to large businesses are paying that now. Imagine the savings if that business could get a free connection, and pay maybe $300 a month for a high-end NBN connection.

All that aside, given that over the last 15 years typical internet speeds in Australia have increased by about 10,000 times, how do you think those people happy with ADSL2+ _now_ will feel about it in another _15 years_? How do you think business will move to the cloud, when average upload speeds in Australia are only 1Mbps?

The only way to substantially improve internet speeds is to roll out new infrastructure to replace the copper, whether it be with fibre of HFC cable. And the cost of doing either is similar. Even a stop-gap like FTTN would cost a good $15-20bn, plus whatever we'd have to pay to Telstra. So if (as anyone looking objectively would agree) we will certainly need a faster network within the next 10-15 years, what is a better way of getting there? The private sector has demonstrated that it's not interested. They have done no HFC for a decade or more, no fibre, no FTTN, no VDSL2.....

----

You think the NBN could never pay for itself through productivity etc? Well, off the top of my head, we have a GDP of $1.2 Trillion.

Even taking your inflated NBN figure of $50bn (the capex is actually 36), and given a minimum life of 50 years, that amounts to 0.1% of GDP pa in present dollar terms.

You really don't think that a world-class broadband network could add $1bn (0.1%) pa to our economy across the country?

A study into superfast broadband in Seattle found that a network in that city alone would result in economic benefits of US$1bn pa for the city.


----------



## NBNMyths

bellenuit said:


> Gee NBNMyths. Is one in every two people; men, women and children; online simultaneously in your modelling? And those online are actually interacting 100% of the time with the internet? No pauses to read the screen or to compose responses or to just be doing something else while logged on?
> 
> Perhaps if your modelling was a bit more realistic you wouldn't need such an expensive system as the NBN.





You want an optimistic figure? OK, let's say only 1% of Australians are online at the same time. Including those at work. That would be an average speed of 4Mbps each from the 10 satellites.

So you think spending $5bn to deliver satellites enabling a speed of about half what we can currently get (on average), is a good idea?


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> not for the fed govt???
> 
> How about state govt? any other form of government, unions etc.
> 
> You are an ALP lackey.




Nope. I only specified the fed govt because they are doing it.

Don't work for the state govt, local govt, a union etc. Not a member of the ALP (although do vote for them more often than not). Not a member of a union, although once was.

An ALP lackey? Yep that's me. I'm being paid to be online at 8pm on a friday night by Conroy. 

BTW, I didn't vote for the ALP in the l;ast state election because they were hopeless, and I don't have much time for Conroy because is almost as technically incompetent as Tony Abbott.


----------



## NBNMyths

Interesting that, once again, I'm having to defend myself against accusations of being some Government troll.

Why is that? Let's face facts. With very few exceptions, the only people speaking publicly against the NBN are conservative commentators and politicians. You don't find too many business groups, leaders, execs speaking against it. The IT industry, experts, the business community, the telco community are all backing the NBN, albeit sometimes with assorted qualifications.

Take off the blinkers people, turn off the AM radio, put down the Bolt column and you might see just how popular this network is with the business community.


----------



## drsmith

IFocus said:


> The realities for a project this size and complexity is that it is unlikely to be on time and wont be on cost. Time and cost will be politicized to death but success engineering wise is about it working, being maintainable and low fault rate.



It won't be completed in its present form with one reason being that the rollout phase will outlive the current government by some margin.

That's assuming the current government doesn't fall before the serious rollout even begins.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> The IT industry, experts, the business community, the telco community are all backing the NBN, albeit sometimes with assorted qualifications.



Of course they are.

It's the taxpayer who is stumping up the cash and who will likely take on most, if not all of the risk.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Of course they are.
> 
> It's the taxpayer who is stumping up the cash and who will likely take on most, if not all of the risk.




First, let's not forget that at least 30% of the taxation revenue in Australia comes from business.

Secondly, you can't have it both ways. ie, you can't say on one hand that there won't be a benefit, and then say that business groups support it because they will benefit from it.


----------



## drsmith

I never said there wouldn't be a benefit, but one wonders whether some of that money could be spent on more worthy projects.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> It won't be completed in its present form with one reason being that the rollout phase will outlive the current government by some margin.
> 
> That's assuming the current government doesn't fall before the serious rollout even begins.




That's all quite possible. I certainly hope it doesn't happen, and there have been many obstacles thrown up to prevent it.

There is a lot of legislation supporting the NBN and preventing assorted outcomes that would sell it off or stop it before completion. Even if the ALP lose in 2013, between them and the greens they'll have the power in the senate, which will prevent the repealing of the NBN legislation.

Then there is the fibre construction contracts, which are now signed for the next two years (to mid 2013), with another 2 year option. You'd have to assume that option would be signed before the next election, locking in another 2 years of rollout (I would hope and think that exit penalties would be harsh). By the time that contract is up, probably 40% of the fibre construction will be complete. I suspect that politically it would be extremely hard to stop at that point, particularly because the most expensive phase of the project (ie the startup) will already be spent. Even if only 20% of the fibre were completed by 2013, the savings from cancellation at that time would be much, much less than 80%. The new Govt would then have to pay the "startup" cost of whatever program they decided to go with instead, and pay out the contracts they cancel in the process.

Fibre aside, the satellites will be ordered soon and the entire wireless component has already been contracted for completion in 2015.

On top of all that, there's the Telstra deal which will probably be signed this year to turn off the copper and migrate customers. Since Telstra is footing the bill to upgrade all their pit and pipe for the NBN, I'd imagine they will have a pretty strong cancellation penalty in there as well.

Put all that together, and the NBN will be an extremely hard egg to unscramble in 2013, and I would say practically impossible in 2016.


----------



## bellenuit

NBNMyths said:


> You want an optimistic figure? OK, let's say only 1% of Australians are online at the same time. Including those at work. That would be an average speed of 4Mbps each from the 10 satellites.
> 
> So you think spending $5bn to deliver satellites enabling a speed of about half what we can currently get (on average), is a good idea?




I didn't say anything about satellites. I just noted your completely ridiculous assumptions that you used in your reply. 

Your model needs to work out how many users are online at any one time on average and the average amount of time each of those users spends actually uploading/downloading from the internet when online. 

If 1% are online at any one time on average (your more recent figure) and each spends 5% of their time uploading/downloading (which is high for the average person using the internet at work, but low for online gamers and movie watchers - so it may be close to the average) then that would give an average speed of 80Mbps using your calculations. This compares to the figure of 0.06Mbps that you used in your response to the original post. 

See what a difference a bit of realism makes.


----------



## IFocus

JTLP said:


> IFocus I rarely weigh into these political debates as everyone has them covered (as well as questions to you)...but seriously...you would have to be one of the most die-hard/one-eyed/would run over their own grandmother - Labor supporters i've ever witnessed.




Actually not that happy with the current Labor government but really anti Abbott who really is a drop kick heavily defended on this site. 



> You can simply not accept that this minority government is a shambles and has done virtually nothing right. If they were all about prosperity and Australia moving forward - they would have responsibly managed the massive inflows coming in via our very favourable lucky land and made "real changes" to ensure this country can thrive once the minerals are gone/China buys us out..



.

What most if not everyone here is look the other way at the alternative say no and do nothing Abbott with his bunch of losers.



> The way they conduct themselves and draft legislations beggars belief. The 'resource rent' tax and carbon tax are 2 prime examples of Labor shooting for the moon and landing nowhere near the stars...rather their 'rocket' went backwards. Can you agree on these points? You don't have to say they were bad ideas (in which they are but that's my opinion) - can you agree they have been grossly mismanaged?




Inept management is a understatement but there should be a dividend for Australia from mining (WA Liberal Governess thought so) but Labor has sold Australia short in the mining tax that they are going to raise.

As for Carbon tax everyone here has been in complete denial with their fingers in their ears going na na na na  about the coalitions direct action tax funded BS.



> Julia has asked you numerous questions in which you have conveniently side-stepped...no doubt you will do the same to mine...thus confirming you know you're caught out...




Not at all just means I don't talk to those that decide to label me various names based on their opinion instead of talking about the issue.


----------



## NBNMyths

bellenuit said:


> I didn't say anything about satellites. I just noted your completely ridiculous assumptions that you used in your reply.
> 
> Your model needs to work out how many users are online at any one time on average and the average amount of time each of those users spends actually uploading/downloading from the internet when online.
> 
> If 1% are online at any one time on average (your more recent figure) and each spends 5% of their time uploading/downloading (which is high for the average person using the internet at work, but low for online gamers and movie watchers - so it may be close to the average) then that would give an average speed of 80Mbps using your calculations. This compares to the figure of 0.06Mbps that you used in your response to the original post.
> 
> See what a difference a bit of realism makes.




I'd hardly call that realistic, especially with the growing boom in cloud computing, on-demand video and other assorted high-bandwidth uses for the internet. FYI, NBN co assume that "busy hour" periods would have about 40% of users being online at the same time. You also need to consider that while some connections are inactive, others are being used for multiple simultaneous uses, and this is increasing all the time.

I don't have average figures for what you described, but what I do have is ABS stats for total data consumed in Australia over fixed networks, from which some extrapolation can be done:

For the December 2010 quarter, that came to a total of 174,665 terabytes (or ~1.4 million terrabits) and growing steadily at the rate of about 50% _every year_, cumulative.

So let's jump ahead to 2015, a reasonably close target. Expected total volume at that stage is 10.6 million Terrabits per quarter, or 118,000,000 Megabits per day. Given the average broadband connection in Australia is 8Mbps, to achieve that volume of data would mean 25% of all connections operating at 100% capacity, 100% of the time. How's that for realistic?

Without doing the sums again, that means that today (roughly) our total data volume equates to having 2.5% of connections running at 100% of capacity (8Mbps), 100% of the time. Of course, we know it doesn't work that way. At 4am, the volume is low while at 7pm the volume is massive.

With data growth running at 50% a year, can we afford not to build the NBN, or something like it?


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> With data growth running at 50% a year, can we afford not to build the NBN, or something like it?




Of course.

WHY is data growing?

Piracy, youtube, social media.

Which of these improves productivity????

Future projections no doubt include streaming of TV and movies.

CONSUMPTION.

extra tax revenues, consumption, zero or v v little increase in productivity = extremely poor investment for me as a taxpayer.

Where would I spend $50 billion?

A viable steel industry / value adding for minerals  and port and rail infrastructure.

you know, stuff that will actually make our country LOTS of money.


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> Of course.
> 
> WHY is data growing?
> 
> Piracy, youtube, social media.
> 
> Which of these improves productivity????
> 
> Future projections no doubt include streaming of TV and movies.
> 
> CONSUMPTION.
> 
> extra tax revenues, consumption, zero or v v little increase in productivity = extremely poor investment for me as a taxpayer.
> 
> Where would I spend $50 billion?
> 
> A viable steel industry / value adding for minerals  and port and rail infrastructure.
> 
> you know, stuff that will actually make our country LOTS of money.





I have no doubt that all of those things are growing. But that isn't a reason not to build the NBN.

Video and multimedia are the big growth areas for bandwidth, and these things are a part of a modern economy. Whether it be IPTV, movie downloads, HD video conferencing, the sending of large files between producers and customers, the move to cloud computing and online storage etc.

All of these things improve business turnover, efficiency, and therefore productivity.

All that said, the NBN is not "spending" your tax dollars, and none of the NBN equity injections have any impact whatsoever on the budget or other Government spending.

The NBN will be paid for by the revenue coming in from the users of the network. Big users will pay more than small users. As a taxpayer, you're not subsidising those who want big NBN connections for games/piracy/movies, because those users will have to pay a premium for those speeds and volumes, more than paying for their share of constructing the network.

Taxpayers are taking the risk on the NBN, not actually spending on it. True, if it goes pear shaped, then the equity injections will become spends. But given the growing number of signed contracts, the copper network shutdown, the constant growth in data consumption and the announcement by Vodafone and others that they will use the NBN for cellular backhaul (income not figured in the biz case), the chances that the assumptions in the biz case won't pan out are pretty slim and getting slimmer all the time.


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> I have no doubt that all of those things are growing. But that isn't a reason not to build the NBN.
> 
> Video and multimedia are the big growth areas for bandwidth, and these things are a part of a modern economy. Whether it be IPTV, movie downloads, HD video conferencing, the sending of large files between producers and customers, the move to cloud computing and online storage etc.
> 
> All of these things improve business turnover, efficiency, and therefore productivity.
> 
> All that said, the NBN is not "spending" your tax dollars, and none of the NBN equity injections have any impact whatsoever on the budget or other Government spending.
> 
> The NBN will be paid for by the revenue coming in from the users of the network. Big users will pay more than small users. As a taxpayer, you're not subsidising those who want big NBN connections for games/piracy/movies, because those users will have to pay a premium for those speeds and volumes, more than paying for their share of constructing the network.
> 
> Taxpayers are taking the risk on the NBN, not actually spending on it. True, if it goes pear shaped, then the equity injections will become spends. But given the growing number of signed contracts, the copper network shutdown, the constant growth in data consumption and the announcement by Vodafone and others that they will use the NBN for cellular backhaul (income not figured in the biz case), the chances that the assumptions in the biz case won't pan out are pretty slim and getting slimmer all the time.




1. Businesses that benefit from fast internet ALREADY HAVE fast internet. The NBN will only accomplish increased consumption, less jobs.

2. Oh so REVENUE is generated by the taxpayer.  WHY should we pay a pseudo tax on top of our service cost to receive a service that is not required over what we already have?    I can quite comfortably do whatever I want with the current internet.


Oh that is right, CONSUMPTION.

See, I was not born yesterday.  I can tell when something will show a ROI, and for $50 billion / increased cost of access to the internet for the punter, the NBN is a massive fail.

Unless you are a gamer or pirate.


----------



## DB008

NBNMyths, I am not against you. 
I just question why the Gov will be spending in the ballpark, ~50 billion for an infrastructure project where it won't be utilised to it's full potential. Much of it will be used by gamers, social media, downloading movies and the like. Sure, hospitals and small business' need it, as do 'bush residents', but major cities? I even spoke to a professor (medicine) recently, and even he had doubts about this project. If he is having doubts, boy 'o' boy, so am l.

 The most people who benefit the most from this will be tradies who will be installing/digging cable trenches. The follow on effect won't be as high as, well, the snowy river scheme or building the harbour bridge.


----------



## boofhead

medicowallet said:


> 1. Businesses that benefit from fast internet ALREADY HAVE fast internet. The NBN will only accomplish increased consumption, less jobs.




Far from true. Plenty of companies operate outside of the cities. I recently worked at a place where the choice of internet was between substandard dialup or satellite. Satellite had more speed but depending on many factors could drop out at an instant.

Current workplace is at the end of a long copper loop. Barely get ADSL 1 speeds.

In many places there is only 1 choice of infrastructure - Telstra. When you have only Telstra the prices rise. To install fibre many companies would go bankrupt because they are so far from existing fibre runs.

Remember the cities and the population centres mostly only supply one raw material - people.

There are lots of electorates in the cities. Lots of the voters never spend any substantial time away from the cities.

BTW, IPTV seems to be experiencing a bit of growth now which is good. It gives Foxtel competition. Telstra's wholesale customers don't get features enabled that allow efficient delivery of such content - multicast.


----------



## NBNMyths

boofhead said:


> Far from true. Plenty of companies operate outside of the cities. I recently worked at a place where the choice of internet was between substandard dialup or satellite. Satellite had more speed but depending on many factors could drop out at an instant.
> 
> Current workplace is at the end of a long copper loop. Barely get ADSL 1 speeds.
> 
> In many places there is only 1 choice of infrastructure - Telstra. When you have only Telstra the prices rise. To install fibre many companies would go bankrupt because they are so far from existing fibre runs.
> 
> Remember the cities and the population centres mostly only supply one raw material - people.
> 
> There are lots of electorates in the cities. Lots of the voters never spend any substantial time away from the cities.
> 
> BTW, IPTV seems to be experiencing a bit of growth now which is good. It gives Foxtel competition. Telstra's wholesale customers don't get features enabled that allow efficient delivery of such content - multicast.




+1

That is spot on. People who believe that _businesses who need fast internet already have it_ must be living a very sheltered life.

I'd suggest you watch what Glen Innes-based Eastmon Digital have to say about how a lack of fast connection is a huge impediment to their business. It's on the 4 Corners programme about the NBN.

But you don't have to go that far into the regions. I'm only 2 hours out of Sydney, and can only get ADSL1 speeds.

The massive lack of telco infrastructure makes operating a media-based business outside the CBDs a very difficult thing to do. This increases centralisation and all the problems associated with it.


----------



## So_Cynical

boofhead said:


> Far from true. Plenty of companies operate outside of the cities. I recently worked at a place where the choice of internet was between substandard dialup or satellite. Satellite had more speed but depending on many factors could drop out at an instant.
> 
> Current workplace is at the end of a long copper loop. Barely get ADSL 1 speeds.
> 
> In many places there is only 1 choice of infrastructure - Telstra. When you have only Telstra the prices rise. To install fibre many companies would go bankrupt because they are so far from existing fibre runs.
> 
> Remember the cities and the population centres mostly only supply one raw material - people.
> 
> There are lots of electorates in the cities. Lots of the voters never spend any substantial time away from the cities.
> 
> BTW, IPTV seems to be experiencing a bit of growth now which is good. It gives Foxtel competition. Telstra's wholesale customers don't get features enabled that allow efficient delivery of such content - multicast.




Medico and the other right wing, spend nothing, do nothing Liberals don't care about the broader Australian context and the reality's of life out side the major city's...the vast majority of city people have no idea about what's going on in rural Australia or even on the city fringes.

"Businesses that benefit from fast internet ALREADY HAVE fast internet." yes they do and that's because they need fast internet and so will need faster internet when that's available...its called growth, been going on for years.

------------------------------------

As proven on this forum many times, the right side of politics tends to want Govt to do nothing and spend nothing, while the other side tends to be ok with some "big picture" spending....the debate is political not technical as proven by NBNMyths and others, many times on this forum and whirlpool.


----------



## medicowallet

boofhead said:


> Far from true. Plenty of companies operate outside of the cities. I recently worked at a place where the choice of internet was between substandard dialup or satellite. Satellite had more speed but depending on many factors could drop out at an instant.
> 
> Current workplace is at the end of a long copper loop. Barely get ADSL 1 speeds.
> 
> In many places there is only 1 choice of infrastructure - Telstra. When you have only Telstra the prices rise. To install fibre many companies would go bankrupt because they are so far from existing fibre runs.
> 
> Remember the cities and the population centres mostly only supply one raw material - people.
> 
> There are lots of electorates in the cities. Lots of the voters never spend any substantial time away from the cities.
> 
> BTW, IPTV seems to be experiencing a bit of growth now which is good. It gives Foxtel competition. Telstra's wholesale customers don't get features enabled that allow efficient delivery of such content - multicast.




1. I live in the country, I understand that access to fast internet is less here.

2. Can you please explain how faster internet at the business you work for will result in *more exports*

3. IPTV, Video on demand = *consumption* . Isn't this exactly what gets countries such as America, Australia, and European countries into dramas such as the GFC.

SORRY, but you cannot sell me a $50 billion dollar investment into *consumption* when we could invest $50 billion into industry and be guaranteed improved *income* for the country, yes that means you and me and everyone.

See, like an ALP lackey, you have been sold a con job where you mistake government revenue (taxes) for income for the country. 

Conroy and his stupid fools are selling you a dud, which will not show a ROI *for the country* . BUT see, you cannot understand that. You cannot understand that by you paying the government more for internet, you are effectively paying more tax for something which will not provide any real improvement in income for the country (and I could argue would have negative implications).

I am sorry you cannot understand this.

Happy gaming, piracy and youtube.


----------



## medicowallet

So_Cynical said:


> Medico and the other right wing, spend nothing, do nothing Liberals don't care about the broader Australian context and the reality's of life out side the major city's...the vast majority of city people have no idea about what's going on in rural Australia or even on the city fringes.
> 
> "Businesses that benefit from fast internet ALREADY HAVE fast internet." yes they do and that's because they need fast internet and so will need faster internet when that's available...its called growth, been going on for years.




1. I don't know what people in the city think, I don't live in one. Do you live in a country town, or are you talking for us with your city perspective?

2. I have never said that businesses will not need access to faster internet. BUT do you actually realise that there are businesses with faster access speeds than NBN?? I am sure that the entire CBA head office does not run off ADSL2.   Also, why not then invest in the infrastructure to businesses only?  

Why should everyone need access to 100mbit connections?  This is stupidly crazy, and a waste of $40 billion plus.


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> +1
> 
> That is spot on. People who believe that _businesses who need fast internet already have it_ must be living a very sheltered life.
> 
> I'd suggest you watch what Glen Innes-based Eastmon Digital have to say about how a lack of fast connection is a huge impediment to their business. It's on the 4 Corners programme about the NBN.
> 
> But you don't have to go that far into the regions. I'm only 2 hours out of Sydney, and can only get ADSL1 speeds.
> 
> The massive lack of telco infrastructure makes operating a media-based business outside the CBDs a very difficult thing to do. This increases centralisation and all the problems associated with it.




1. *How much income for Australia will Eastmon generate with faster internet.* Show me the ROI.

2. Why does eastmon require faster than ADSL2 or multiple ADSL2 connections

3. Why should Glenn Innes receive full NBN for 1 business which will increase consumption in that area?

4. Being a regular visitor to Glenn Innes, I don't think they need faster than ADSL2 there.


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> 1. I don't know what people in the city think, I don't live in one. Do you live in a country town, or are you talking for us with your city perspective?
> 
> 2. I have never said that businesses will not need access to faster internet. BUT do you actually realise that there are businesses with faster access speeds than NBN?? I am sure that the entire CBA head office does not run off ADSL2.   Also, why not then invest in the infrastructure to businesses only?
> 
> Why should everyone need access to 100mbit connections?  This is stupidly crazy, and a waste of $40 billion plus.






medicowallet said:


> 1. *How much income for Australia will Eastmon generate with faster internet.* Show me the ROI.
> 
> 2. Why does eastmon require faster than ADSL2 or multiple ADSL2 connections
> 
> 3. Why should Glenn Innes receive full NBN for 1 business which will increase consumption in that area?
> 
> 4. Being a regular visitor to Glenn Innes, I don't think they need faster than ADSL2 there.




What a ridiculously short-sighted response.

As I wrote, the internet is still in its infancy. In just 15 years, we have seen speeds rise from 14kbps to a typical 10,000kbps over that period.

Surely, no-one could deny the economic and social growth that has followed this rise in speeds, and all the applications that have stemmed from it?

Like it or not, the World is moving more online every day. We are doing things over the internet today that we couldn't even have imagined 20 years ago. Entertainment, business, education, medicine.

I seriously cannot believe that anyone could think that the 1,000 times increase in online speeds over the last 15 years will suddenly stop now. That we have achieved everything the internet can deliver, and there is no need to let it improve any further? That every use for it has been done already, so there's nothing out there that could take advantage of faster speeds? Surely nobody is that naive.

The rest of the World are rapidly improving their networks. Apart from all the Asian countries that are orders-of-magnitude faster than us, the US has set a target of 70% of their premises having access to 100Mbps speeds within 10 years, and the major infrastructure in every town (schools, hospitals, local govt etc) having 1Gbps. Europe is full of FTTP and fast FTTN installations. Even NZ is rolling out FTTP.

For average _advertised_ broadband speeds, Australia ranks 17/31 in the OECD. For fibre penetration we rank 24/31. According to Akamai (an international internet download mirroring service), Australian ranks 51st in the world for actual download speeds, down 10 spots on 2 years ago.

If you think this lack of speed isn't affecting the competitiveness and productivity of our businesses, then you're crazy. The amount of data flying around the country is always increasing. Every minute spent waiting for a file is a minute of lost productivity.


As for Eastmon....Well, since their entire business revolves around the receiving of huge amounts of high-resolution digital imaging so they can print their books etc, I have no doubt that ADSL2+ wouldn't even come close to satisfying their needs.

You asked about our local production....Well, if places like Eastmon can't get decent connections, then people will just buy their photobooks etc from Singapore.



> Why should everyone need access to 100mbit connections?




Why should every house have a telephone. Why not just run the phone to a couple of buildings in town?....

Imagine if you'd said to someone 60 years ago, that they should get the phone connected, because there is going to be this thing called the internet that would use your phone lines. You'll be able to sit in front of a little screen, and talk to someone on the other side of the World. You'll be able to buy things. You'll be able to look at photographs and videos. You'll be able to have a school lesson from someone on the other side of the country. You'll be able to have meetings, or remotely control machinery.

I can only be grateful that such short-sighted luddites weren't running the show when the PMG were tasked with rolling out the telephone network.


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> What a ridiculously short-sighted response.
> 
> As I wrote, the internet is still in its infancy. In just 15 years, we have seen speeds rise from 14kbps to a typical 10,000kbps over that period.
> 
> Surely, no-one could deny the economic and social growth that has followed this rise in speeds, and all the applications that have stemmed from it?
> 
> Like it or not, the World is moving more online every day. We are doing things over the internet today that we couldn't even have imagined 20 years ago. Entertainment, business, education, medicine.
> 
> I seriously cannot believe that anyone could think that the 1,000 times increase in online speeds over the last 15 years will suddenly stop now. That we have achieved everything the internet can deliver, and there is no need to let it improve any further? That every use for it has been done already, so there's nothing out there that could take advantage of faster speeds? Surely nobody is that naive.
> 
> The rest of the World are rapidly improving their networks. Apart from all the Asian countries that are orders-of-magnitude faster than us, the US has set a target of 70% of their premises having access to 100Mbps speeds within 10 years, and the major infrastructure in every town (schools, hospitals, local govt etc) having 1Gbps. Europe is full of FTTP and fast FTTN installations. Even NZ is rolling out FTTP.
> 
> For average _advertised_ broadband speeds, Australia ranks 17/31 in the OECD. For fibre penetration we rank 24/31. According to Akamai (an international internet download mirroring service), Australian ranks 51st in the world for actual download speeds, down 10 spots on 2 years ago.
> 
> If you think this lack of speed isn't affecting the competitiveness and productivity of our businesses, then you're crazy. The amount of data flying around the country is always increasing. Every minute spent waiting for a file is a minute of lost productivity.
> 
> 
> As for Eastmon....Well, since their entire business revolves around the receiving of huge amounts of high-resolution digital imaging so they can print their books etc, I have no doubt that ADSL2+ wouldn't even come close to satisfying their needs.
> 
> You asked about our local production....Well, if places like Eastmon can't get decent connections, then people will just buy their photobooks etc from Singapore.
> 
> 
> 
> Why should every house have a telephone. Why not just run the phone to a couple of buildings in town?....
> 
> Imagine if you'd said to someone 60 years ago, that they should get the phone connected, because there is going to be this thing called the internet that would use your phone lines. You'll be able to sit in front of a little screen, and talk to someone on the other side of the World. You'll be able to buy things. You'll be able to look at photographs and videos. You'll be able to have a school lesson from someone on the other side of the country. You'll be able to have meetings, or remotely control machinery.
> 
> I can only be grateful that such short-sighted luddites weren't running the show when the PMG were tasked with rolling out the telephone network.




I read this codswallop.

I saw not one example of how income for the country would be increased by faster internet, and on those lines, no where near how a ROI of $50 billion would be justified.


Keep towing the ALP line mate, at least that way you can live a wasteful, low productivity and inefficient life.  

Business owners make money by being efficient, and this NBN is the least efficient way of investing $50 billion I have ever come across.

RAIL, PORTS, MANUFACTURING/VALUE ADDING.

Learn about the real world, the real economy and how things work, then come back with an attempt at an argument as to how we need FASTER speeds.


You are accusing me of discounting the advances that telephone and internet have afforded, where have I said this?

Why don't we spend $100 billion improving phone lines so that the voice sounds clearer? 
Why go 100mbit, why not 1000mbit?


What medical technology do we have access to that requires greater than ADSL2?

You are aware that ADSL2 covers most of australians aren't you?

Keep up your CONSUMPTION agenda, at exactly the time the world needs to moderate consumption, but then again, you probably believe CONROY, mate, he is a complete clown, and I hope we are around in 10 years to debate any (lol) benefits the NBN will have given us.. for it will not give anywhere near what an appropriate investment of $50 billion would if the federal government was competent.

PS.

You limited understanding of reality does not comprehend that if the business grows and more people get photos developed, we will import more and send $$$ offshore.

If we spent it on manufacturing, we could keep $$ here and generate more $$$, but this is probably too complicated for you to understand.


----------



## IFocus

I love it when opinions argue with facts 

Has anyone here have any idea what applications businesses use now and what they could use with greater bandwidth?

As for manufacturing you would have to compete with China labor costs...........


----------



## medicowallet

IFocus said:


> I love it when opinions argue with facts
> 
> Has anyone here have any idea what applications businesses use now and what they could use with greater bandwidth?
> 
> As for manufacturing you would have to compete with China labor costs...........




Oh I agree, what is hamstringing business at the moment? 

I hope it

1. Results in export earnings.
2. Does not increase consumption.
3. Validates a $50 billion investment

As for manufacturing, we do compete on the world market eg steel. Obviously we cannot compete with everything, but to value add to commodities (just to name one thing) just makes sense.


----------



## NBNMyths

Speaking of codswallop....



> You limited understanding of reality does not comprehend that if the business grows and more people get photos developed, we will import more and send $$$ offshore.




Perhaps you don't get it. Eastmon is a local producer. They are competing _against_ the importers. If their business grows, then it will mean fewer imports, not more of them.

I am a business owner, and I know how inefficient the current network is. It costs me time and money every day, and there are plenty more like me. From the statements you are giving about the state of business connectivity in Australia, you obviously don't depend on it because the internet reality you live in is one of fairies and unicorns.

I seriously cannot believe that anyone would think that faster network speeds won't increase productivity, especially as more and more of our working lives are spend waiting for online content.

You want examples?

The business transferring media files across the country. With ADSL2+ upload speeds, a 1GB transfer takes about 10 hours. Even a reasonably basic NBN connection will reduce that to 30 minutes. There's 9.5 hours of productivity right there. I know many business people that jump in a car and drive files around rather than transfer them electronically, because it's just too slow. I do it myself quite regularly.

Imagine the savings if SMEs could have real teleconferencing, instead of the generally useless systems available now to anyone without fibre. Imagine the savings in time and money if 20% of Sydney-Melbourne meetings could take place via video, instead of wasting 4 hours flying between the offices.

What if just 5% of people could telecommute in future, thanks to reasonable data speeds (and no, ADSL2+ doesn't cut it if you have high data demands, such as an SAP system to access remotely). 

Imagine 5% less traffic on the roads into the city. Imagine the gains in productivity for those people who do still have to travel. The reduced delivery times, the reduced number of trucks on the road delivering fuel (and the reduced fuel imports).

You want some more ideas? Have a read of this:
http://www.smh.com.au/technology/te...dband-network-20110603-1fj9j.html?from=smh_sb

and particularly this, if you don't get where a need for 100Mbps comes from:
http://technologyspectator.com.au/nbn-buzz/i-spy-100mbps

ADSL2 might cover most Australians, but that doesn't mean it delivers ADSL2 speeds. You do realise that DSL is distance-dependent, don't you? 2km from the exchange and it officially drops to _pathetic_.

As for the investment....Where does this constant $50 billion figure come from? You do realise that the total capex is $36bn, and $27bn is the Government investment?

I realise 50 sounds scarier than 27, but is there a reason you've made up that particular value? Why not just round it up to $100bn and be done with it?

As for spending it on manufacturing.....Look, I love Australian stuff and I buy it whenever I can. I'm actually quite passionate about it. But throwing $50bn into manufacturing in this country would be $50bn down the drain. If we want decent wages and low tariffs, then we can't compete with the likes of China for manufacturing.

If I recall correctly, the decline of manufacturing and value-adding in this country began well and truly before the ALP came to power. The Newcastle steel mills is an example that comes to mind....

That aside, you still don't seem to understand the NBN funding model. The Govt investment in the NBN is off-budget, because it's being funded by infrastructure bonds at ~5%, and repaid by revenue at ~7%. It doesn't affect the ability to invest in other projects at all. If Govt wanted to throw $50bn at ports or rail, the NBN is not standing in their way.


----------



## NBNMyths

Ohh, look. I've been going on an Eastmon and they've made an NBN video, which says everything I've been writing, but better. Medicowallet, take note:


----------



## So_Cynical

NBNMyths said:


> Speaking of codswallop....
> Perhaps you don't get it.




I don't think there is any other conclusion to come to.

Some people see the light and others don't.


----------



## IFocus

medicowallet said:


> As for manufacturing, we do compete on the world market eg steel. Obviously we cannot compete with everything, but to value add to commodities (just to name one thing) just makes sense.





You need access to cheap power which we don't have, very cheap labor, no environment rules, large population etc.

The only real manufacturing that is possible is to manufacture technology and export it like the Germans but Australia stopped thinking some time ago just go through the treads and read the intellectual analysis and facts presented..................very little.


Myths is really the only person that turns up here with any real knowledge facts and numbers and the best people can do is call him some sort of Labor supporter nothing about the issue............nothing of substance.


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> Speaking of codswallop....
> 
> Perhaps you don't get it. Eastmon is a local producer. They are competing _against_ the importers. If their business grows, then it will mean fewer imports, not more of them.
> 
> I am a business owner, and I know how inefficient the current network is. It costs me time and money every day, and there are plenty more like me. From the statements you are giving about the state of business connectivity in Australia, you obviously don't depend on it because the internet reality you live in is one of fairies and unicorns.
> 
> I seriously cannot believe that anyone would think that faster network speeds won't increase productivity, especially as more and more of our working lives are spend waiting for online content.
> 
> You want examples?
> 
> The business transferring media files across the country. With ADSL2+ upload speeds, a 1GB transfer takes about 10 hours. Even a reasonably basic NBN connection will reduce that to 30 minutes. There's 9.5 hours of productivity right there. I know many business people that jump in a car and drive files around rather than transfer them electronically, because it's just too slow. I do it myself quite regularly.
> 
> Imagine the savings if SMEs could have real teleconferencing, instead of the generally useless systems available now to anyone without fibre. Imagine the savings in time and money if 20% of Sydney-Melbourne meetings could take place via video, instead of wasting 4 hours flying between the offices.
> 
> What if just 5% of people could telecommute in future, thanks to reasonable data speeds (and no, ADSL2+ doesn't cut it if you have high data demands, such as an SAP system to access remotely).
> 
> Imagine 5% less traffic on the roads into the city. Imagine the gains in productivity for those people who do still have to travel. The reduced delivery times, the reduced number of trucks on the road delivering fuel (and the reduced fuel imports).
> 
> You want some more ideas? Have a read of this:
> http://www.smh.com.au/technology/te...dband-network-20110603-1fj9j.html?from=smh_sb
> 
> and particularly this, if you don't get where a need for 100Mbps comes from:
> http://technologyspectator.com.au/nbn-buzz/i-spy-100mbps
> 
> ADSL2 might cover most Australians, but that doesn't mean it delivers ADSL2 speeds. You do realise that DSL is distance-dependent, don't you? 2km from the exchange and it officially drops to _pathetic_.
> 
> As for the investment....Where does this constant $50 billion figure come from? You do realise that the total capex is $36bn, and $27bn is the Government investment?
> 
> I realise 50 sounds scarier than 27, but is there a reason you've made up that particular value? Why not just round it up to $100bn and be done with it?
> 
> As for spending it on manufacturing.....Look, I love Australian stuff and I buy it whenever I can. I'm actually quite passionate about it. But throwing $50bn into manufacturing in this country would be $50bn down the drain. If we want decent wages and low tariffs, then we can't compete with the likes of China for manufacturing.
> 
> If I recall correctly, the decline of manufacturing and value-adding in this country began well and truly before the ALP came to power. The Newcastle steel mills is an example that comes to mind....
> 
> That aside, you still don't seem to understand the NBN funding model. The Govt investment in the NBN is off-budget, because it's being funded by infrastructure bonds at ~5%, and repaid by revenue at ~7%. It doesn't affect the ability to invest in other projects at all. If Govt wanted to throw $50bn at ports or rail, the NBN is not standing in their way.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/07/30/2968355.htm

Obviously you do not teleconference on a regular basis, I do. 

I also like how they tout medical consultations over the internet, this is the biggest joke of all. How is this going to work mate? Doctors CANNOT and WILL NOT make a Dx over an internet connection.

I also note the benefits in the pathetic article you link all relate to CONSUMPTION, you have been sold a dud.

You also don't understand that Eastmon helps Australians CONSUME and does not generate any income for the country. So you are prepared to connect the entirity of Glenn Innes to NBN so that one company can avoid getting business speed internet. Sorry, but a business like that should help itself out with internet.

BS people import from overseas as opposed to dealing with locals for printing needs, AND if there was evidence to that, then you contradict yourself "WHY WOULDN'T THEY GET IT FROM CHINA THEN" lol.

Sorry champ, the cost will be $50 billion, EVERY SINGLE ALP initiative has had a massive cost blowout, and the tendering system proves that this will be the same.

$50 billion into INFRASTRUCTURE and manufacturing, as I CLEARLY pointed out but you conveniently, in your naivity of how the world works, ignored, has to come from SOMEWHERE.

Where?

Australians. Where did this $50 billion come from?  NOT from people importing photo paper, frames and printing machines, but from FARMING, MINING and export industries.

But go ahead, increase CONSUMPTION, whilst credible people think of ways of increasing income.

HOW MUCH EXPORT $$ does your business generate?

Perhaps you are not aware that there is a steel industry in Australia, and a government with initiative could easily grow this back to traditional levels.  We have the ore, the coal and the expertise.

And PLEASE answer me this.

*WHICH BUSINESSES TRANSFER 1GB FILES ON A REGULAR BASIS?????*lmao.

and then

*HOW DO THESE PARTICULAR BUSINESSES GENERATE INCOME FOR AUSTRALIA?*

Oh it is ok, I know you will not answer these questions, because you cannot, because there is no benefit in spending $50 billion for faster piracy, youtube and pr0n downloads.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-TA57L0kuc


----------



## Knobby22

medicowallet said:


> http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/07/30/2968355.htm
> 
> And PLEASE answer me this.
> 
> *WHICH BUSINESSES TRANSFER 1GB FILES ON A REGULAR BASIS?????*lmao.
> 
> and then
> 
> *HOW DO THESE PARTICULAR BUSINESSES GENERATE INCOME FOR AUSTRALIA?*
> 
> Oh it is ok, I know you will not answer these questions, because you cannot, because there is no benefit in spending $50 billion for faster piracy, youtube and pr0n downloads.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-TA57L0kuc




The business I work for does.
We regularly and large files, though often we have to post them to some clients because they can't handle the download.
I am talking of architecture and engineering consulting. The new standard involves designing in 3D which is making the files absolutely massive. Our data network has had major upgrades over the last 10 years to keep up and we are finding even though we are in the CBD, that we are starting to need more bandwidth.

Of course we represent only a tiny tiny part of the economy being one on many companies involved in new buildings, new manufacturing and the mining industry. Of course all the companies we deal with would love it to take place as a lot of the works take place out of the CBD.

Two companies we deal with, Lumascape and Planet Lighting (look them up) are based in towns and are our last two lighting companies that have massive lighting exports made in Australia. 

Many of my family live in the bush. They would love it also for medical and business reasons.

I hope this helps your perspective Medicowallet. 

*It could have been done in a different way, that is a fair argument,* but its need in this large country is self evident and this is why the Coalition had a plan for a rollout also.

Hope you looked at Inside Business with Alan Kohler and NBNco today? Interesting interview.
I'm sure you are aware that Siemens have signed to deliver the network to the budget.

Just remember 20 years ago, fax machines were cutting edge. I find that hard to believe today bit it is true.


_I watched his countenance closely, to see if he was not deranged ... and I was assured by other senators after he left the room that they had no confidence in it.
Reminiscence by Oliver Hampton Smith, Senator for Indiana, upon meeting Morse at the demonstration of his telegraph to the U.S. Congress in 1842. _
— Oliver H. Smith

Early Indiana Trials and Sketches (1858), 413 


_[It would not be long] ere the whole surface of this country would be channelled for those nerves which are to diffuse, with the speed of thought, a knowledge of all that is occurring throughout the land, making, in fact, one neighborhood of the whole country. _
— Samuel F. B. Morse

Samuel F.B. Morse: His Letters and Journals (1914), vol. 2, 85. 

Which person was right? The Visionary or the Conservative?

The first quote reminds me of the reception that CFU ceramic fuel cells got from the Australian parliament - that is why the company is now manufacturing in Germany and on Inside Business today, was the highest rising shareprice for the week.


----------



## medicowallet

Knobby22 said:


> The business I work for does.
> We regularly and large files, though often we have to post them to some clients because they can't handle the download.
> Of course we represent only a tiny tiny part of the economy being one on many companies involved in new buildings, new manufacturing and the mining industry.
> 
> Two companies we deal with, Lumascape.
> 
> Many of my family live in the bush. They would love it also for medical and business reasons.
> 
> I hope this helps your perspective Medicowallet.
> 
> *It could have been done in a different way, that is a fair argument,*




Yes it should be done in a different way. If you look at my prior posts, I say we could give it to businesses, schools and hospitals. Why do we need it for home use?

I also looked up only the one business, located in a town called Brisbane.

What benefits for medical treatments and access does your family expect?  

In all there is a massive waste of $50 billion, which would be much better off spent elsewhere (eg helping the backlog at ports, improving access to energy, manufacturing). You know, targetted spending to income generating areas, instead of a highly inefficient shotgun approach which will result in increased consumption.


----------



## NBNMyths

This is too easy.



medicowallet said:


> You also don't understand that Eastmon helps Australians CONSUME and does not generate any income for the country. So you are prepared to connect the entirity of Glenn Innes to NBN so that one company can avoid getting business speed internet. Sorry, but a business like that should help itself out with internet.
> 
> BS people import from overseas as opposed to dealing with locals for printing needs, AND if there was evidence to that, then you contradict yourself "WHY WOULDN'T THEY GET IT FROM CHINA THEN" lol.




Sorry buddy, but it's consumption that makes the World go round. If there was no consumption, there would be no economy.

If the US weren't huge consumers, then China wouldn't be buying our iron and coal, and our economy would be cactus.

Local consumption is no different to international consumption. People work, they buy stuff, which gives jobs to other people, which let's them buy stuff to. 

Consumption didn't lead to the GFC, bad debt did. You don't have to have bad debt to get increased consumption.

It's not a hard concept to grasp, surely?



> HOW MUCH EXPORT $$ does your business generate?




Bugger all actually. Maybe a thousand dollars a year. But what does that matter?




> *WHICH BUSINESSES TRANSFER 1GB FILES ON A REGULAR BASIS?????*lmao.
> 
> and then
> 
> *HOW DO THESE PARTICULAR BUSINESSES GENERATE INCOME FOR AUSTRALIA?*
> 
> Oh it is ok, I know you will not answer these questions, because you cannot, because there is no benefit in spending $50 billion for faster piracy, youtube and pr0n downloads.




That one is actually very easy. Pretty much anyone working with photographs, video or artwork will be sending such files around all the time. You've already had the design example given above.

About 5 minutes of decent HD video hits a GB. 

Then there's still images.....The files from a Nikon D3x camera are about 140MB in size, so sending just 7 images is over a GB. How many images do you think get shot for a fashion show, as one example. Then there's artwork. For every billboard. Every brochure. Every advertisement.

Do these businesses generate income for Australia? You bet. How do you think the video and image files than make up our tourism campaigns get around? What about our film industry, particularly animation?

Australia's manufacturing industry in uncompetitive with places like China for the reasons already given: High wages, 1st-world energy prices, employment conditions, strict environmental laws, strict OH&S laws. Without watering down these things, no amount of money thrown at the industry will help them compete.

We need to reduce our dependence on mining and farming, and improve our income from technology and creation, because those are more dependent on talent than on costs alone. And they are areas where we can compete internationally, given the right infrastructure.

Oh, and you want examples of photobooks being produced overseas? Look no further than Apple's very popular iPhoto books, ordered online and delivered direct from Singapore. And yes, they are often cheaper than local places. The only thing that saves them is shipping costs.



> I also like how they tout medical consultations over the internet, this is the biggest joke of all. How is this going to work mate? Doctors CANNOT and WILL NOT make a Dx over an internet connection.




I don't think anyone expects a large percentage of initial consults being done over the net. But there's certainly the opportunity to do mild/routine/followup stuff over the net if the equipment is there, or the video is good enough.

eg, off the top of my head: Regular checkups using a terminal for BP, pulse etc; Issuing repeat scripts for the pill etc; Scripts for mild illnesses. Conjunctive itis comes to mind. Got it a few weeks back, and had to drive to the Doc, spend half an hour in the waiting room, for him to spend 30 seconds looking at my eye, and another minute for him to write the Chlorsig script. There would have been no issue at all with doing that over the net, with an HD webcam letting him look at my eye. Imagine the savings in time, fuel etc if people didn't have to go to the doc for such small issues?



> Australians. Where did this $50 billion come from?  NOT from people importing photo paper, frames and printing machines, but from FARMING, MINING and export industries.
> 
> But go ahead, increase CONSUMPTION, whilst credible people think of ways of increasing income.
> 
> Sorry champ, the cost will be $50 billion, EVERY SINGLE ALP initiative has had a massive cost blowout, and the tendering system proves that this will be the same.
> 
> $50 billion into INFRASTRUCTURE and manufacturing, as I CLEARLY pointed out but you conveniently, in your naivity of how the world works, ignored, has to come from SOMEWHERE.




Oh OK, so the $50bn is just your personal made-up estimate basd on your obviously extensive knowledge of the telecommunications industry. I guess you must know better than KPMG or Caliburn too. And I guess the fact that all the tenders are now coming in on budget makes no impact on your assessment, since it's based solely on your seething hatred of the ALP, rather than any actual evidence? Fair enough.


----------



## NBNMyths

Knobby22 said:


> _I watched his countenance closely, to see if he was not deranged ... and I was assured by other senators after he left the room that they had no confidence in it.
> Reminiscence by Oliver Hampton Smith, Senator for Indiana, upon meeting Morse at the demonstration of his telegraph to the U.S. Congress in 1842. _
> ”” Oliver H. Smith
> 
> Early Indiana Trials and Sketches (1858), 413
> 
> 
> _[It would not be long] ere the whole surface of this country would be channelled for those nerves which are to diffuse, with the speed of thought, a knowledge of all that is occurring throughout the land, making, in fact, one neighborhood of the whole country. _
> ”” Samuel F. B. Morse
> 
> Samuel F.B. Morse: His Letters and Journals (1914), vol. 2, 85.
> 
> Which person was right? The Visionary or the Conservative?
> 
> The first quote reminds me of the reception that CFU ceramic fuel cells got from the Australian parliament - that is why the company is now manufacturing in Germany and on Inside Business today, was the highest rising shareprice for the week.




Plenty more where they came from:

_"This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us." _
- Western Union internal memo, 1876.

_"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."_
- Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.

_"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." _
- Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977.

But perhaps the best example is from Clifford Stoll's embarassing-in-hindsight 1995 article about the internet. Yes, this is from just 16 years ago:
http://www.newsweek.com/1995/02/26/the-internet-bah.html

With classics like:

_“….Nicholas Negroponte, director of the MIT Media Lab, predicts that we'll soon buy books and newspapers straight over the Intenet. *Uh, sure.*”_

_“Then there's cyberbusiness. We're promised instant catalog shopping - just point and click for great deals. We'll order airline tickets over the network, make restaurant reservations and negotiate sales contracts. *So how come my local mall does more business in an afternoon than the entire Internet handles in a month? Even if there were a trustworthy way to send money over the Internet””which there isn't””the network is missing a most essential ingredient of capitalism: salespeople.”*_

----

Now, does this sound familiar?

_"Why should everyone need access to 100mbit connections? This is stupidly crazy, and a waste of $40 billion plus."_
- Medicowallet, 2011

----

I think I'll finish with this one:

*An enduring characteristic of human nature is our inability to understand and accept the rate of technological change and its impact on society.*
- Professor Rod Tucker, University of Melbourne


----------



## medicowallet

I am sorry you do not understand economics.

Seriously, how do you think you do not look like a clown when you think that consumption did not cause the GFC, what else did Americans do with their $$$ borrowed from the rest of the world?


I am also sorry that you do not understand the driving force of the Australian economy and are prepared to waste $50 billion on faster internet, which 99% of people do not need, when we actually NEED at the moment, port and rail upgrades.

Certainly you live in your own little world without an understanding of WHY Australians are so wealthy.

You can live with your imported computers, and technology, which I assume your job revolves around. You can keep advocating for increased consumption,

but spare a thought for the miners, farmers and manufacturers that make goods that we export to the world to give you the money to consume.

I apologise for supporting them so that they can make us all wealthier.


THAT we do need now.  99% of people would do just fine with ADSL internet, and ADSL2 is perfectly adequate for many years to come

unless you want better gaming pings, or want to pirate movies faster.


----------



## boofhead

Where I work for export 100% of product. They require various results from a variety of tests and logs to verify integrity. Difficult to get permits (and finance) to develop industrial processes in CDBs. Ships going to various parts of the world can be difficult to get at a suitable time. High volumes require storage somewhere.

Also having major shoreholders of the comany overseas requires a lot of communication. 1500 kbit can only pump so much data. Sometimes people can't wait.


----------



## So_Cynical

medicowallet said:


> I am sorry you do not understand economics.
> 
> Seriously, *how do you think you do not look like a clown* when you think that consumption did not cause the GFC, what else did Americans do with their $$$ borrowed from the rest of the world?




This is a little like the "guns don't kill people - people kill people" argument that the anti gun lobby is so fond of....consumption did not cause the GFC, cheap debt, greed,  predatory leading and the financial creativity of the US finance industry created the GFC.

Also calling someone a clown is a clear personal attack and a sure sign your loosing the argument which of course is somewhat inevitable when any one argues against progress and human development.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> Interesting that, once again, I'm having to defend myself against accusations of being some Government troll.
> 
> Why is that? Let's face facts. With very few exceptions, the only people speaking publicly against the NBN are conservative commentators and politicians. You don't find too many business groups, leaders, execs speaking against it. The IT industry, experts, the business community, the telco community are all backing the NBN, albeit sometimes with assorted qualifications.
> 
> Take off the blinkers people, turn off the AM radio, put down the Bolt column and you might see just how popular this network is with the business community.




While not agreeing with you, I will join the mob and buy some more TLS when the market crashes in 2 weeks.

It is a tulip measure, this NBN, but if there is a quid to be made from tulips, the Gumnut mob should be in the trough with IT and all the other wasters benefiting from it.

gg


----------



## todster

Garpal Gumnut said:


> While not agreeing with you, I will join the mob and buy some more TLS when the market crashes in 2 weeks.
> 
> It is a tulip measure, this NBN, but if there is a quid to be made from tulips, the Gumnut mob should be in the trough with IT and all the other wasters benefiting from it.
> 
> gg




From the man who brought you NBN roll out scrapped lol


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> I am sorry you do not understand economics.
> 
> Seriously, how do you think you do not look like a clown when you think that consumption did not cause the GFC, what else did Americans do with their $$$ borrowed from the rest of the world?
> 
> Certainly you live in your own little world without an understanding of WHY Australians are so wealthy.
> 
> You can live with your imported computers, and technology, which I assume your job revolves around. You can keep advocating for increased consumption,
> 
> but spare a thought for the miners, farmers and manufacturers that make goods that we export to the world to give you the money to consume.




I'm sorry that you don't understand the absolute ridiculousness of your own argument.

What do you think it is that drives our exports of minerals? What do you think those minerals are being used for? Are we exporting them to China, where they evaporate?

Or, are they being used to manufacture goods for consumption in places like the USA? 

Without consumption, there would be no mining boom. Get it?


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> I'm sorry that you don't understand the absolute ridiculousness of your own argument.
> 
> What do you think it is that drives our exports of minerals? What do you think those minerals are being used for? Are we exporting them to China, where they evaporate?
> 
> Or, are they being used to manufacture goods for consumption in places like the USA?
> 
> Without consumption, there would be no mining boom. Get it?




Well we sure as hell don't e-mail it all to the docks do we??

No DO YOU GET that we do not have to manufacture trinkets, we only need to turn ore into steel.

Do you get that sunshine?

Of course I know that China uses our raw materials to manufacture stuff to sell to the USA and to customers of photo labs.

But what would it hurt to value add a bit to our product.... you do understand that concept, don't you?


----------



## JTLP

IFocus said:


> Actually not that happy with the current Labor government but really anti Abbott who really is a drop kick heavily defended on this site.
> 
> .
> 
> What most if not everyone here is look the other way at the alternative say no and do nothing Abbott with his bunch of losers.
> 
> 
> 
> Inept management is a understatement but there should be a dividend for Australia from mining (WA Liberal Governess thought so) but Labor has sold Australia short in the mining tax that they are going to raise.
> 
> As for Carbon tax everyone here has been in complete denial with their fingers in their ears going na na na na  about the coalitions direct action tax funded BS.
> 
> 
> 
> Not at all just means I don't talk to those that decide to label me various names based on their opinion instead of talking about the issue.




Thanks for your reply - I do appreciate it.

What if the Libs dropped Abbott - would you back them then? Surely a majority Coalition in your eyes would be a lot better than a minority Labor? (for me I think I would flee Australia for 4 years if we had a majority Labor  )

This one is for NBNMyths - 
Have you physically read the NBN document? Mate it is ridiculous that facts and figures you are spitting out about this thing...you either have:
A) Too much time (no offence intended) on your hands 
B) Are somewhat involved. 

- Hit that deny deny deny button all you like - but even the staunch Labor supporters don't know jack about the NBN - just that it is something that Lib voters oppose so they like it :

PS you really think Internet speeds are exponential? Lolly what's that speed of light?


----------



## medicowallet

So_Cynical said:


> Also calling someone a clown is a clear personal attack and a sure sign your loosing the argument which of course is somewhat inevitable when any one argues against progress and human development.




Hop off your high horse, of course it is not a personal attack, Mr Sensitive.

I think the argument is anything but loost.


----------



## todster

medicowallet said:


> Well we sure as hell don't e-mail it all to the docks do we??
> 
> No DO YOU GET that we do not have to manufacture trinkets, we only need to turn ore into steel.
> 
> Do you get that sunshine?
> 
> Of course I know that China uses our raw materials to manufacture stuff to sell to the USA and to customers of photo labs.
> 
> But what would it hurt to value add a bit to our product.... you do understand that concept, don't you?




Onesteel do it now,have a look at the chart.


----------



## medicowallet

todster said:


> Onesteel do it now,have a look at the chart.




Sad isn't it.

Our $ is killing all exporters, so what we should do is invest $50 billion into faster internet so we can consume more.

In reality a chart like that clearly shows that we need to be doing more here.

Manufacturing in this country is not a lost cause, we just need Govt to support it more.


----------



## So_Cynical

JTLP said:


> PS you really think Internet speeds are exponential? Lolly what's that speed of light?




Have you heard of Moore's law? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law ill quote the wiki  "The capabilities of many digital electronic devices are strongly linked to Moore's law: processing speed, memory capacity, sensors and even the number and size of pixels in digital cameras" 

And we can add to that list, software and internet speeds and capacity...for example: i like to play PC games, FPS - First Person Shooters being my favourite, the first one i ever played was Doom (1995) and it came on i think 8 or so floppy disks so the whole game was less than 20 Meg's in size, then a few years later came Doom 2 which was on a CD i think and that was about 400 Meg's in size.

Anyway fast forward to this weekend when i downloaded one of the latest FPS games to be released COD black ops multi-player (steam had a free game play weekend) it was a 6 Gig download, this game has global sales of over 8 million copy's (1 billion$) that's alot of gigs.

With Games getting bigger and Multi-player being such a popular way to play, the growth of consoles and their integration into the family TV and entertainment space....the file sizes will just continue growing and the bulk of those files will be distributed digitally and stored in clouds and local machines...we need the NBN speeds just to keep pace with digital reality's.


----------



## medicowallet

So_Cynical said:


> Have you heard of Moore's law? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law ill quote the wiki  "The capabilities of many digital electronic devices are strongly linked to Moore's law: processing speed, memory capacity, sensors and even the number and size of pixels in digital cameras"
> 
> And we can add to that list, software and internet speeds and capacity...for example: i like to play PC games, FPS - First Person Shooters being my favourite, the first one i ever played was Doom (1995) and it came on i think 8 or so floppy disks so the whole game was less than 20 Meg's in size, then a few years later came Doom 2 which was on a CD i think and that was about 400 Meg's in size.
> 
> Anyway fast forward to this weekend when i downloaded one of the latest FPS games to be released COD black ops multi-player (steam had a free game play weekend) it was a 6 Gig download, this game has global sales of over 8 million copy's (1 billion$) that's alot of gigs.
> 
> With Games getting bigger and Multi-player being such a popular way to play, the growth of consoles and their integration into the family TV and entertainment space....the file sizes will just continue growing and the bulk of those files will be distributed digitally and stored in clouds and local machines...we need the NBN speeds just to keep pace with digital reality's.




Ah, now I see.

Happy gaming.

PS Doom 2 was distributed on floppy too.  Doom was released in 1993 and doom 2 in 1994.


----------



## So_Cynical

medicowallet said:


> Ah, now I see.
> 
> Happy gaming.




Yep i play games and i cant spell...your point is? if it helps with your superiority complex im also in the under 50K annual income bracket...feel better now big fella?



medicowallet said:


> PS Doom 2 was distributed on floppy too.  Doom was released in 1993 and doom 2 in 1994.




Yep my bad...i was thinking Doom2 but it was actually Quake II in 97 and i was right as it was about 450 Meg's in size so from floppy's to CDs in under 5 years...and now we have made the leap from DVD's to online distribution and cloud storage.


----------



## NBNMyths

JTLP said:


> This one is for NBNMyths -
> Have you physically read the NBN document? Mate it is ridiculous that facts and figures you are spitting out about this thing...you either have:
> A) Too much time (no offence intended) on your hands
> B) Are somewhat involved.
> 
> - Hit that deny deny deny button all you like - but even the staunch Labor supporters don't know jack about the NBN - just that it is something that Lib voters oppose so they like it :
> 
> PS you really think Internet speeds are exponential? Lolly what's that speed of light?




No offence taken. I have too much time. I spend a fair bit of time waiting for things to happen, and while I'm doing that I jump on forums and read up on my pet project.

I haven't read the biz case or other technical docs end to end, but when someone says something I open them up and search for that info.

I also have a google notification set up for NBN-related searches, so I read most NBN articles.

Internet speeds are not increasing exponentially, but they are increasing rapidly. They've gone up ~1,000 times in the last 15 years. You don't need the speed of light to change to achieve that. Light doesn't move any 'faster' down fibreoptic cable than it did 30 years ago, but they get more throughput by splitting the light into different colours, and sending it down the same cable.

I'm also not a staunch labor supporter. I'm a staunch NBN supporter. I am actually quite pleased that Turnbull of late has shifted his position from "12Mbps is enough for anything" to clearly angling towards a ~25Mbps Fibre To The Node proposal. While that's still pretty backward and unlikely to be value for money, at least it's a move in the right direction. I feel less concerned at the prospect of them getting in in 2013. After all, it took the ALP 2 years to dump the FTTN idea. If the Libs move on the same schedule they might even back the NBN by 2013....


----------



## medicowallet

So_Cynical said:


> Yep i play games and i cant spell...your point is? if it helps with your superiority complex im also in the under 50K annual income bracket...feel better now big fella?
> 
> 
> 
> Yep my bad...i was thinking Doom2 but it was actually Quake II in 97 and i was right as it was about 450 Meg's in size so from floppy's to CDs in under 5 years...and now we have made the leap from DVD's to online distribution and cloud storage.




My point is that your motives for support may not be the same as someone who isn't a gamer.

In my opinion, the government should spend our money the most effective way it can.

The current government has a pathetic record.

The NBN will be no different, with cost blowouts, and overservicing 99% of the population.

We would be much better off spending the money to make a ROI rather than spending it on a machine used for consumption.

You game ok now.  You pirate movies ok now.

The coal exporters are bottlenecked by rail and port infrastructure.

We sell raw materials without any value adding.

Can you not see how this is crazy?


----------



## bellenuit

The argument that the NBN can deliver fast speeds is not the issue with many here. The 4 main things about the NBN that I am opposed to are:

1. The assumption that fast internet speed can only be delivered by government, when it has been mainly private industry that has brought computing and communications to the stage it is in today. Compare both computing and communications speeds with what they were only 10 years ago. This was mostly all done without government involvement.

2. It is hard to predict what the needs will be in 10 years time. Speed will undoubtedly be required, but access method is constantly changing and the trend is strongly towards mobility. Although the NBN may serve as a useful backbone, does it need to go to every home?

3. The enormous cost of the NBN. Note they haven't upgraded the cost even though they are assuming more risk than previously since last weeks decision. Many would ask if investing that amount in the NBN provides the most benefit to Australia.

4. And extremely importantly. There is the whole assumption that the NBN that we are being told we will get can be delivered successfully. This government has failed to handle projects and policies far less complex. Not only have they often not delivered, they have screwed up entirely, setting whole industries back years (think roof insulation). Many of us simply believe that the NBN will be another fiasco. We may end up worse off than we currently are if the NBN doesn't deliver while it stymied private investment in this same area. The attempts to stifle competition to the NBN and the secrecy surrounding many aspects of the project are clear indications that it is already heading that way.


----------



## bellenuit

Workers may hold NBN to ransom, according to industrial agreement

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...strial-agreement/story-e6frg9hx-1226069735242


----------



## NBNMyths

bellenuit said:


> The argument that the NBN can deliver fast speeds is not the issue with many here. The 4 main things about the NBN that I am opposed to are:
> 
> 1. The assumption that fast internet speed can only be delivered by government, when it has been mainly private industry that has brought computing and communications to the stage it is in today. Compare both computing and communications speeds with what they were only 10 years ago. This was mostly all done without government involvement.




The problem is that the market (in Australia) hasn't delivered fast internet speeds.

Neither the Optus or Telstra HFC networks have been expanded for over a decade. The Telstra net only passes ~25% of the population, with less than that actually able to be connected. The Optus net is even less, passing ~20% and available to ~15%. The standard to increase these networks to 100Mbps per node was ratified way back in 2007, but Telstra and Optus have only just begun updating parts of their network to it.

With the exception of new estates, we have no FTTP networks, while overseas they have been building them for a decade. In most cases by partially or fully-Government owned telcos.

The gradual improvements using ADSL and ADSL2+ have been delivered by Telstra, but not everywhere. There is only competing infrastructure in about 400 of our ~6000 exchanges.

While the private sector have delivered overseas (the US is the best example), they simply haven't done it here. One of the biggest reasons is that the fibre/cable nets in the US are funded by payTV subscriptions. That won't happen here because we have low payTV uptake due to anti-sihoning laws (which IMHO are a very good thing).



> 2. It is hard to predict what the needs will be in 10 years time. Speed will undoubtedly be required, but access method is constantly changing and the trend is strongly towards mobility. Although the NBN may serve as a useful backbone, does it need to go to every home?




The trend isn't a change _to_ mobility, it is the _addition_ of it. Data growth over fixed networks continues to increase much, much faster than data over wireless networks. From Q4 2009 to Q4 2010, the ABS reported that data over wireless increased by 2,500 Terrabytes (to 16990), while data over fixed lines increased by 61,000 Terrabytes (to 174665).

Mobile broadband connections cannot physically cope with our current data needs, let alone the massive growth that we have every year. There is no mobile technology on the horizon that can overcome this, and there is no country or telecommunications provider anywhere in the World that is advocating wireless to replace fixed networks in metropolitan areas.

Then of course there is the price, which is up to 1,333 times more expensive than fixed connections.



> 3. The enormous cost of the NBN. Note they haven't upgraded the cost even though they are assuming more risk than previously since last weeks decision. Many would ask if investing that amount in the NBN provides the most benefit to Australia.




That's a fair argument, and there are strong opinions on either side. Personally, I have no doubt, but other feel strongly the other way.

From my POV... I think the future is undoubtedly dependent on a fast network, fibre is undoubtedly the most future-proof solution, and there will be large and widespread benefits. I also don't support comparison with 'spending' on things that don't provide a measurable return. Unlike most govt spending, the NBN actually provides measurable income, so the spending on it cannot be compared to, say, building a toll-free road.



> 4. And extremely importantly. There is the whole assumption that the NBN that we are being told we will get can be delivered successfully. This government has failed to handle projects and policies far less complex. Not only have they often not delivered, they have screwed up entirely, setting whole industries back years (think roof insulation). Many of us simply believe that the NBN will be another fiasco. We may end up worse off than we currently are if the NBN doesn't deliver while it stymied private investment in this same area. The attempts to stifle competition to the NBN and the secrecy surrounding many aspects of the project are clear indications that it is already heading that way.




Again, some of that is a fair argument.

I have no doubt that this Govt has stuffed things up, as all Governments do. The last one was no exception, it's just that we tend to remember the current Government's stuffups while people forget about the billion-odd we threw at the Seasprite fiasco, for example.

But the Government isn't doing the NBN. They have appointed a company to do it, full of very experienced and qualified people, and from all indications they are doing a pretty good job. Hundreds of contracts have been signed, all seems to be on budget so far and any delays are minimal and largely outside their control (ie Telstra deal). For such a massive start-up project, I'd say they are doing very well indeed.

Looking at an alternative suggested by the coalition...where Govt pay the private sector to improve the network outside profitable areas... This has far more in common with the insulation scheme that what the Government is actually doing with the NBN. While the Govt did a piss-poor job of supervising the insulation scheme, it was the private sector that provided the poor/unsafe workmanship and committed the frauds.

The "secrecy" surrounding the NBN is a fallacy promoted by Turnbull et al. As I've demonstrated, there is vast amounts of NBN info out there. The only things missing are in-depth costings for tenders etc, which I think is quite sensible to keep private. No company tells it's shareholders the detailed costings of what it expects to pay for upcoming contracts. It would be stupidity.

As for stifling competition. I have no issue with what they have done, which is to legislate that if any company wants to build a competing fast fixed-line network, then they must do so on the same terms as the NBN. That is: wholesale-only, open access. But if the private sector wanted to build a fast network, why haven't they done anything for the last 10 years? AAPT's Paul Broad is a great example. He jumped up and down about the restrictions if he wanted to build a FTTP network. Well Paul, where have you been for the last 10 years? He has never even proposed doing such a thing, why would we believe he's going to start now?



bellenuit said:


> Workers may hold NBN to ransom, according to industrial agreement
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...strial-agreement/story-e6frg9hx-1226069735242




There's a big difference between what the unions _want_ to get through, and what they will _actually_ get through. I'm sure anyone who has ever dealt with such negotiations would realise that the wish list sent through by either side as a starting point is not particularly close to the eventual reality.

I would hope that they take a leaf out of the Sydney Olympics book, and get a good working relationship with the construction unions.


----------



## JTLP

So_Cynical said:


> Have you heard of Moore's law? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law ill quote the wiki  "The capabilities of many digital electronic devices are strongly linked to Moore's law: processing speed, memory capacity, sensors and even the number and size of pixels in digital cameras"
> 
> And we can add to that list, software and internet speeds and capacity...for example: i like to play PC games, FPS - First Person Shooters being my favourite, the first one i ever played was Doom (1995) and it came on i think 8 or so floppy disks so the whole game was less than 20 Meg's in size, then a few years later came Doom 2 which was on a CD i think and that was about 400 Meg's in size.
> 
> Anyway fast forward to this weekend when i downloaded one of the latest FPS games to be released COD black ops multi-player (steam had a free game play weekend) it was a 6 Gig download, this game has global sales of over 8 million copy's (1 billion$) that's alot of gigs.
> 
> With Games getting bigger and Multi-player being such a popular way to play, the growth of consoles and their integration into the family TV and entertainment space....the file sizes will just continue growing and the bulk of those files will be distributed digitally and stored in clouds and local machines...we need the NBN speeds just to keep pace with digital reality's.




I have actually and knew it was around processing speeds - was it really intended for internet speeds? I don't think it was...open to interpretation though.


----------



## bellenuit

NBNMyths said:


> The problem is that the market (in Australia) hasn't delivered fast internet speeds.




Neither has the NBN yet. The market delivers what the market wants. It is the story of capitalism. Saying the market can't do it because they haven't up to now is like saying that the market can't deliver IPTV because they haven't done so in the past. A lot of things have to come together to make it feasible for private industry to get involved. The NBN is being rolled out to serve a future anticipated need. You are attacking private industry for not serving that need when it hasn't been there up to now. The planned NBN rollout, with its legislative impediments to competition, has ensured that the market will not get involved, even when they agree that need will be there in the future.



> The trend isn't a change _to_ mobility, it is the _addition_ of it. Data growth over fixed networks continues to increase much, much faster than data over wireless networks. From Q4 2009 to Q4 2010, the ABS reported that data over wireless increased by 2,500 Terrabytes (to 16990), while data over fixed lines increased by 61,000 Terrabytes (to 174665).
> 
> Mobile broadband connections cannot physically cope with our current data needs, let alone the massive growth that we have every year. There is no mobile technology on the horizon that can overcome this, and there is no country or telecommunications provider anywhere in the World that is advocating wireless to replace fixed networks in metropolitan areas.




Again you are trying to compare a fixed network model to an all mobile model. The trend is clearly towards access from mobile rather than fixed devices. This may well increase at a faster rate the amount of data that flows on fixed networks between nodes that service the mobile devices. But the issue is the market will provide the speed and throughput where it is most wanted and profitable. Private industry has successfully done that up to now. This doesn't always mean that there won't be black spots where industry is uninterested because it doesn't make economic sense, but the government can fill the voids through subsidies or other means. You don't need a $35B commitment to do that.



> fibre is undoubtedly the most future-proof solution




You cannot make anything future proof. The best thing to do in such a fast changing environment as data communications *may be* to just plan to meet short term known requirements with some risk taking, but not throwing billions at one option only. Follow the need as it arises. Remain flexible and responsive and don't put everything in the one basket. A few years ago it may have seemed that putting a PC on every student's desk linked via a wired LAN would be the way to go. It was comparable on a micro scale with the NBN in many respects. Now schools are looking at giving iPads to students instead. Setting up such a school infrastructure to provide a PC / Wired LAN solution would have been beneficial but wasted compared to the alternative's available today. I was reading today that some airlines, I think BA was mentioned, are looking at providing passengers with iPads for the duration of their flights rather than installing expensive seat entertainment networks. What a great idea. Load the two dozen or so movies that they normally deliver on in flight entertainment on the iPads and hand out to the customers. If an iPad isn't functioning just replace it. If one or more inbuilt seat entertainment systems fail, you end up with many unhappy passengers. 



> But the Government isn't doing the NBN. They have appointed a company to do it, full of very experienced and qualified people, and from all indications they are doing a pretty good job. Hundreds of contracts have been signed, all seems to be on budget so far and any delays are minimal and largely outside their control (ie Telstra deal). For such a massive start-up project, I'd say they are doing very well indeed.
> 
> Looking at an alternative suggested by the coalition...where Govt pay the private sector to improve the network outside profitable areas... This has far more in common with the insulation scheme that what the Government is actually doing with the NBN. While the Govt did a piss-poor job of supervising the insulation scheme, it was the private sector that provided the poor/unsafe workmanship and committed the frauds.




I think you are trying to have your cake and eat it here. First paragraph: You agree government stuffs up but the NBN Co will contract the work out to private companies so that is OK. Second paragraph: It wasn't the government that stuffed up but private companies.



> The "secrecy" surrounding the NBN is a fallacy promoted by Turnbull et al. As I've demonstrated, there is vast amounts of NBN info out there. The only things missing are in-depth costings for tenders etc,




There is a lot more missing than that. I will have to research some of the facts I based my comment on as I don't have them to hand, but I clearly recollect when initially reading about them that the secrecy was not limited to just business in confidence issues.



> As for stifling competition. I have no issue with what they have done, which is to legislate that if any company wants to build a competing fast fixed-line network, then they must do so on the same terms as the NBN. That is: wholesale-only, open access. But if the private sector wanted to build a fast network, why haven't they done anything for the last 10 years? AAPT's Paul Broad is a great example. He jumped up and down about the restrictions if he wanted to build a FTTP network. Well Paul, where have you been for the last 10 years? He has never even proposed doing such a thing, why would we believe he's going to start now?




The last 10 years issue I have dealt with above. 

But companies can't build competing networks on the same terms as the NBN. They are being prevented from competing in that space. There is no reason why it should be wholesale only. What you are saying is, you can compete, but you must dump your retail base to do so. That is a restriction that is only there for the purpose of stifling competition to the NBN, not to ensure that the best network is rolled out to consumers based on what consumers eventually want. In any case, I have read some articles where the NBNCo or some planned subsidiary of it will be able to provide retail services to large institutions.


----------



## boofhead

Fibre has a bit of future proofing. The bulk of the physical layout can be left as is while equipment attached to it can be upgraded. Similarly to how copper has managed to be extended a bit but that appears to be reaching limits partly because of Telstra's buildout.

IPTV mostly hasn't happened here because of the networks. Telstra don't enable multicast to wholesale customers. That leaves ISPs deploying own DSLAMs. That has cost and needs competitive backhaul. Tasmanians know what it is like - often overlooked. People in NT experience it now. Also Telstra own and operate exchanges - they have their fees and procedures. Then you have the South Brisbane issues. Telstra decommissioned an exchange. What is the competitive environment like with that?


----------



## drsmith

Some interesting speculation about the industrial agreement for NBN contractors.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...-tender-pd20110606-HK47E?opendocument&src=idp (subscription required)


----------



## NBNMyths

bellenuit said:


> Neither has the NBN yet. The market delivers what the market wants. It is the story of capitalism. Saying the market can't do it because they haven't up to now is like saying that the market can't deliver IPTV because they haven't done so in the past. A lot of things have to come together to make it feasible for private industry to get involved. The NBN is being rolled out to serve a future anticipated need. You are attacking private industry for not serving that need when it hasn't been there up to now. The planned NBN rollout, with its legislative impediments to competition, has ensured that the market will not get involved, even when they agree that need will be there in the future.




But the market hasn't even delivered ADSL to many metropolitan areas, and surely no-one could deny that there is massive demand for that?

The installation of competitive DSLAMs is another great example. There are about 6,000 telephone exchanges in Australia. Yet "the market" has only installed relatively cheap DSLAMs into about 400 metropolitan exchanges. If these companies aren't willing to spend on a $500 piece of basic commodity technology that will serve 20 connections, what hope is there for spending a few thousand dollars per premises?

Also, the NBN isn't just about delivering a future need, it's about fixing the failure of the market to deliver for existing needs. But it does so using technology that will deliver sufficient bandwidth for the foreseeable future.

The thought that the market would ever deliver fibre to the premises on anything like the scale of the NBN is just fantasy.



> Again you are trying to compare a fixed network model to an all mobile model. The trend is clearly towards access from mobile rather than fixed devices. This may well increase at a faster rate the amount of data that flows on fixed networks between nodes that service the mobile devices. But the issue is the market will provide the speed and throughput where it is most wanted and profitable. Private industry has successfully done that up to now. This doesn't always mean that there won't be black spots where industry is uninterested because it doesn't make economic sense, but the government can fill the voids through subsidies or other means. You don't need a $35B commitment to do that.




You are misunderstanding the ABS statistics. They are not measuring the total amount of data flowing "between nodes", they are measuring the total amount of data downloaded via fixed connections to ordinary subscribers (ie ADSL and Cable).

The use of mobile devices is growing, but they are not replacing fixed connections. Note that I am not including mobile devices connected via WiFi in this, because those WiFi connections depend on the fixed network like the NBN.

The other part of your case is a philosophical one. Yes, you can make an argument to leave it to the market in profitable areas and subsidise them in unprofitable areas. Or you can deliver ubiquity in one swoop. I think there are pros and cons for either model, but I'm quite happy with the NBN model. I doubt the overall cost would be very different either way. The problem with paying a subsidy is that you effectively have to pay a subsidy so the telco can achieve a commercial return (say 15% ROI). The NBN is only trying to achieve 7%. So that extra 8% must either come from excessive subsidies in the unprofitable areas, or from higher prices (if we assume the cost of actually building the network is the same either way). So why is that better?



> You cannot make anything future proof.




Fibre is a future-proof as it gets. It has been the fastest technology for 30 years, and nothing is approaching it. In fact, it keeps getting faster than any alternative. Speeds over fibre can be increased relatively easily using technology that's already in use. Just last week we saw another speed record set over fibreoptic cable.

For mobile broadband to ever approach the capacity of fibre optics would require a rewrite of the laws of physics. That's not an exaggeration. There's simply not enough radio spectrum in existence to carry that much data, even if the current practical limitations were overcome. It's not just a matter of waiting for a technological improvement as it was for your classroom wired/wifi example above.

What will happen is a boom in WiFi (and in the future WiGig) connectivity. Short range wireless networks connected to the fixed network. The NBN will assist this boom because there will finally be a fixed network that can match the capacity of WiFi.

Your BA iPad example does nothing for your cause either. Those iPads will be filled with data via the WiFi network of BA, not the mobile broadband network.



> I think you are trying to have your cake and eat it here. First paragraph: You agree government stuffs up but the NBN Co will contract the work out to private companies so that is OK. Second paragraph: It wasn't the government that stuffed up but private companies.




Not quite. The NBN isn't the Government. I have more faith in their ability to get value for money from tenderers than some faceless department hack.




> There is a lot more missing than that. I will have to research some of the facts I based my comment on as I don't have them to hand, but I clearly recollect when initially reading about them that the secrecy was not limited to just business in confidence issues.




I await your research.



> But companies can't build competing networks on the same terms as the NBN. They are being prevented from competing in that space. There is no reason why it should be wholesale only. What you are saying is, you can compete, but you must dump your retail base to do so. That is a restriction that is only there for the purpose of stifling competition to the NBN, not to ensure that the best network is rolled out to consumers based on what consumers eventually want. In any case, I have read some articles where the NBNCo or some planned subsidiary of it will be able to provide retail services to large institutions.




That is partially true. The NBN model of having universal access cost across the country means that metro areas will to some extent subsidise rural areas. The size of the network lets them get some back through economies of scale. But, if it were open for a private company to come in to a high-profit, low cost area and run a vertical network, then they could probably undercut the NBN. And that destroys the cost base for the network. Again, this comes down to the build-all or market+subsidy model already discussed. And again, I have no issue with the rules that have been put in place to ensure that if anyone does come in, they must wholesale to everyone equally, just like the NBN has to.

Just like water pipes or power lines, telecommunications networks are a natural monopoly. It makes no more sense to have duplicated physical networks than it does to have multiple power lines running to each house. It's just money down the drain, as Telstra and Optus found out in the 90s. The best solution is to have one set of "wires", then ensure you have strong competition for the retail market, allowing ISPs to develop different and competitive services over your pipes.

The NBN and any subsidiary is specifically restricted to wholesale only, with the exception of services to utilities for specified services such as smart metering, traffic lights controls and things like that. If during the course of operations, they acquire a retailer, they must dispose of it's retail operations within 12 months. The example given is say the NBN buy a company that owns a fibre network, in order to use that network rather than overbuild it. If that company has a retail arm, then the retail arm must be either closed or sold within 12 months.

You can check the legislation for yourself here:
http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2011A00022/Html/Text#_Toc289934635


----------



## cynic

NBNMyths said:


> Fibre is a future-proof as it gets. It has been the fastest technology for 30 years, and nothing is approaching it. In fact, it keeps getting faster than any alternative.




Are you sure about this?

I was of the understanding that there have been some significant scientific discoveries/breakthroughs over the past few decades that would appear to presage the advent of superior (in terms of speed and infrastructure size) data transmission technology.

Perhaps you could put the "rose coloured" optics aside for a moment and perform an exhaustive investigation first, rather than automatically fending off the various challenges to the wisdom of NBN policy with such bold statements about "future-proof" data transmission technology.


----------



## boofhead

What alternatives to fibre are future proof that you're aware of? Most of the wireless advances do not come close to approaching fibre.


----------



## cynic

boofhead said:


> What alternatives to fibre are future proof that you're aware of? Most of the wireless advances do not come close to approaching fibre.




Discoveries regarding quantum entanglement appear to suggest that seemingly "instantaneous" data transmission is achievable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement


----------



## trainspotter

It will be dismissed as some sort of unobtainable "voodoo technology" by NBNMyths no doubt. Anyone that has a valid statement against the NBN is automatically categorised as screaming heretics and neophytes.


----------



## NBNMyths

cynic said:


> Are you sure about this?
> 
> I was of the understanding that there have been some significant scientific discoveries/breakthroughs over the past few decades that would appear to presage the advent of superior (in terms of speed and infrastructure size) data transmission technology.
> 
> Perhaps you could put the "rose coloured" optics aside for a moment and perform an exhaustive investigation first, rather than automatically fending off the various challenges to the wisdom of NBN policy with such bold statements about "future-proof" data transmission technology.




When I read this, I though you were serious and I was all ready to write a nice, factual response. Then I read this.....



cynic said:


> Discoveries regarding quantum entanglement appear to suggest that seemingly "instantaneous" data transmission is achievable.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement




.... and now am pretty sure you're either having a shot, or have just been watching too many episodes of Fringe.


ROFL....Quantum Entanglement! Yep, I'm sure that commercial technology that violates Einstein's theory of relativity is only just around the corner.


----------



## trainspotter

It will only take one geeky kid or technoboffin to write a code that can decompress data into bite size chunks to change this story. There was an Australian guy who invented an engine that was 50% lighter and 30% more fuel efficient. A fuel company bought it so bye bye technology. Sarich was his name.

Whatever happened to this startling breakthrough?



> “The scratched glass we’ve developed is actually a Photonic Integrated Circuit,” he explained in a University of Sydney statement. “This circuit uses the ‘scratch’ as a guide or a switching path for information -- kind of like when trains are switched from one track to another -- except this switch takes only one picosecond to change tracks.
> 
> “This means that in one second the switch is turning on and off about one million times,” he added. *“We are talking about photonic technology that has terabit per second capacity.”*
> 
> An initial demonstration of the photonic technology has revealed it as capable of providing *speeds around 60 times faster than today’s networks, *which rely on electric switching, but the team is confident that further development will glean even quicker performance.




http://www.thetechherald.com/articl...ircuit-sends-internet-speeds-through-the-roof


----------



## IFocus

trainspotter said:


> It will only take one geeky kid or technoboffin to write a code that can decompress data into bite size chunks to change this story. There was an Australian guy who invented an engine that was 50% lighter and 30% more fuel efficient. A fuel company bought it so bye bye technology. Sarich was his name.
> 
> Whatever happened to this startling breakthrough?
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.thetechherald.com/articl...ircuit-sends-internet-speeds-through-the-roof




Sarich made I think $500 million and didn't produce a engine? I don't think ASIC would let him get away with that to day.



> The orbital engine was invented in 1972 by Ralph Sarich, an engineer from Perth, Australia, who worked on the concept for years without ever producing a production engine. A prototype was demonstrated, running on the bench with no load. The engine can run on compressed air or steam. The engine does not need oil to run at all. It produces very high revs. It has only one moving part which can be run as a pump.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_engine

The real issue isn't that we will all move over to wireless for BB as mobile devices will / are going to crowd out the available spectrum anyway which will become a issue for BB users.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> It will only take one geeky kid or technoboffin to write a code that can decompress data into bite size chunks to change this story. There was an Australian guy who invented an engine that was 50% lighter and 30% more fuel efficient. A fuel company bought it so bye bye technology. Sarich was his name.
> 
> Whatever happened to this startling breakthrough?
> 
> http://www.thetechherald.com/articl...ircuit-sends-internet-speeds-through-the-roof




Thanks IPfocus for the Sarich stuff. +1. Additionally, the conspiracy theory that an oil company bought the patent and shelved it has been around for a while, but I've never seen any actual evidence of it. Even if true though, the patent expired over 15 years ago, so if the engine actually worked, then there's been nothing stopping it being developed for well over a decade. Me thinks that Ralph's baby was not so good as he claimed it was....

On the other points...

Any mythical future super-data-compression system could just as easily be applied to fibre as well as copper or wireless, so would only serve to increase the gap between fibre and the rest.

Also, I'm not sure that you actually read the article you linked to about the new switching tech. Here, let me quote a bit for you:

_According to Professor Eggleton, whose scientific team beat its own deadline for completion by a full year in developing the new circuit technology,* the recent advancement of optical fibre delivery has meant that online data has the capacity to travel at much greater speeds than those currently achieved, which is where the scratched glass comes into play. *_

Let me translate: _To use this great new tech we have discovered, you need optical fibre._ Just like Alan Jones' "Laserbeam" technology from a couple of weeks ago. In fact, Jones would probably be right onto this great new photonics technology....

Since the current bottleneck is the "last mile" of copper from exchange to house, any advancements such as this that benefit the optical fibre portion of the networks won't produce any improvements in the speeds people can get, since it's limited by the DSL portion of the network.

And you wondered what happened to this idea? Well, the Fed Govt is funding the group's research: http://www.usyd.edu.au/news/science/397.html?newsstoryid=6795

Quite ironic that you've quoted a leading researcher in photonics and strong supporter of the NBN as somehow being evidence that it's not a good thing. 

Are there any more technical articles supporting Fibre or the NBN you'd like to produce? Makes my job here much easier.


----------



## boofhead

cynic said:


> Discoveries regarding quantum entanglement appear to suggest that seemingly "instantaneous" data transmission is achievable.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement




How long until working systems will be implemented?

Have you checked out what production systems using anything quantum use? USA based company has started selling quantum computing devices. http://www.dwavesys.com/en/dw_homepage.html and check out the cooling required!


----------



## Knobby22

Quantam entanglement is real but lets face it, very difficult to do.
Some people say it could be used for transportation (beam me up Scotty) but getting two electrons to act the same way under laboratory conditions is VERY different to getting billions of molecules to act together. Besides quantam theory is very weird stuff.

From Neils Bohr, the founder of this branch of physics: 

"For those who are not shocked when they first come across quantum theory cannot possibly have understood it."


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> Thanks IPfocus for the Sarich stuff. +1. Additionally, the conspiracy theory that an oil company bought the patent and shelved it has been around for a while, but I've never seen any actual evidence of it. Even if true though, the patent expired over 15 years ago, so if the engine actually worked, then there's been nothing stopping it being developed for well over a decade. Me thinks that Ralph's baby was not so good as he claimed it was....
> 
> On the other points...
> 
> Any mythical future super-data-compression system could just as easily be applied to fibre as well as copper or wireless, so would only serve to increase the gap between fibre and the rest.
> 
> Also, I'm not sure that you actually read the article you linked to about the new switching tech. Here, let me quote a bit for you:
> 
> _According to Professor Eggleton, whose scientific team beat its own deadline for completion by a full year in developing the new circuit technology,* the recent advancement of optical fibre delivery has meant that online data has the capacity to travel at much greater speeds than those currently achieved, which is where the scratched glass comes into play. *_
> 
> Let me translate: _To use this great new tech we have discovered, you need optical fibre._ Just like Alan Jones' "Laserbeam" technology from a couple of weeks ago. In fact, Jones would probably be right onto this great new photonics technology....
> 
> Since the current bottleneck is the "last mile" of copper from exchange to house, any advancements such as this that benefit the optical fibre portion of the networks won't produce any improvements in the speeds people can get, since it's limited by the DSL portion of the network.
> 
> And you wondered what happened to this idea? Well, the Fed Govt is funding the group's research: http://www.usyd.edu.au/news/science/397.html?newsstoryid=6795
> 
> Quite ironic that you've quoted a leading researcher in photonics and strong supporter of the NBN as somehow being evidence that it's not a good thing.
> 
> Are there any more technical articles supporting Fibre or the NBN you'd like to produce? Makes my job here much easier.




Hahahahahhaaaa ...... your sabbatical at Camp Conroy has given you all the answers now hasn't it. You have also forgotten that I am not against the technology. I have written I am all for it when it is placed in the right areas first  The link I provided was to evidence that there is technology to be invented yet that could make other/existing technology redundant. Also why I played the Sarich card as well. You keeping up yet?

1) If Sarich's engine was never a goer why did a petrochem company buy it then? The Wiki link that IFocus provided says he sold it to them? Sarich made his money out of the shares he sold in the company and used it to buy Perth CBD Property. DOH ! Do you actually comprehend what you are reading?

2) Alan Jones is a paid vox pop. Not a scientist. Not a Laser Professor either. Ummmmm did you actually READ the date on the link I provided? _"great new photonics technology...."_ you called it. The article was written on the Jul 10 2008, 10:34am. I was asking WHERE IS IT USED NOW ???? Fibre has been around for 30 years !!!! You highlighted the part you wanted where it states "_the *recent* advancement of optical fibre delivery has meant that online data has the capacity to travel at much greater speeds than those currently achieved"_ WHERE IS THE SCRATCHED GLASS COMING INTO PLAY THEN?? We all know that fibre optic cable is faster then copper. The scratched glass was supposed to be changing the EXISTING SWITCHES that is causing the lag time according to the article. I reiterate ...... did you actually read this or just cherry pick so you can go on the attack?



> Are there any more technical articles supporting Fibre or the NBN you'd like to produce? *Makes my job here much easier*.




Hung yourself with your own tongue on this one "Champion"  Which "job" is that exactly old ****? To re-educate the neophytes to bend to the will of the shiny blue cable? Rome burns and Nero fiddles again.

P.S. Read the article again. Replace the switches with photonic switch technology. NOWHERE does it state fibre optic cable is the key to the solution. 



> An initial demonstration of the photonic technology has revealed it as capable of providing speeds around 60 times faster than today’s networks, *which rely on electric switching,* but the team is confident that further development will glean even quicker performance.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> Hahahahahhaaaa ...... your sabbatical at Camp Conroy has given you all the answers now hasn't it. You have also forgotten that I am not against the technology. I have written I am all for it when it is placed in the right areas first  The link I provided was to evidence that there is technology to be invented yet that could make other/existing technology redundant.




And my point is that all these breakthrough technologies are base on a fibreoptic network.



> 1) If Sarich's engine was never a goer why did a petrochem company buy it then? The Wiki link that IFocus provided says he sold it to them?



Did they? Got a ref? Note that the article doesn't give a reference for the supposed purchase of the patent. The ref is just the patent itself. Also, as I wrote, the patent expired 15 years ago, yet no orbital engines have made it anywhere.



> 2) Alan Jones is a paid vox pop. Not a scientist. Not a Laser Professor either. Ummmmm did you actually READ the date on the link I provided? _"great new photonics technology...."_ you called it. The article was written on the Jul 10 2008, 10:34am. I was asking WHERE IS IT USED NOW ???? Fibre has been around for 30 years !!!! You highlighted the part you wanted where it states "_the *recent* advancement of optical fibre delivery has meant that online data has the capacity to travel at much greater speeds than those currently achieved"_ WHERE IS THE SCRATCHED GLASS COMING INTO PLAY THEN?? We all know that fibre optic cable is faster then copper. The scratched glass was supposed to be changing the EXISTING SWITCHES that is causing the lag time according to the article. I reiterate ...... did you actually read this or just cherry pick so you can go on the attack?




I guess you didn't get my sarcasm. I'll try to be more obvious in future.

No, Jones is not a scientist. If only he'd realise that himself, before passing his laughable interpretations off as fact.

I have no idea if the tech is in use, or what stage the research is at. Believe it or not, the success of an experiment doesn't instantly send that system into production. I guess that's why the lab received ongoing funding for their photonic switching technologies last year? Alcatel demonstrated 100Pbps/km fibre optics in 2009, but commercially they are still at 100Gbps. It takes time to commercialise these things. Surely, you can understand that?

But if you want to know, why not send the good professor an email. I'm sure he'd be quite happy to enlighten you as to their progress.



> Hung yourself with your own tongue on this one "Champion"  Which "job" is that exactly old ****? To re-educate the neophytes to bend to the will of the shiny blue cable?




Yes, that's the one. The job I have to ensure _truth, justice and the Australian way_ when it comes to dispelling ridiculous myths surrounding the NBN. Oh, and just in case you're implying that by 'job' I meant a paid or otherwise directed position to perform such a role, you should be on the Australian Olympic archery team if you can draw a bow that long. 



> P.S. Read the article again. Replace the switches with photonic switch technology. NOWHERE does it state fibre optic cable is the key to the solution.




What do you think photonics is? Maybe you should look it up. The reason glass etching works is because it is light switching light, instead of electrical current doing so. ie, optical data transmission ie, optical fibre.


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> Yes, that's the one. The job I have to ensure *truth, justice and the Australian way *when it comes to dispelling ridiculous myths surrounding the NBN. Oh, and just in case you're implying that by 'job' I meant a paid or otherwise directed position to perform such a role, you should be on the Australian Olympic archery team if you can draw a bow that long.




Bwaahahhhahahhahahahhaaaa **gasp** hahahhahhahaahqaaaaaaggagagaa ......  So now you are a superhero? _Truth, justice and the Austalian way !!_ You have got to be kidding me man. You have some serious issues I think you should look at. This by the way is an internet forum where people can have an opinion that differs from yours. So who appointed you to make this your "JOB" then? Yourself?

And what exactly is your "JOB" in here then other than flying around wearing a red cape and your underpants on the outside, Ohhhhhhhhhhh thats right, educating us neophytes on the benefits of a shiny blue cable!

No ridiculous myths as to why they would not release a business case model then?

Methinks you have made a Freudian slip old ****. Hand in the cookie jar for mine.

Your "JOB" ...... LOL 

P.S. Send an email to Alan Jones ..... I am sure he will want to hear your point of view as well. Afterall ...... he gets paid for his job.


----------



## todster

trainspotter said:


> Bwaahahhhahahhahahahhaaaa **gasp** hahahhahhahaahqaaaaaaggagagaa ......  So now you are a superhero? _Truth, justice and the Austalian way !!_ You have got to be kidding me man. You have some serious issues I think you should look at. This by the way is an internet forum where people can have an opinion that differs from yours. So who apointed you to make this your "JOB" then? Yourself?
> 
> And what exactly is your "JOB" in here then other than flying around wearing a red cape and your underpants on the outside, Ohhhhhhhhhhh thats right, educating us neophytes on the benefits of a shiny blue cable!
> 
> No ridiculous myths as to why they would not release a business case model then?
> 
> Methinks you have made a Freudian slip old ****. Hand in the cookie jar for mine.
> 
> Your "JOB" ...... LOL
> 
> P.S. Send an email to Alan Jones ..... I am sure he will want to hear your point of view as well. Afterall ...... he gets paid for his job.




Your just digging a bigger hole for yourself,put the bottle down and go to bed.


----------



## trainspotter

todster said:


> Your just digging a bigger hole for yourself,put the bottle down and go to bed.




You of all people can see this folding out in front of you todster? 

Truth, justice and the Australian Waaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy ........ up up and awayyyyyyyy! You have got to be kidding me !!!!!!!! 



> *MAKES MY JOB HERE MUCH EASIER*



 NBNMyths on a roll.


----------



## todster

trainspotter said:


> You of all people can see this folding out in front of you todster?
> 
> Truth, justice and the Australian Waaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy ........ up up and awayyyyyyyy! You have got to be kidding me !!!!!!!!
> 
> NBNMyths on a roll.




Mate if he's/she's not working for them they should employ him/her.(might be Penny wong)


----------



## So_Cynical

I just watched an amazing video of a new PC and console game that's going to be released soon called Battlefield 3 (BF3) the game features stunning graphics and Multiplayer servers capable of hosting 64 player games, the amount of bandwidth and low ping's required to have quality play is reliant on capable hardware and fast, high quality internet connections, as an example of where the gaming world is going have a look at the video in full screen HD and imagine what the future holds if this is the reality now....this is 1 reason why need the NBN.
~


----------



## cynic

boofhead said:


> How long until working systems will be implemented?
> 
> Are you really asking me to commit a scientist to a specific deadline?



The potential intelligence and military applications of this new technology are likely to prove to be compelling incentives for certain nations to get on board, so my best guess is that it will happen in my current lifetime!


boofhead said:


> Have you checked out what production systems using anything quantum use? USA based company has started selling quantum computing devices. http://www.dwavesys.com/en/dw_homepage.html and check out the cooling required!




No - I haven't checked out these systems. As for the cooling required, I believe Edison also had some significant challenges when he invented his first electric light bulb. Mankind still managed to surmount these early obstacles way back then - so why not now?


----------



## cynic

NBNMyths said:


> When I read this, I though you were serious and I was all ready to write a nice, factual response. Then I read this.....
> 
> .... and now am pretty sure you're either having a shot, or have just been watching too many episodes of Fringe.
> 
> 
> ROFL....Quantum Entanglement! Yep, I'm sure that commercial technology that violates Einstein's theory of relativity is only just around the corner.




Am I to understand that you are suggesting that commercial applications of Quantum Entanglement violate Einstein's Theory of Relativity? (If so, I'd love to hear your explanation/justification on this! Pray, do tell?)


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> Bwaahahhhahahhahahahhaaaa **gasp** hahahhahhahaahqaaaaaaggagagaa ......  So now you are a superhero? _Truth, justice and the Austalian way !!_ You have got to be kidding me man. You have some serious issues I think you should look at. This by the way is an internet forum where people can have an opinion that differs from yours. So who appointed you to make this your "JOB" then? Yourself?
> 
> And what exactly is your "JOB" in here then other than flying around wearing a red cape and your underpants on the outside, Ohhhhhhhhhhh thats right, educating us neophytes on the benefits of a shiny blue cable!
> 
> Methinks you have made a Freudian slip old ****. Hand in the cookie jar for mine.
> 
> Your "JOB" ...... LOL
> 
> P.S. Send an email to Alan Jones ..... I am sure he will want to hear your point of view as well. Afterall ...... he gets paid for his job.






trainspotter said:


> You of all people can see this folding out in front of you todster?
> 
> Truth, justice and the Australian Waaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy ........ up up and awayyyyyyyy! You have got to be kidding me !!!!!!!!
> 
> NBNMyths on a roll.




It appears my sense of humour is beyond you. I'll remind myself to be entirely boring in future.



> No ridiculous myths as to why they would not release a business case model then?




You mean like this one?
http://www.nbnco.com.au/wps/wcm/con...-announcements/nbn-co-corporate-plan-released


----------



## NBNMyths

cynic said:


> Am I to understand that you are suggesting that commercial applications of Quantum Entanglement violate Einstein's Theory of Relativity?




On my understanding, yes.
eg: http://www.pacoahlgren.com/does-quantum-entanglement-destroy-the-theory-of-relativity/

_Wait a minute. Didn’t Einstein say the universal speed limit is bound by light? So what’s going on? The answer: nobody knows. Even Einstein was befuddled by quantum entanglement. But the ramifications are clear ”” if it’s possible for any element in nature to transmit data (or force, or whatever) instantaneously ”” and the phenomenon of quantum entanglement has been firmly established scientifically –  then Special Relativity either needs to make an exception, or it needs to be remodeled in a big way.​_
My point is that data transmission by quantum entanglement hasn't even been established experimentally, so the chances that it will be: 
a) discovered; _and_
b) verified; _and_
c) developed; _and_
d) commercialised

....sometime on the foreseeable future is highly implausible.

Saying we shouldn't build the NBN because of an unproven theorem is like saying we should all give up on cars, planes, trains etc from now on, because teleportation via quantum entanglement might be just around the corner.


----------



## trainspotter

So_Cynical said:


> I just watched an amazing video of a new PC and console game that's going to be released soon called Battlefield 3 (BF3) the game features stunning graphics and Multiplayer servers capable of hosting 64 player games, the amount of bandwidth and low ping's required to have quality play is reliant on capable hardware and fast, high quality internet connections, as an example of where the gaming world is going have a look at the video in full screen HD and imagine what the future holds if this is the reality now....this is 1 reason why need the NBN.
> ~





So we build an NBN so 64 people can play HD Games? Ummmmmmm I don't get it??

I am trying to look at it with an open mind So_Cyclical. Ummmmmmm what about training an army to shoot with FPS games? You could put on Gran Tourismo 5 and do driving lessons for 64 people. After that ya pretty much got me flummoxed.

I can see the NBN used as a great business tool for companies that require high speed internet such as the CSIRO or ATO or the Big Banks due to the volume of information crunched. I can see some smaller companies like photolabs/multi media etc gaining benefits due to the file size of their work. Schools for education and Hospitals for radiography etc are a given.

I can see the wondrous things the NBN is going to do for the country, I truly can. The problem for me is the implementation strategy. Build it where it is needed most FIRST, iron out the bugs in high density areas THEN with a higher takeup rate PAYING for it "going forward" send it to the country and high cost areas.

Not that hard really.


----------



## ghotib

Is this a myth? It's from another board I frequent. The writer is somewhere in northern NSW on a "crappy Sat. connection":


> To compound my connectivity frustration, I see with the NBN, those of us on small rural phone exchanges will get shafted. My neighbours on ADSL will have to move to Sat. with approx 10x less service delivery then that available to those with fibre. Fark knows what we'll do for telephony when they cease support for the copper lines, smoke signals ? Once again, we small rural areas get the rough end of the pineapple in terms of services.




FWIW, at the moment we live within a hundred miles of Sydney, Wollongong, and Canberra and we have no access to ADSL. Last time our neighbours talked to Telstra about how they could improve their internet service Telstra told them they shouldn't expect any better because they're in the outback. Our wireless broadband is faster than their satellite, but speed is noticeably variable and files bigger than about 20Mb (e.g. many software upgrades) often  fail to download completely. 

Thanks for any info:

Ghoti


----------



## medicowallet

trainspotter said:


> So we build an NBN so 64 people can play HD Games? Ummmmmmm I don't get it??
> 
> I am trying to look at it with an open mind So_Cyclical. Ummmmmmm what about training an army to shoot with FPS games? You could put on Gran Tourismo 5 and do driving lessons for 64 people. After that ya pretty much got me flummoxed.
> 
> I can see the NBN used as a great business tool for companies that require high speed internet such as the CSIRO or ATO or the Big Banks due to the volume of information crunched. I can see some smaller companies like photolabs/multi media etc gaining benefits due to the file size of their work. Schools for education and Hospitals for radiography etc are a given.
> 
> I can see the wondrous things the NBN is going to do for the country, I truly can. The problem for me is the implementation strategy. Build it where it is needed most FIRST, iron out the bugs in high density areas THEN with a higher takeup rate PAYING for it "going forward" send it to the country and high cost areas.
> 
> Not that hard really.




Sort of.

1. Purchase Telstra infrastructure.
2. Offer ADSL2 where it can be, with incentives for 3rd party ISPs to put DSLAMS into regional areas, and the current infrastructure upgraded to ADSL2 by NBN Co.

Offer NBN speeds to schools, hospitals, or businesses who don't already have speeds considerably faster than NBN can offer.

3. Save $40 billion and invest in rail, ports, manufacturing.

4. Use this guaranteed revenue stream from rail and ports to potentially upgrade the network in 10-15 years when it may need to be.

5. Listen to gaming nerds whinge. Perhaps lose some votes. Look like a hero to taxpayers. Everyone in Australia becomes wealthier. Decreased risk of investment.


----------



## NBNMyths

ghotib said:


> Is this a myth? It's from another board I frequent. The writer is somewhere in northern NSW on a "crappy Sat. connection":
> 
> 
> FWIW, at the moment we live within a hundred miles of Sydney, Wollongong, and Canberra and we have no access to ADSL. Last time our neighbours talked to Telstra about how they could improve their internet service Telstra told them they shouldn't expect any better because they're in the outback. Our wireless broadband is faster than their satellite, but speed is noticeably variable and files bigger than about 20Mb (e.g. many software upgrades) often  fail to download completely.
> 
> Thanks for any info:
> 
> Ghoti




Sort of.

The NBN will do fibre to all towns with >1000 premises, plus all town with >500 premises IF they are located along the NBN backhaul route. This represents 93% of the population. This will provide speeds of up to 1000Mbps (1Gbps).

Outside this "fibre footprint", 4% will receive 4G/LTE fixed wireless, initially at up to a peak of 12Mbps. There is potential for these speeds to improve in the future.

The final 3% will get satellite at up to 12Mbps peak. There is little prospect of this improving substantially without launching new satellites.

ADSL2+ offers a maximum theoretical of 24Mbps, but in practise it's very unlikely that the homes set for wireless or sat would get those speeds due to distance from the exchange. The big problem with ADSL tech is that it gets worse, and collapses as you move away from the exchange. The max useful range is about 5km. The average ADSL2+ speed in Australia is about 9Mbps.

My guess is that the wireless customers will get a service at least as good in practise as ADSL2+ would deliver. The sat users will get the speed of ADSL/2+, but the latency (lag) will make it a poorer service.

In the fibre footprint, the copper will be decommissioned about 18 months after the fibre goes through. Remaining customers will have to either migrate to fibre, or dump their fixed line and go to a mobile connection.

Outside the fibre footprint, the copper will remain until at least July 2022. After that, its need to remain will be assessed. It could be that by then either the fibre will be expanded, or some new long-range wireless tech (eg the CSIRO's Ngara) might be able to make it redundant.

You can get an indication of which towns are slated for fibre or wireless on the NBN website:
http://www.nbnco.com.au/wps/wcm/connect/main/site-base/main-areas/our-services/coverage-maps/


----------



## cynic

NBNMyths said:


> On my understanding, yes.
> eg: http://www.pacoahlgren.com/does-quantum-entanglement-destroy-the-theory-of-relativity/
> 
> _Wait a minute. Didn’t Einstein say the universal speed limit is bound by light? So what’s going on? The answer: nobody knows. Even Einstein was befuddled by quantum entanglement. But the ramifications are clear ”” if it’s possible for any element in nature to transmit data (or force, or whatever) instantaneously ”” and the phenomenon of quantum entanglement has been firmly established scientifically –  then Special Relativity either needs to make an exception, or it needs to be remodeled in a big way.​_
> My point is that data transmission by quantum entanglement hasn't even been established experimentally, so the chances that it will be:
> a) discovered; _and_
> b) verified; _and_
> c) developed; _and_
> d) commercialised
> 
> ....sometime on the foreseeable future is highly implausible.




Well, from your response I can see that you don't understand Einstein's theory of relativity at all! Nor do you have an adequate comprehension of quantum entanglement theory which, whilst it may be as yet unproven, has been experimentally demonstrated!

Super light velocities of particles of matter are somewhat irrelevant to data transmission when facilitated via the application of quantum entanglement theory. Why? Put quite simply , the stimulation of one of a pair of particles results in a predictable alteration in the state of its partner, irrespective of the distance between these two particles.
Information has no mass and is not synonymous with its storage medium (whether that medium be matter,force,energy or the aforementioned particles).
So where does super light velocity fit into this equation? 
Did this theory actually state that matter/mass/energy traversed these two points? 
(No! It certainly did not!)

As for universal speed limits, that misconception arose from misunderstandings regarding the mathematical scope of Einstein's equations. When considering super light velocity a complex number (square root of a negative number!) appears in several of the formulae. The theory, by its very design, was never intended to accommodate the investigation of super light velocity! It neither includes nor excludes this possibility, it quite simply does not address it!



> Saying we shouldn't build the NBN because of an unproven theorem is like saying we should all give up on cars, planes, trains etc from now on, because teleportation via quantum entanglement might be just around the corner.




I never made any representations as to whether or not NBN should be built! I quite simply challenged you for your audacity in declaring certain technologies as "future-proof" and dogmaticallyy defending every challenge that is posted on this thread prior to performing adequate research.

BTW I shall not be doing any more research on your behalf, BOOFHEAD,oops sorry! I meant to say NBNMyths (freudian slip on my part!)

P.S. I'm somewhat curious as to the size of the corner that NBN is just around/lurking behind. Must be pretty big! I haven't seen it in my future!


----------



## ghotib

NBNMyths said:


> Sort of.
> 
> The NBN will do fibre to all towns with >1000 premises, plus all town with >500 premises IF they are located along the NBN backhaul route. This represents 93% of the population. This will provide speeds of up to 1000Mbps (1Gbps).
> <snip>



 Thanks Myths.


----------



## NBNMyths

cynic said:


> Well, from your response I can see that you don't understand Einstein's theory of relativity at all! Nor do you have an adequate comprehension of quantum entanglement theory which, whilst it may be as yet unproven, has been experimentally demonstrated!
> 
> Super light velocities of particles of matter are somewhat irrelevant to data transmission when facilitated via the application of quantum entanglement theory. Why? Put quite simply , the stimulation of one of a pair of particles results in a predictable alteration in the state of its partner, irrespective of the distance between these two particles.
> Information has no mass and is not synonymous with its storage medium (whether that medium be matter,force,energy or the aforementioned particles).
> So where does super light velocity fit into this equation?
> Did this theory actually state that matter/mass/energy traversed these two points?
> (No! It certainly did not!)
> 
> As for universal speed limits, that misconception arose from misunderstandings regarding the mathematical scope of Einstein's equations. When considering super light velocity a complex number (square root of a negative number!) appears in several of the formulae. The theory, by its very design, was never intended to accommodate the investigation of super light velocity! It neither includes nor excludes this possibility, it quite simply does not address it!
> 
> I never made any representations as to whether or not NBN should be built! I quite simply challenged you for your audacity in declaring certain technologies as "future-proof" and dogmaticallyy defending every challenge that is posted on this thread prior to performing adequate research.
> 
> BTW I shall not be doing any more research on your behalf, BOOFHEAD,oops sorry! I meant to say NBNMyths (freudian slip on my part!)
> 
> P.S. I'm somewhat curious as to the size of the corner that NBN is just around/lurking behind. Must be pretty big! I haven't seen it in my future!




I never pretended to fully understand quantum entanglement theory (my physics education is limited to 3U HSC, BTW), nor do I plan on giving myself a crash course. Again, as I understand it from what I have read, whether quantum entanglement per se has been experimentally demonstrated or not is beside the point. Data transmission using quantum entanglement has not been demonstrated, making the point rather moot. Its relevance to any discussion on the NBN is zero.

I also never said fibre was future proof. I said it was "the most future proof solution". In other words, more future proof than the alternatives available, being copper or wireless. You're right that nothing is 100% future proof, nor will it ever be. But on the current understanding of technologies, optical fibre is the most future proof technology for use in data transmission. End of story.

Not sure I understand the boofhead remark. I assume you're implying I am a sockpuppet of BOOFHEAD. I'm sure the site admin can check this, should you wish to put a complaint in. 

Is the NBN just around the corner? Well I guess that depends on where you live. You might have to wait 9 more years, by which time you will probably be cursing the former Government for not doing something 10 years ago, when Japan and SK began rolling out their fibre.


----------



## boofhead

Not sure - perhaps they're implying we're the same person. I know that isn't true.

As for use of entanglement - experimental high temperate working examples use 50 kelvin. That is very cold. It is not yet known it can happen at room temperature.


----------



## Greg

Having read the threads of NBNMyths and Cynic, I roll back in my chair, immensely impressed with the depth of this thread and the astounding intellect it attracts. In search of a break from the intensity, I simply ask, "can someone pull my finger?"
Thanks


----------



## bellenuit

NBNMyths said:


> I also never said fibre was future proof. I said it was "the most future proof solution". In other words, more future proof than the alternatives available, being copper or wireless.




This is meant as a genuine question in regards to how future proof fibre is.

When you say that fibre is the most future proof solution, are you referring to the medium in general or to the specific fibre being installed by the NBN? For instance, just as UTP cabling is used for LAN implementations, as LAN speeds increased, the UTP specifications changed and we went from CAT 3 to CAT 5 and now CAT6 (although I am not sure if the latter is unshielded). So the UTP being installed in the 1990s (spec Cat 3 then) that supported 10 Mbits/sec would have to be ripped out and replaced by Cat 5 or Cat 6 UTP if we want to run reliably at 100 Mbits/sec or 1000 Mbits/sec.

So when you talk of fibre having a high degree of future proofing, do you mean that we could run significantly higher speeds than has been announced up to now down the actual fibre that is currently being laid or do you mean that the higher speeds can be supported by fibre technology but will require a fibre cable manufactured to a much higher spec than that currently being laid (and possibly required new transmission equipment at each node along the route)?  The latter obviously means significant costs to provide future bandwidth upgrades compared to say wireless that may only require upgrading the transmission/receiving equipment.


----------



## NBNMyths

bellenuit said:


> This is meant as a genuine question in regards to how future proof fibre is.
> 
> When you say that fibre is the most future proof solution, are you referring to the medium in general or to the specific fibre being installed by the NBN? For instance, just as UTP cabling is used for LAN implementations, as LAN speeds increased, the UTP specifications changed and we went from CAT 3 to CAT 5 and now CAT6 (although I am not sure if the latter is unshielded). So the UTP being installed in the 1990s (spec Cat 3 then) that supported 10 Mbits/sec would have to be ripped out and replaced by Cat 5 or Cat 6 UTP if we want to run reliably at 100 Mbits/sec or 1000 Mbits/sec.
> 
> So when you talk of fibre having a high degree of future proofing, do you mean that we could run significantly higher speeds than has been announced up to now down the actual fibre that is currently being laid or do you mean that the higher speeds can be supported by fibre technology but will require a fibre cable manufactured to a much higher spec than that currently being laid (and possibly required new transmission equipment at each node along the route)?  The latter obviously means significant costs to provide future bandwidth upgrades compared to say wireless that may only require upgrading the transmission/receiving equipment.




No, I mean that the fibre that is actually being laid for the NBN can support significantly higher speeds than will be in place initially.

Fibre has been improved over the years, but even very old fibre can support far higher speeds than will be used for the NBN through multiplexing. It's not quite the same as copper, where there are different standards supporting vastly different speeds.


----------



## boofhead

To further the point - submarine cables joining continents and countries have been through various speed upgrades. Admittedly they are of a different design to FTTH fibre.

The main issues for fibre upgradeability would be the fibre itself - that is the material and quality along with the shielding of the fibre.

Assuming they don't scrape the bottom of the barrel for quality (no idea what conditions are placed in the tender documents) it should be upgradable by replacing termination hardware. It is similar to how copper has been extended beyond the initial call quality of the original phone systems.


----------



## noco

Oh dear, Oh dear, this surely can't be true.


http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...mail/comments/nbn_brings_wealth/#commentsmore


----------



## trainspotter

WHOAAAAAAAAAA MAMA !!!!!



> THE cost of staff for the National Broadband Network has reached $132 million a year against revenue of only $3 million this year.
> 
> Executives are on big salaries - 34 NBN Co staff are on between $300,000 and $400,000 a year, putting some of them ahead of Prime Minister Julia Gillard.
> 
> Another 13 earn more than $400,000, including four executives on more than $700,000 a year for the project overseen by Communications Minister Stephen Conroy.
> 
> NBN Co chief Michael Quigley earns more than $1.8 million a year.
> 
> *And, in the face of the salaries, the NBN has only about 560 customers throughout the country.*
> 
> By the end of this month, NBN Co is expected to have 1000 staff, which will mean almost two employees for every customer.
> 
> None of its customers is paying to access the broadband network. *The service is free* to internet service providers during a trial period.




From the link noco provided !


----------



## sptrawler

Well at least it can only get better from here, oh come on it has to, please someone tell me I am dreaming. This can't be happening.


----------



## NBNMyths

noco said:


> Oh dear, Oh dear, this surely can't be true.
> 
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...mail/comments/nbn_brings_wealth/#commentsmore






trainspotter said:


> WHOAAAAAAAAAA MAMA !!!!!
> 
> From the link noco provided !






sptrawler said:


> Well at least it can only get better from here, oh come on it has to, please someone tell me I am dreaming. This can't be happening.




Is there an issue here? We have a group of experienced execs, engineers etc designing and building the biggest infrastructure project in Australia's history and writing tenders and signing contracts worth (to date) ~$10 billion dollars, with another ~$25 billion to go.

How much should we be paying them?

NBN is a startup. Of course its costs and employee:customer ratio will be high to begin with. It is with any major project.

*BTW, an interesting post on whirlpool:*
_$132m with close to 1,000 staff. $132,000 per year average on a massive infrastructure project like this actually sounds pretty reasonable.

Telstra's wage bill last year was 26% of their $21bn operating costs spread over 45,220 employees.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/telstra-wields-job-axe-with-1000-to-go/story-e6frf7jo-1225944635627
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telstra

$5.46bn / 45,220 = $120,743 per year average​_
So even though NBN's current employees are predominantly executives, engineers and other high-end staff, the average wage is only slightly higher than Telstra's. Even including all their store/office staff etc.

I do wonder (as an aside) that given the story is full of known errors (eg the number of customers), whether anything else in it is correct?

edit:
*NBN's top 100 staff:*
_Of NBN Co's "top 100 employees", over half of the group had two university degrees (including four doctorates), 53 had worked in senior telco sector roles in Australia and overseas, over 15 per cent had worked in top roles in "globally recognised companies", including ASX50 companies, and 27 were engineers by training.

In addition, seven out of NBN Co chief executive's eight direct reports had lived and worked overseas in the global telecommunications industry._
http://www.zdnet.com.au/nbn-co-rejects-coalitions-talentless-slur-339305168.htm

I suspect these people are worth the money.....


----------



## So_Cynical

Foxtel lost money for over a decade...start up's burn cash, we all know that.

what's new. :dunno:


----------



## DB008

NBNMyths said:


> The NBN will do fibre to all towns with >1000 premises, plus all town with >500 premises IF they are located along the NBN backhaul route. This represents 93% of the population. This will provide speeds of up to 1000Mbps (1Gbps).
> 
> Outside this "fibre footprint", 4% will receive 4G/LTE fixed wireless, initially at up to a peak of 12Mbps. There is potential for these speeds to improve in the future.
> 
> The final 3% will get satellite at up to 12Mbps peak. There is little prospect of this improving substantially without launching new satellites.




World Internet Stats
http://www.internetworldstats.com/pacific.htm#au


> AU - 21,262,641 population (2010) - Country Area: 7,682,557 sq km
> 
> Capital City: Canberra - GNI p.c.US$ 26,900 (2004), per World Bank
> 
> 17,033,826 users as of Aug/09, *80.1% penetration*, per Nielsen




Not saying that 80.1% has ADSL speed, but the whole "93%" line that has been touted is a bit of a marketing ploy.


----------



## DB008

Australian Bureau of Statistics
8153.0 - Internet Activity, Australia, Dec 2010  

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/8153.0/


> HIGHLIGHTS
> At the end of December 2010, there were 10.4 million active internet subscribers in Australia (excluding internet connections through mobile handsets). This represents annual growth of 16.7% and an increase of 9.9% since the end of June 2010.
> 
> The phasing out of dial-up internet connections continued with 93% of internet connections being non dial-up. *Australians also continued to access increasingly faster download speeds, with 81% of access connections offering a download speed of 1.5Mbps or greater.*
> 
> Digital subscriber line (DSL) continued to be the major technology for connections, accounting for 43% of the total internet connections, followed closely by mobile wireless (40% of total internet connections). However, the DSL percentage share has decreased since June 2010 when DSL represented 44% of the total connections.
> 
> Mobile wireless (excluding mobile handset connections) was the fastest growing internet access technology in actual numbers, increasing from 2.8 million in December 2009 to 4.2 million in December 2010.




But the NBN is only just starting to become operational....


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> World Internet Stats
> http://www.internetworldstats.com/pacific.htm#au
> 
> 
> Not saying that 80.1% has ADSL speed, but the whole "93%" line that has been touted is a bit of a marketing ploy.






DB008 said:


> Australian Bureau of Statistics
> 8153.0 - Internet Activity, Australia, Dec 2010
> 
> http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/8153.0/
> 
> 
> But the NBN is only just starting to become operational....




Not sure of the point(s) you're trying to make? 

1.5Mbps is hardly fast (even the lowest speed on the NBN is 12Mbps). Also, what do you mean by "93% is a marketing ploy", in relation to us having 80% internet penetration now?


----------



## trainspotter

NBN is not a startup company. It is a Government funded olygopoly. PERIOD. There is a difference. It is in it's initial phase of "design and construct" but it sure as **** aint a startup company.

Seeing one poster in particular is the full bottle on everything about the shiny blue cable why doesn't the "champion" go and find EXACTLY how many people have ACTUALLY connected to the NBN thus far?

And post it in here for all of us neophytes to revel in. Because that is their job right?


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> NBN is not a startup company. It is a Government funded olygopoly. PERIOD. There is a difference. It is in it's initial phase of "design and construct" but it sure as **** aint a startup company.
> 
> Seeing one poster in particular is the full bottle on everything about the shiny blue cable why doesn't the "champion" go and find EXACTLY how many people have ACTUALLY connected to the NBN thus far?
> 
> And post it in here for all of us neophytes to revel in. Because that is their job right?





Well according to page 4 of the hansard of the joint committee from 16th May, as at 6th May 2011 there were 723 connections ordered in Tasmania, of which 712 had been connected as of that date. Then there were the initial 7 trial connections in Armidale as ay 18th May. So there is at least 730. On top of that, each of the 4 active RSPs is allowed to connect a few people per week in Armidale, so my guess would be that they are now up around 760.

The actual numbers aren't really the issue though. It's the fact that News quoted there being 561, when that is a demonstrably false figure. It clearly isn't hard to get accurate info, they just chose to sensationalise using incorrect info which aided their slant on the story.


----------



## boofhead

iinet has said in the last day or 2 that in the trial areas they only have 3.7% of premises connected as customers via ADSL. In 2-3 years I'm confident they could get close to that with fibre. iinet is the 2nd largest broadband ISP by broadband customer numbers. I'm sure Telstra haven't just realised they were not as price competitive as they could be and decided to compete late last year. It's when NBN has started to get operational customers. Testra's customers will be on contracts (which can be broken - often for a fee) so it'll take time for people to be contract free.


----------



## DB008

NBNMyths said:


> Not sure of the point(s) you're trying to make?
> 
> 1.5Mbps is hardly fast (even the lowest speed on the NBN is 12Mbps). Also, what do you mean by "93% is a marketing ploy", in relation to us having 80% internet penetration now?




"93% of the population will be connected to the NBN", most of the population already has internet. 1.5Mbps is fast enough for me....end of story. Wow, l'll get my e-mails 0.765 nanoseconds faster, gee, my life will be so much better.


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> Well according to page 4 of the hansard of the joint committee from 16th May, as at 6th May 2011 there were 723 connections ordered in Tasmania, of which 712 had been connected as of that date. Then there were the initial 7 trial connections in Armidale as ay 18th May. So there is at least 730. On top of that, each of the 4 active RSPs is allowed to connect a few people per week in Armidale, so my guess would be that they are now up around 760.
> 
> The actual numbers aren't really the issue though. It's the fact that News quoted there being 561, when that is a demonstrably false figure. It clearly isn't hard to get accurate info, they just chose to sensationalise using incorrect info which aided their slant on the story.




Thankyou NBNMyths. Is this still the trial period for customers? If so when will the trial period end? As the shiny blue cable has been in Tasmania some time now can you please advise as to how many houses are able to connect ? As in if the shiny blue cable runs past 10,000 houses and 712 have been connected .... is this a fair take up rate?

THE NUMBERS ARE THE ISSUE NBNMYTHS !!!!!!!!! Without the takeup rate then how does this thing PAY FOR ITSELF ??? HUH ?????

Forget what the bloody newspaper says no-one believes what they read anyhow !!!!!!!!

You are the "DEEP THROAT" on the issue ...... spread the gospel of truth for us please.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> Thankyou NBNMyths. Is this still the trial period for customers? If so when will the trial period end? As the shiny blue cable has been in Tasmania some time now can you please advise as to how many houses are able to connect ? As in if the shiny blue cable runs past 10,000 houses and 712 have been connected .... is this a fair take up rate?
> 
> THE NUMBERS ARE THE ISSUE NBNMYTHS !!!!!!!!! Without the takeup rate then how does this thing PAY FOR ITSELF ??? HUH ?????
> 
> Forget what the bloody newspaper says no-one believes what they read anyhow !!!!!!!!
> 
> You are the "DEEP THROAT" on the issue ...... spread the gospel of truth for us please.




While Tasmania is still a trial, there are no connection restrictions as far as I know. The network passes about 4,000 premises (again according to the hansard) so there is currently an 18% takeup rate, after 10 months of availability. To put this in perspective, by the end of 2002 there was only a 3% takeup of ADSL connections in Australia even though it was available to (IIRC) about 80% of premises by mid-2002.

There are currently several barriers to NBN takeup in Tasmania:


Only 4 ISPs are offering open services in Tassie, and this doesn't include Telstra or Optus. Telstra have got 100 people on a trial to test compatibility with their network systems and the T-hub / T-box devices. Optus aren't participating at all in Tassie until they do the initiation stuff in Armidale. So the two biggest telcos in Australia aren't currently offering services.


None of the ISPs are offering a phone service yet, except VoIP. So if customers in Tassie want to retain a 'normal' phone service and number, then they must keep their copper line in addition to the NBN connection. This obviously adds extra costs and complexity.


None of the ISPs are offering bundling or migration options, so anyone on an ADSL contract is stuck with it, and anyone with bundled services (eg with Telstra) have a big disincentive to switch because they can't get a Telstra NBN connection yet. Once the NBN is in full swing, existing copper customers will be migrated onto a fibre connection.


Armidale is in trial until the end of September, according to the various reports. NBN is supposed to open it up fully and begin charging as per their wholesale agreement on 1 October.


----------



## trainspotter

Eggsellent work NBNMyths. I wonder why Telstra and Optus are not offering services there? As it expands I am sure the takeup rate will become profitable ??? RIGHT ???


----------



## boofhead

Optus very much avoid Tasmania.

Until the last few years they basically only have ok coverage in 2 cities for mobiles. They have started to expand. They recently announced $25 million expansion of that.

For ADSL they don't offer it in all ADSL enabled DSLAMs. NT and TAS seem to have special exceptions when reading Optus terms. So many are limited to phone for Optus fixed line services.

Until very recently only one company provided fibre access from the big island to Tasmania - Telstra. As an exercise Internode are on the record saying it is cheaper to send data from Sydney, around the globe and land in Perth than between Melbourne and anywhere in Tasmania. There is some competition now but they only have submarine cable so there is no redundancy if you don't like Testra's pricing. I think the ISPs servicing Tasmania had mentioned they expected pricing to be more competitive than what it is.

For Telstra - we can at best speculate but they already have existing infrastructure they will want to maximise profits from before paying another wholesaler. There was some rumblings that Telstra wanted volume discounts from NBN a year or 2 ago but naturally that was blocked otherwise Telstra buys a major advantage.


----------



## So_Cynical

Tasmania is a technology backwater i would imagine many people there have no need for super fast internet because they have no need for super slow internet...you don't miss what you never had.


----------



## trainspotter

So_Cynical said:


> Tasmania is a technology backwater i would imagine many people there have no need for super fast internet because they have no need for super slow internet...you don't miss what you never had.




Post of the month right there!!!!!! I'm gonna get this one framed.

Totally agrees with my perspective of build the damn thing WHERE IT IS NEEDED MOST first, iron out the bugs in high density areas, have massive takeup rate, pay this thing going forward, become profitable earlier, get business's and hospitals and education systems hooked on a shiny blue cable, worry about the movie watchers and gameheads later. 

I thnk NBNMyths wrote they have sepnt 10 billion already with a further 25 billion to go thus far? Not much in the way of infratructure for nearly a third of the money in the ground??? Does the 25 billion include the 11 billion to Telstra?

10 billion spent = 760 people hooked up ????



> Is there an issue here? We have a group of experienced execs, engineers etc designing and building the biggest infrastructure project in Australia's history and *writing tenders and signing contracts worth (to date) ~$10 billion dollars, with another ~$25 billion to go.*


----------



## joea

Why would anbody with some idea of maths, and having observed the NBN to date,
believe that we have only $25 bullion to go?
What ever price you have been informed of  by this government, then double it, and I will ensure the original project stated by Labor will not be finished.

joea


----------



## boofhead

Tasmania is mostly a technological backwater because low population - distributed population too. Another is startup costs. No one except Telstra or a government will spend much here and as we know about how Telstra wholesales with no competition...

Many here would like it. If IPTV is competitive with satellite subscription TV then it will get takeup based on that alone. No shortage of people here with subscription TV via sat.

We're just often left off maps. Watch any comments on the state capital cities. Somehow it stops at a list of 5 on many TV shows.


----------



## joea

boofhead said:


> Tasmania is mostly a technological backwater because low population - distributed population too. Another is startup costs. No one except Telstra or a government will spend much here and as we know about how Telstra wholesales with no competition...
> 
> Many here would like it. If IPTV is competitive with satellite subscription TV then it will get takeup based on that alone. No shortage of people here with subscription TV via sat.
> 
> We're just often left off maps. Watch any comments on the state capital cities. Somehow it stops at a list of 5 on many TV shows.




boofhead
I actually have satellite  broadband and I would say its just make do. That is at this point of time.
The contract will only guarantee  a percentage of coverage, so they have the defects covered. i.e. 80 % of the time. On whirlpool, the guys says there is a problem with "ipstar or the unit", so hopefully that can be improved as well.
One would hope the satellites coming on line, will be better.
The satellite I am on, is weather compensated, so it will handle rain pretty well.

Put it this way, if I was in a community where a bit of money would give you wire or fibre, thats the way I would go.

To load "market software" the first time I go to the local  IT guy, because my satellite is just not good enough.

joea


----------



## trainspotter

boofhead said:


> Tasmania is mostly a technological backwater because low population - distributed population too. Another is startup costs. No one except Telstra or a government will spend much here and as we know about how Telstra wholesales with no competition...
> 
> Many here would like it. If IPTV is competitive with satellite subscription TV then it will get takeup based on that alone. No shortage of people here with subscription TV via sat.
> 
> We're just often left off maps. Watch any comments on the state capital cities. Somehow it stops at a list of 5 on many TV shows.




Ummmmmmmmm so why put the shiny blue cable in Tasmania as a start point? Small population and distribution hassles, topography issues, high cost installation with low takeup numbers. What's the deal with that? Not good business sense?

As for being off the maps ...... try living in rural WA !! I am often on the East Coast and fair dinkum the people there think the world stops at the Great Dividing Range !! :


----------



## boofhead

At least rural WA is somehow physically on the maps even if unmentioned. Tasmania is sometimes forgotten about.

I say much of the Tasmanian deployment is political. Tasmanian government tendered for the FTTN which included much planning which was used to speed up Tasmania's deployment. It had a head start. Some areas had been parts of a fibre trial although they are not in the first build areas. The company that was supposed to co-build it was a part of existing trials. Some of it may be to help Tasmanians compete - Bass Strait is a major hinderance for physical and information transport. We have little competition for IT infrastructure. Hobart is a bit. Launceston not much. Basically it is the Tas govt with some fibre linking the major population areas and everywhere else Testra. Same issue for NT.

The current uptake numbers will improve as it is only early still. Remember people are on existing plans etc. As more major population centres come online it will improve. Also during the rollout of first areas in Tasmania the rapid rise in confusing information from radio, newspaper, TV (even news which is supposed to be more factual) which permeates through the community. Many thought having the physical connection meant they had to pay monthly fees even if not using it. I've found reading and listening to a lot of rhetoric about it seem to be deliberatly vague. Internode had capacity issues a few months ago because 100 mbit takeup was larger than their plans.

Remember Abbott at the time of the election found it hard to believe NBN could magically go from 100 mbit to 1000 mbit. Jones recently somehow things recent laser innovations make the fibre deployment pointless not knowing lasers drive optical fibre communications. Both people have a lot of influence. Many people reporting have no idea about the technology, for example some coverage of quantum entanglement experiments were reported by people that talked about 50 degrees Kelvin - you don't add the degrees in there.

Economic opinions on why it should or should not proceed are one thing. I can understand both sides but when many people make comment about the technologies involved are factually wrong then that is a different ball game.

Japanese government subsidised the deployment there - with various conditions which allowed the area monopolies to continue to be. Many of which Telstra would be unlikely to agree to.


----------



## trainspotter

You would think if you are about to spend 36 billion of taxpayers funds on the largest infrastructure/technology programme Australia has ever witnessed that you would have the masses equally stupified with the benefits and or costings?

Why did the Japanese Government subsidise the rollout in Tasmania?


----------



## IFocus

trainspotter said:


> 10 billion spent = 760 people hooked up ????




Really surprised "The Australian" hasn't run that as a headline.


----------



## boofhead

trainspotter said:


> Why did the Japanese Government subsidise the rollout in Tasmania?




I didn't mean to say that. I meant Japanese govt subsidised the Japanese network upgrades which the Libs seem to forget about. Asctually mostly when Libs talk about the world they mean USA although USA govt is subsidising some network upgrades which will benefit some of the incumbents there.


----------



## So_Cynical

The Tassie coverage map is actually surprisingly extensive..Taswegians have certainly not been left off this map.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/wps/wcm/con...5166da634/Coverage+-+Tasmania.pdf?MOD=AJPERES
~


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> I thnk NBNMyths wrote they have sepnt 10 billion already with a further 25 billion to go thus far? Not much in the way of infratructure for nearly a third of the money in the ground??? Does the 25 billion include the 11 billion to Telstra?
> 
> 10 billion spent = 760 people hooked up ????




They haven't _spent_ $10 billion, they have _signed contracts_ for ~$10 billion, which will be paid progressively as the equipment is supplied and installed.



joea said:


> Why would anbody with some idea of maths, and having observed the NBN to date, believe that we have only $25 bullion to go?
> What ever price you have been informed of  by this government, then double it, and I will ensure the original project stated by Labor will not be finished.
> joea




Examples of it going poorly so far?

The only hiccups I have seen are:
- The delay in finalising the Telstra agreement, which is as much Telstra's fault as NBN's, and doesn't add anything to costs. It's rumoured to be almost ready, and set for approval at the Telstra AGM in October.

- The suspension of the fibre construction tender. This now looks to be solved, with Silcar signed up (on budget) for NSW, QLD & ACT, and negotiations with other contractors ongoing for the other states on the same terms as Silcar.

So at this stage, the biggest infrastructure project in Australia's history is running a few months late, and has suffered no budget blowouts. Pretty hard to be unhappy with that.

NBN Co have signed contracts for Australian-made fibre & equipment, 2x datacentres, greenfield estate rollouts, wireless spectrum, wireless rollout, interim satellite, OSS/BSS systems.... all on time and budget. 

The wireless contract is an end-to-end provided by Ericsson and is now scheduled to be complete in 2015 instead of 2019 as originally promised. The mainland first release sites are all on time. AFAIK there have been no failures or issues to date.

I'd suggest that the only people thinking it's going poorly are people whose source of NBN info is AM radio and News Ltd.


----------



## trainspotter

You were doing so well NBNMyths until you started playing the man.

Just the facts M'aam .... just the facts.

Do you have a cost analysis available thus far? As in how much has been spent to date to get this coverage? 10 billion in CONTRACTS have been let. How much of this money has actually been spent to wind the shiny blue cable around Tasmania as per So_Cyclicals map??? How much did Armidale cost to bring on line?


----------



## trainspotter

boofhead said:


> I didn't mean to say that. I meant Japanese govt subsidised the Japanese network upgrades which the Libs seem to forget about. Asctually mostly when Libs talk about the world they mean USA although USA govt is subsidising some network upgrades which will benefit some of the incumbents there.




No problem with the Government FUNDING this shiny blue cable boofhead. It is my money they are using so therefore I am entitled to an opinion as to where my money is going BTW. I have posted I can see the benefits in the long haul. I have posted that Alan Jones is not a scientist but a PAID vox pop. I understand the technology and I do get what is trying to be achieved here. I truly do !

My area of concern is that they are placing this wondrous technology in PLACES THAT DON'T FRIGGIN NEED IT FIRST !!!!!!!! Also that the people that are being hooked up FIRST do not need the technology for CRYING OUT LOUD !!!!!!

Look at it from a business perspective. Let's get all the nupties in really, really hard areas to implement on line first with no chance of recouping running costs so that we are behind the 8 ball from the get go. Can you see my point now? Bloody HELL !

OR .......... put it in high density areas, have massive takeup rate, iron out the problematic scenarios, get big end of town to uptake and pay for it by usage AND THEN send it to the minions. Not that hard really !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I wont repeat myself as I can feel my blood pressure rising as I type.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> You were doing so well NBNMyths until you started playing the man.
> 
> Just the facts M'aam .... just the facts.
> 
> Do you have a cost analysis available thus far? As in how much has been spent to date to get this coverage? 10 billion in CONTRACTS have been let. How much of this money has actually been spent to wind the shiny blue cable around Tasmania as per So_Cyclicals map??? How much did Armidale cost to bring on line?




No idea on either question, sorry.


----------



## trainspotter

Well assuming that there is 36 billion to be spent and there are 11 miilion or so of taxpayers in Australia to fund this shiny blue cable and it goes past 4000 homes in Tasmania ....... surely it is not that hard to do the maths?? 

It would be an average of course.


----------



## Wysiwyg

It might be a case of start from the bottom and work their way up. Lotta money up for grabs. Nice work if you can get it and all that jazz.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> Well assuming that there is 36 billion to be spent and there are 11 miilion or so of taxpayers in Australia to fund this shiny blue cable and it goes past 4000 homes in Tasmania ....... surely it is not that hard to do the maths??
> 
> It would be an average of course.




I would assume that the cost per premises in Tasmania (and the mainland trial sites for that matter)is _substantially_ higher than what the final rollout will cost. It was a totally new experience for the contractors, using assorted machinery specially imported for the rollout to trial various methods of trenching and installation. There have also ben changes made to the hardware equipment, and contracts for volume supply which weren't in place for Tassie.

eg: A company I worked for purchased a fleet of 80 vehicles, with two prototypes from different manufacturers before deciding on one and going into production. The prototypes cost over 150% the price of the final production vehicles, and they weren't particularly complex....

I have often heard NBN staff referring to the rollout as a modular system. ie, that they aren't building a huge one-off network. They are building thousands of little, very similar networks. The thought being that once the process is developed and standardised, it gets cheaper and easier as time progresses.


----------



## boofhead

Some high density areas may not see the update you may think. Existing contracts and some may have cable. NBN's fibre may not give them access to anything new.

Some of the extra cost for the Tassie build out would be backhaul etc. In the extra stages there will be less need to build backhual - some of it was laid in stage 1. So a part of it is about deploying alternative to Telstra backhaul. It could potentially have consumer cost drive downs and develop better competitive environment.

My comments about USA, Japan is more about how the coalition spruke their rhetoric about not done elsewhere. Many aspects of what NBN is planning to do is being deployed in other countries or has been deployed. Coalition need to be precise about some comments to add clarity. UK has having some deployments. NZ, USA is getting wireless expansion subsidised, Japan's subsidies (govt + telcos could come to an agreement) and so forth.

If Telstra could have found a way to find a suitable agreement and wanted it to happen then govt + Telstra would have much of it already deployed.

I'm a bit disappointed ACCC gave in to Telstra and Optus on POI. While Telstra and Optus would have had redundant invenstments - in time it could enable them to be decommissioned and reduce some costs. Less to maintain, operate etc.


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> I would assume that the cost per premises in Tasmania (and the mainland trial sites for that matter)is _substantially_ higher than what the final rollout will cost. It was a totally new experience for the contractors, using assorted machinery specially imported for the rollout to trial various methods of trenching and installation. There have also ben changes made to the hardware equipment, and contracts for volume supply which weren't in place for Tassie.
> 
> eg: A company I worked for purchased a fleet of 80 vehicles, with two prototypes from different manufacturers before deciding on one and going into production. The prototypes cost over 150% the price of the final production vehicles, and they weren't particularly complex....
> 
> I have often heard NBN staff referring to the rollout as a modular system. ie, that they aren't building a huge one-off network. They are building thousands of little, very similar networks. The thought being that once the process is developed and standardised, it gets cheaper and easier as time progresses.




Hencewhy my stand is to ask WHY is it being rolled out in the high risk/cost/implematation/manpower/income etc in the first place????????

How is it that you are hearing from NBN staff this closely? Do you want to stop the charade and come clean? I am more than happy for you to come out onto the flat and have an open discussion about this marvelous technology that is unfolding before us at taxpayers expense.



> They are building thousands of little, very similar networks. The thought being that once the process is developed and standardised, it gets cheaper and easier as time progresses




Well DUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHH .......... ya think??????? Would it not have been better to place it in a density area that the "networks" could have evolved??????? HELLO???

To say it went into Tassie FIRST to test the technology is a CROCK OF ****.


----------



## trainspotter

boofhead said:


> Some high density areas may not see the update you may think. Existing contracts and some may have cable. NBN's fibre may not give them access to anything new.
> 
> My comments about USA, Japan is more about how the coalition spruke their rhetoric about not done elsewhere. Many aspects of what NBN is planning to do is being deployed in other countries or has been deployed. Coalition need to be precise about some comments to add clarity. UK has having some deployments. NZ, USA is getting wireless expansion subsidised, Japan's subsidies (govt + telcos could come to an agreement) and so forth.
> 
> If Telstra could have found a way to find a suitable agreement and wanted it to happen then govt + Telstra would have much of it already deployed.
> 
> I'm a bit disappointed ACCC gave in to Telstra and Optus on POI. While Telstra and Optus would have had redundant invenstments - in time it could enable them to be decommissioned and reduce some costs. Less to maintain, operate etc.




So now the high density areas are already covered with enough internet speed? WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA? No significant improvement or access to anything new WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA?

Take the politics out of it boofehead. I am not interested in debating Libs/USA/Japan/NZ governmental controls as to whom is doing what to whom. I DON"T CARE !!!!!!!!!!! This is not political anymore. It is about DELIVERANCE of the greatest nation building exercise in our countries history. I want VALUE for my dollar and I damn well better get answers. 

Agreed that Telstra has been a stumbling block. Waitaminute ! The Guvmint used to own this olygopoly and now it is curtailed by the dragon !! Bwhahahahhahahahhahahaaaaaaaaaa ...... so much for privatisation eh??

We had one of these previously .... it was called Telstra ...... they sold it ......... now they want to build a new one ........ anyone but me see the irony?? HUH ?? Well do ya???


----------



## sptrawler

The only saving grace, trainspotter, is the majority of the general public can see the absurdity of it. The next election is going to be memorable.
Since it's inception we have been supporting the concept that the government should have bought back Telstra at a fair and reasonable price. Then reconfigured it as it liked and refloat the sections as it saw fit.
However that would have meant giving back taxpayers money, much better to use new taxpayers money and take back(cherry pick) the best parts that you sold off the first time.
The problem is when a politically and ideologically driven belief is forced upon the people who then have to fund it, without being asked if they want it, smacks of extreme socialism. 
When this is added to the hand outs you had to have. The home insulation you had to pay for, one way or another and if you had already put it in yourself, you had to subsidise everyone else. The set top box you never asked for, but no $400 if you don't want it or already have it.
It is as though the country is being run like a department store, the only difference is they fill up your basket with crap you don't want. But you don't have any choice and still have to pay for it.
There is no rhyme or reason to their chaotic policy on the run.
This isn't governing it is chaos management.


----------



## todster

trainspotter said:


> So now the high density areas are already covered with enough internet speed? WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA? No significant improvement or access to anything new WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA?
> 
> Take the politics out of it boofehead. I am not interested in debating Libs/USA/Japan/NZ governmental controls as to whom is doing what to whom. I DON"T CARE !!!!!!!!!!! This is not political anymore. It is about DELIVERANCE of the greatest nation building exercise in our countries history. I want VALUE for my dollar and I damn well better get answers.
> 
> Agreed that Telstra has been a stumbling block. Waitaminute ! The Guvmint used to own this olygopoly and now it is curtailed by the dragon !! Bwhahahahhahahahhahahaaaaaaaaaa ...... so much for privatisation eh??
> 
> We had one of these previously .... it was called Telstra ...... they sold it ......... now they want to build a new one ........ anyone but me see the irony?? HUH ?? Well do ya???




Who sold it ?


----------



## sptrawler

Doesn't matter really, who wants to re hash it, is the question.


----------



## So_Cynical

I'm starting to get the feeling that the timing of the NBN roll out is going to be near perfect with the CFC impacts rolling on and the need to boost employment and stimulate the non mining economy etc...i have a feeling that the NBN is going to go down in history as one of the greatest achievements of any Aust Govt.

Perhaps even Snowy scheme, MIA,  Opera house status. 



sptrawler said:


> The only saving grace, trainspotter, is the majority of the general public can see the absurdity of it. The next election is going to be memorable.




I Agree...the next election will be memorable because Labor will be returned with a slightly increased majority and the Coalition will be forced to abandon its extreme right wing agenda and make a realistic effort to engage the mainstream of Aust politics...1 Vote Tony will be a 2 time loser and replaced with Malcolm (inevitable) Turnbull.


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> I'm starting to get the feeling that the timing of the NBN roll out is going to be near perfect with the CFC impacts rolling on and the need to boost employment and stimulate the non mining economy etc...i have a feeling that the NBN is going to go down in history as one of the greatest achievements of any Aust Govt.
> 
> Perhaps even Snowy scheme, MIA,  Opera house status.
> 
> 
> 
> I Agree...the next election will be memorable because Labor will be returned with a slightly increased majority and the Coalition will be forced to abandon its extreme right wing agenda and make a realistic effort to engage the mainstream of Aust politics...1 Vote Tony will be a 2 time loser and replaced with Malcolm (inevitable) Turnbull.




Well I will be the first to eat humble pie if you are proved correct. Time will tell.
By the way who do you think will be leading labor at the next election?


----------



## So_Cynical

sptrawler said:


> By the way who do you think will be leading labor at the next election?




Good question...im afraid i don't have an answer that i have any great confidence in.


----------



## todster

sptrawler said:


> Doesn't matter really, who wants to re hash it, is the question.




Trainspotter by the looks of it.


----------



## boofhead

trainspotter said:


> So now the high density areas are already covered with enough internet speed? WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA? No significant improvement or access to anything new WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA?





I didn't say they have enough internet speed. I'm saying places like some areas of Hobart have competition for fibre/backhaul. They have choices. Outside of Hobart the choice is typically only Telstra. You can follow Whirlpool and read the feedback from various ISPs on how Telstra operate. Telstra talks about needing to cover costs. Competition arrives and they still talk about covering costs but magically the costs come down to match the competition. Gouging.


----------



## trainspotter

Thanks for clarifying that boofhead. Telstra has performed this magic trick for a very long time now so nothing new in the statement provided. They are the first to crack the whip on the competition as well. *GOSH* I hate Telstra.

Anyhooooo ...... I cannot see how the shiny blue cable is going to be the saviour of Australia by boosting employment and stimulate the non mining economy etc.? I can see a sheeetload of people sitting in darkened rooms playing FPS games. All 64 of them running around in cyberworld shooting each other. GREAT !!!!!!!!!

Meanwhile BACK ON TOPIC !!!!!!



> “It may be possible for you to connect to the National Broadband Network using fibre optic technology, if you agree to pay NBN Co to extend the fibre optic network to your property,” wrote Flemming. “Over the coming months, NBN Co is performing a trial of the fibre optic network extension process with selected properties that border the Tasmania Second Release sites of Triabunna, Sorell, Deloraine, St Helens and South Hobart.”




http://delimiter.com.au/2011/06/11/nbn-co-kicks-off-fibre-extension-trial/

Now that makes sense to me. I can see a profit to be turned on this one. Fibre just misses your property by a smidge so you pay for it to be connected. OR you can sit back and do nothing and get satellite/wireless connection for free. Hmmmmmmmmm ?

P.S. Can we keep the politics out of this thread thanks.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> How is it that you are hearing from NBN staff this closely? Do you want to stop the charade and come clean? I am more than happy for you to come out onto the flat and have an open discussion about this marvelous technology that is unfolding before us at taxpayers expense.




Man, you are paranoid! There's nothing close about it. I've seen videos of several interviews with Quigley etc where he has referred to the network actually being lots of little networks. Unfortunately I can't find a link to one now. I'll keep looking and post it when I find one.



> Hencewhy my stand is to ask WHY is it being rolled out in the high risk/cost/implematation/manpower/income etc in the first place????????
> 
> Well DUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHH .......... ya think??????? Would it not have been better to place it in a density area that the "networks" could have evolved??????? HELLO???
> 
> To say it went into Tassie FIRST to test the technology is a CROCK OF ****.




I don't know why Tassie in particular, but I can give some reasons why I think it hasn't specifically gone into cities first:

*Technical reasons:*
Cities currently have the best services and the most competition. Therefore the incremental benefit for many city people is less than for areas outside the cities. Personally, I think that areas with cable internet should be the last areas to have the NBN.

Following on from that, I doubt takeup will be any better in city areas than regional areas. Of the 5 mainland 1st release sites, the highest connection rates were in the regional sites of Armidale and Willunga (~90%), while the lowest takeup was in the city site of Brunswick (~60%).

If you're testing the rollout and operation of a network it's much easier to do the initial stuff in areas with lower density.

*Political reasons:*
There was an agreement with Oakeshott and Windsor to prioritise regional Australia in the rollout.

The NBN would be politically much harder to stop by a future Coalition govt if rolled out using an outside-in model. ie, lets say they did all the cities first, and by 2013 most of the metro areas were done, then the coalition got in to power. Pretty easy to stop it politically in that case. Cities have always had better services, so those outside the city would just have to put up with the inferior services and higher prices again.

BUT... If in 2013, you have 100 rural/regional centres and selected city suburbs that have fibre, and all can get speeds of 1Gbps for the same price, it makes it pretty hard for the coalition to say "we're stopping now and scaling back to 25Mbps fibre to the node" for the remaining areas, including big chunks of metropolitan Australia. Can you imagine trying to explain to voters that they can get 1000Mbps in Toowoomba, but only 25Mbps in Brisbane?


----------



## boofhead

They don't get sat or wireless free. They get it at a standardised price, same for as the fibre connections where available.


----------



## NBNMyths

boofhead said:


> They don't get sat or wireless free. They get it at a standardised price, same for as the fibre connections where available.




I think what he means is that the connection itself is free, not the service.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Man, you are paranoid! There's nothing close about it. I've seen videos of several interviews with Quigley etc where he has referred to the network actually being lots of little networks. Unfortunately I can't find a link to one now. I'll keep looking and post it when I find one.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know why Tassie in particular, but I can give some reasons why I think it hasn't specifically gone into cities first:
> 
> *Technical reasons:*
> Cities currently have the best services and the most competition. Therefore the incremental benefit for many city people is less than for areas outside the cities. Personally, I think that areas with cable internet should be the last areas to have the NBN.
> 
> Following on from that, I doubt takeup will be any better in city areas than regional areas. Of the 5 mainland 1st release sites, the highest connection rates were in the regional sites of Armidale and Willunga (~90%), while the lowest takeup was in the city site of Brunswick (~60%).
> 
> If you're testing the rollout and operation of a network it's much easier to do the initial stuff in areas with lower density.
> 
> *Political reasons:*
> There was an agreement with Oakeshott and Windsor to prioritise regional Australia in the rollout.
> 
> The NBN would be politically much harder to stop by a future Coalition govt if rolled out using an outside-in model. ie, lets say they did all the cities first, and by 2013 most of the metro areas were done, then the coalition got in to power. Pretty easy to stop it politically in that case. Cities have always had better services, so those outside the city would just have to put up with the inferior services and higher prices again.
> 
> BUT... If in 2013, you have 100 rural/regional centres and selected city suburbs that have fibre, and all can get speeds of 1Gbps for the same price, it makes it pretty hard for the coalition to say "we're stopping now and scaling back to 25Mbps fibre to the node" for the remaining areas, including big chunks of metropolitan Australia. Can you imagine trying to explain to voters that they can get 1000Mbps in Toowoomba, but only 25Mbps in Brisbane?




The takeup rates have absolutely no bearing on how many will sign up for the service.
As has been shown with the Tasmanian towns of Scottsdale, Smithton and Midway point. There was a reasonably high take up rate but a very poor sign up rate for services.
Not unlike what happened with Foxtel when they rolled out fibre in the early days. If you signed up for a month they connected you free.
I installed it in the early days, had it for the month, gave the box back and never had it since. Actually Foxtel is available to 70% of Australian homes and it has huge problems with takeup rates.
Your talk off expected takeup of connections due to access to increased speed could be chalenged also. If we take the case of existing landline connections, they are much faster than wireless, however customers are leaving in droves for the flexibility of wireless.
You can put lipstick on the pig, but it is still a pig and one that is going to cost us dearly.


----------



## boofhead

Do you have figures to backup the idea that people are dropping fixed line broadband in droves?

Wireless is often not used to replace fixed line broadband. End of financial year reporting will be interesting. iinet is experiencing growth. Telstra seems to be having plenty of signups - they increased value.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> The takeup rates have absolutely no bearing on how many will sign up for the service.
> As has been shown with the Tasmanian towns of Scottsdale, Smithton and Midway point. There was a reasonably high take up rate but a very poor sign up rate for services.
> Not unlike what happened with Foxtel when they rolled out fibre in the early days. If you signed up for a month they connected you free.
> I installed it in the early days, had it for the month, gave the box back and never had it since. Actually Foxtel is available to 70% of Australian homes and it has huge problems with takeup rates.
> Your talk off expected takeup of connections due to access to increased speed could be chalenged also. If we take the case of existing landline connections, they are much faster than wireless, however customers are leaving in droves for the flexibility of wireless.
> You can put lipstick on the pig, but it is still a pig and one that is going to cost us dearly.




The connection rates in Tasmania were far below the mainland sites. Only about 49%, compared to an average of about 80% on the mainland. That's a big difference.

I've already mentioned the reasons why the Tasmania service uptake is low at this stage.

It's a fallacy that people are leaving landlines "in droves" for wireless. People are _adding_ wireless services. There is a slight fall in the number of landline _phone_ services, but that's not a fall in landlines as such. People are dumping their fixed phone line for naked ADSL services where they are available. This shows up in stats as a reduction in the number of fixed lines, but the fixed data connection is still there.

For evidence of the growing rise in fixed data lines, let me point you to the latest ABS statistics for internet downloads:
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/8153.0/

Showing that downloads over fixed connections (ADSL and Cable) grew by 61,000 TB between Q4 2009 and Q4 2010, to a total of 175,000 Terabytes. Over the same period, mobile broadband connections only grew by 2,000 Terabytes, to 17,000 total.

The statistics quite clearly show that while the number of mobile broadband connections is growing rapidly, the growth is not coming at the expense of fixed connections, which also continue to grow. Fixed lines continue to experience enormous growth as the 'heavy lifters' of our growing data consumption.

Foxtel is a poor analogy. Who'd want it? I'm quite happy with free TV, thanks.

The NBN will, for all intents, be replacing the current copper phone and internet system. A system with well over 90% connection rates. And the NBN are only banking on 73% by 2025.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

My contacts in El Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE) in Costa Rica tell me that there is an extraordinary interest in this thread by the regulators and judiciary of that country. ICE regulates communications in that land of probity.

May I remind posters that comments in this thread, should any of you be extradited to that country to face bribery and corruption charges, may be used in evidence in that country.

Not that any longterm posters would be, but for the newbies and the innocence challenged, so that you are aware.

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> My contacts in El Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE) in Costa Rica tell me that there is an extraordinary interest in this thread by the regulators and judiciary of that country. ICE regulates communications in that land of probity.
> 
> May I remind posters that comments in this thread, should any of you be extradited to that country to face bribery and corruption charges, may be used in evidence in that country.
> 
> Not that any longterm posters would be, but for the newbies and the innocence challenged, so that you are aware.
> 
> gg




Are your contacts in Costa Rica any more accurate/reliable than the ones who told you the NBN was being scrapped, leading to the creation of this thread in the first place?


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> The connection rates in Tasmania were far below the mainland sites. Only about 49%, compared to an average of about 80% on the mainland. That's a big difference.
> 
> I've already mentioned the reasons why the Tasmania service uptake is low at this stage.
> 
> It's a fallacy that people are leaving landlines "in droves" for wireless. People are _adding_ wireless services. There is a slight fall in the number of landline _phone_ services, but that's not a fall in landlines as such. People are dumping their fixed phone line for naked ADSL services where they are available. This shows up in stats as a reduction in the number of fixed lines, but the fixed data connection is still there.
> 
> For evidence of the growing rise in fixed data lines, let me point you to the latest ABS statistics for internet downloads:
> http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/8153.0/
> 
> Showing that downloads over fixed connections (ADSL and Cable) grew by 61,000 TB between Q4 2009 and Q4 2010, to a total of 175,000 Terabytes. Over the same period, mobile broadband connections only grew by 2,000 Terabytes, to 17,000 total.
> 
> The statistics quite clearly show that while the number of mobile broadband connections is growing rapidly, the growth is not coming at the expense of fixed connections, which also continue to grow. Fixed lines continue to experience enormous growth as the 'heavy lifters' of our growing data consumption.
> 
> Foxtel is a poor analogy. Who'd want it? I'm quite happy with free TV, thanks.
> 
> The NBN will, for all intents, be replacing the current copper phone and internet system. A system with well over 90% connection rates. And the NBN are only banking on 73% by 2025.




It's a bit rich translating increased data volume to increase in connection numbers. It could be that a smaller number of users are downloading more.
I can only go from articles I read in the press and people in circle of family and aqaintances, most of whom are either wireless or are trying to become wireless.

As for Foxtel being a poor analogy, I beg to differ. There is no difference between being happy with free to air t.v or being happy with the current internet speed.
At least with Foxtel you have the choice whether you want it or not and don't tell me I have a choice with N.B.N. We are all paying for it one way or another.

Actually your last paragraph was very enlightening, you appear well connected(no pun intended) with the N.B.N.
You have been very precise about the way you use the words connection and services. By 2025 N.B.N is only working on a *connection* rate of 73% to be profitable .
Which must mean that even if people aren't using the *services* they will be paying for the connection .


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> It's a bit rich translating increased data volume to increase in connection numbers. It could be that a smaller number of users are downloading more.
> I can only go from articles I read in the press and people in circle of family and aqaintances, most of whom are either wireless or are trying to become wireless.
> 
> As for Foxtel being a poor analogy, I beg to differ. There is no difference between being happy with free to air t.v or being happy with the current internet speed.
> At least with Foxtel you have the choice whether you want it or not and don't tell me I have a choice with N.B.N. We are all paying for it one way or another.
> 
> Actually your last paragraph was very enlightening, you appear well connected(no pun intended) with the N.B.N.
> You have been very precise about the way you use the words connection and services. By 2025 N.B.N is only working on a *connection* rate of 73% to be profitable .
> Which must mean that even if people aren't using the *services* they will be paying for the connection .




The same ABS stats show that the number of ADSL fixed connections grew from 4,178,000 in 2009 to 4,458,000 in 2010 (up 300,000). Growth for Cable is not provided, while Fibre grew from 11,000 to 24,000, showing new estates taking up fibre connections instead of copper.

According to the ABS, we only build about 160,000 new dwellings per year, so the growth of fixed lines is running at almost 200% of the growth in new premises. Does that sound like the death of the fixed connection?

There's no doubt that the number of mobile broadband connections are growing at a faster rate, but that's to be expected as a reasonably new technology and it's coming from a much smaller base. You also often have more than one mobile connection per household. What's important is that their growth clearly isn't coming at the expense of fixed connections.

It's also worth noting that the average download over all connections now is 18GB per month, while the biggest Telstra wireless broadband plan is only 12GB per month. In other words, you can't even buy a mobile broadband plan that satisfies the _average_ monthly download!

You do have a choice with the NBN. If you don't want it, don't get connected. You won't be paying for it, the users will. All of the govt investment is repaid by the users of the network.

The difference with foxtel is that it costs you money, while free TV doesn't. The NBN won't cost you any more than your current copper phone/ADSL service, unless you choose to take the faster speeds available (a choice you don't have with copper).

No sorry, I used the wrong terms there. The NBN are banking on a 73% service takeup rate by 2025. Connection rates are irrelevant because there's no charge for a connection.

The last figures I saw had 88% of Australian homes with an active fixed phone line, plus another 6% with a naked-DSL or fibre service, for a total of 94% active fixed services.

Now considering that the copper network will be progressively decommissioned but has 94% active connections, our data appetite is growing at 50% per year (which wireless cannot handle) and wireless is ridiculously expensive compared to fixed, do you really think it will be hard to achieve a 73% service takeup rate?


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> The same ABS stats show that the number of ADSL fixed connections grew from 4,178,000 in 2009 to 4,458,000 in 2010 (up 300,000). Growth for Cable is not provided, while Fibre grew from 11,000 to 24,000, showing new estates taking up fibre connections instead of copper.
> 
> According to the ABS, we only build about 160,000 new dwellings per year, so the growth of fixed lines is running at almost 200% of the growth in new premises. Does that sound like the death of the fixed connection?
> 
> There's no doubt that the number of mobile broadband connections are growing at a faster rate, but that's to be expected as a reasonably new technology and it's coming from a much smaller base. You also often have more than one mobile connection per household. What's important is that their growth clearly isn't coming at the expense of fixed connections.
> 
> It's also worth noting that the average download over all connections now is 18GB per month, while the biggest Telstra wireless broadband plan is only 12GB per month. In other words, you can't even buy a mobile broadband plan that satisfies the _average_ monthly download!
> 
> You do have a choice with the NBN. If you don't want it, don't get connected. You won't be paying for it, the users will. All of the govt investment is repaid by the users of the network.
> 
> The difference with foxtel is that it costs you money, while free TV doesn't. The NBN won't cost you any more than your current copper phone/ADSL service, unless you choose to take the faster speeds available (a choice you don't have with copper).
> 
> No sorry, I used the wrong terms there. The NBN are banking on a 73% service takeup rate by 2025. Connection rates are irrelevant because there's no charge for a connection.
> 
> The last figures I saw had 88% of Australian homes with an active fixed phone line, plus another 6% with a naked-DSL or fibre service, for a total of 94% active fixed services.
> 
> Now considering that the copper network will be progressively decommissioned but has 94% active connections, our data appetite is growing at 50% per year (which wireless cannot handle) and wireless is ridiculously expensive compared to fixed, do you really think it will be hard to achieve a 73% service takeup rate?




From your comprehensive data I would have to agree the expectation of 73% is reasonable. 
However this doesn't diminish the fact that it is a huge financial impost on infrastructure of questionable value. Again this is only my opinion.
Time will tell if it is success or a huge white elephant.
Also like I said earlier, saying it won't cost me money if I don't connect is rubish, all taxpayers are paying for it.
Also if it is not as successful and runs at a loss, taxpayers will continue to pay for it ad infenitum to cover the losses.

As for your data. By the the next election,actual service take up as a percentage of connections and real life costs should be available. Then we will be able to differentiate between speculation and fact.
Not unlike River City Motorway traffic projections and cost base analysis during the selling process verses real life.


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths wrote this :-



> You do have a choice with the NBN. If you don't want it, don't get connected. You won't be paying for it, the users will.




*YA HAVE GOT TO BE JOKING ME !!!!!!!!!!!!! 36 billion dollars of tax payers money to fund this IS PAYING FOR IT !!!!!!!! Don't sugar coat it, this is the TRUTH.*

For crying out loud man ....... take off the rose coloured glasses and look around. The more you post the more stoooooooooopid you look.

OK I don't want the NBN. Does this mean they will stop spending 36 billion dollars of taxpayers money to put a shiny blue cable in the ground?? I think not.

If you are gonna tell a bullsh1t story at least stick to the middle ground. SHEEEEESH 

FFS I have never been so angry at the sheeet that I read on the internet !!!!!!


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths wrote this as well:-



> It's also worth noting that the average download over all connections now is 18GB per month, while the biggest Telstra wireless broadband plan is only 12GB per month. In other words, you can't even buy a mobile broadband plan that satisfies the average monthly download!




PROVIDE EVIDENCE RATHER THAN YOUR BULLSH!T TRAPPINGS PLEASE. Just because you type it does not make it so. Just the facts M'aam ... just the facts.


----------



## trainspotter

Once again NBNMyths wrote this:-



> The connection rates in Tasmania were far below the mainland sites. Only about 49%, compared to an average of about 80% on the mainland. That's a big difference.




760 people are connected to the NBN ......... WOW !!!!!!! 

How can you average takeup rates on such a small demographic??? 4000 homes in Tasmania has access to NBN (according to you) and how many are connected? If we use YOUR maths then there should be 1960 (or 49%) people on the NBN. BTW which there is NOT. Blowing chunks in your story here NBNMyths. 

If you are gonna sprout stats and figures at least PLEASE stay consistent.


----------



## trainspotter

Errrrrrrmmmmmmmmm NBNMyths wrote this as well:-



> The difference with foxtel is that it costs you money, while free TV doesn't. The NBN won't cost you any more than your current copper phone/ADSL service, unless you choose to take the faster speeds available (a choice you don't have with copper).




Nope ...... guess again ....... there is a whole wide range of plans available to you with fixed copper lines. LMAO

Dodo, Bigpond, iinet, Westnet, Optus, etcetera etcetera.

*50GB *for $49.95 per month with Telstra??? Noooooooooooooooo !!!!!!!!!!

http://broadband.smh.com.au/Broadba...e-ADSL-50GB-Multiple-Product-Bundle-24-Months

Add in your mobile phone and your land line for $100 per month .............. 

Up to 200GB per month for $69.95 per month as well !!!!!!!

Probably gonna get me banned for at least 6 months with the tirade but it was worth it.


----------



## sptrawler

Check this out trainspotter, obviously were not the only ones that think it is a massive wate of money.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/bu...me-broadband-fiasco-for-minerals-tax-forrest/

Maybe the pressure sell of the "pigs ear" isn't going as well as labor would like to think it is.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> YA HAVE GOT TO BE JOKING ME !!!!!!!!!!!!! 36 billion dollars of tax payers money to fund this IS PAYING FOR IT !!!!!!!! Don't sugar coat it, this is the TRUTH.
> 
> For crying out loud man ....... take off the rose coloured glasses and look around. The more you post the more stoooooooooopid you look.
> 
> OK I don't want the NBN. Does this mean they will stop spending 36 billion dollars of taxpayers money to put a shiny blue cable in the ground?? I think not.
> 
> If you are gonna tell a bullsh1t story at least stick to the middle ground. SHEEEEESH
> 
> FFS I have never been so angry at the sheeet that I read on the internet !!!!!!




Oooo. We are cranky today, aren't we?

The truth? Maybe you should keep checking. The total amount of "taxpayers" dollars invested into the NBN is $27 billion, not 36.

Next, they aren't _spending_ this money, they are _investing it_ into a project that will repay the money. The NBN is funded by the issuing Government bonds to raise the money, at (currently) about 5%pa. The NBN is forecast to provide a return of 7%pa. Do you understand what this means? Once the network is operational, all of the "taxpayers" dollars are returned, including the interest.

Now you take off the blackout mask and try to understand. :




trainspotter said:


> PROVIDE EVIDENCE RATHER THAN YOUR BULLSH!T TRAPPINGS PLEASE. Just because you type it does not make it so. Just the facts M'aam ... just the facts.




How much evidence would you like?

Here is the link (again) to the latest ABS stats for internet use. Note that the total amount of data downloaded for December 2010 is 191,839 TB. The total number of connections was 10,446. Divide users into data, and you come up with 18.36GB per user, per month. It's not hard.

Now, here is a link to Telstra's mobile broadband plans. Note that the largest one is $89.95 per month (without a bundled home phone), and includes 12GB of data per month.

OK? Oh, and :




trainspotter said:


> Once again NBNMyths wrote this:-
> 
> 760 people are connected to the NBN ......... WOW !!!!!!!
> 
> How can you average takeup rates on such a small demographic??? 4000 homes in Tasmania has access to NBN (according to you) and how many are connected? If we use YOUR maths then there should be 1960 (or 49%) people on the NBN. BTW which there is NOT. Blowing chunks in your story here NBNMyths.
> 
> If you are gonna sprout stats and figures at least PLEASE stay consistent.




Oh dear. Let me standardise some terminology:

_Connected to the NBN:_ You have accepted a physical connection to the NBN (ie, you have an NBN box on your house ready for use). This costs you nothing.

_Active service: _You have accepted a physical connection, _AND_ you have an active NBN service with an RSP (ISP). This costs you a monthly fee.

In Tasmania, ~49% of people in the covered area have taken up a _connection to the NBN fibre cable_. They have a box on the side of their house, and can ring an RSP and ask for a service whenever they want, but they are not necessarily using it. On the mainland, the average connection rate is about 75%, with the highest being Armidale and Willunga at 90%, and the lowest being Brunswick at 58%.

In Tasmania, 18% (of the total, not of the 49%) have now taken up an _active service on the NBN_. Active service figures for the mainland are not yet available, because people can't connect yet unless invited to participate in the trial phase.

I don't know where those chunks are from, but they aren't in my story! :




trainspotter said:


> Errrrrrrmmmmmmmmm NBNMyths wrote this as well:-
> 
> Nope ...... guess again ....... there is a whole wide range of plans available to you with fixed copper lines. LMAO
> 
> Dodo, Bigpond, iinet, Westnet, Optus, etcetera etcetera.
> 
> 50GB for $49.95 per month with Telstra??? Noooooooooooooooo !!!!!!!!!!
> 
> http://broadband.smh.com.au/Broadba...e-ADSL-50GB-Multiple-Product-Bundle-24-Months
> 
> Add in your mobile phone and your land line for $100 per month ..............
> 
> Up to 200GB per month for $69.95 per month as well !!!!!!!




And there will be a whole range of plans, from a whole range of RSPs under the NBN too. I'd expect final pricing to be out in a month or two, but for now here's some Tasmanian pricing. Note that in Tassie, the RSPs only paid a flat $300 fee for 12 months connection, with no ongoing usage charges. This is $25 per month. Once the OSS/BSS comes online though, it will go up slightly to the final wholesale pricing. eg, a 12/1Mbps connection will cost the RSPs ~$28 per month including about 50GB of data.

Tasmanian NBN plans, including the data listed, plus a VoIP phone and all local and national calls:

20GB $39.90
200GB $59.90
400GB $79.90
1TB $109.90

http://www.iinet.net.au/nbn/

:



> Probably gonna get me banned for at least 6 months with the tirade but it was worth it.




Was it?


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Check this out trainspotter, obviously were not the only ones that think it is a massive wate of money.
> 
> http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/bu...me-broadband-fiasco-for-minerals-tax-forrest/
> 
> Maybe the pressure sell of the "pigs ear" isn't going as well as labor would like to think it is.




Oh, well that's it then. Game over. If someone with morals as high as Twiggy says so, then it must be true.

Oh, and I'm sure that Twiggy has a much better grasp on network technology than Vint Cerf and all those so-called intertube experts and assorted business leaders.


----------



## snowking

NBNMyths said:


> In Tasmania, 18% (of the total, not of the 49%) have now taken up an _active service on the NBN_. Active service figures for the mainland are not yet available, because people can't connect yet unless invited to participate in the trial phase.
> 
> I don't know where those chunks are from, but they aren't in my story! :





What was the forecast take up rate for the NBN?
And what is the NPV of the project? positive or negative? by how much?


----------



## moXJO

Here is a bit on costs and comments on the contract


> I conducted an assessment of the situation and suggested that one reason for the tender cost blow-out related to speculation that the disastrous industrial agreement at Victoria's desalination plant was flowing over to the NBN construction. The desalination agreement imposes pay and conditions way above standard construction rates. If NBN tenderers had applied the desalination agreement rates to the NBN, this would arguably increase the NBN's construction costs by some 25 per cent. NBN Co had apparently accused construction companies of price gouging whereas in fact the companies were costing prudently based on facts known at the time.
> 
> Update: Industrial agreement risk
> More recently, however, it's been revealed that NBN Co and the government have worked on deals to get around the militant construction unions that have caused trouble and cost blow-outs at the Victorian desalination plant. They say that they have secured alternative industrial agreements with other unions that will deliver the NBN construction within reasonable costs. I can now reveal a further development in this continuing saga.
> 
> I've received a copy from highly placed sources of the alleged revised template industrial agreement intended to apply to all contractors who undertake the NBN rollout. I'm reliably informed that any company bidding for NBN work 'understands' that this industrial agreement is the one they will need to apply to their workforces if they win work. There's nothing official about this, of course. That's the way big business-big government-big union deal-making works in Australia. There's lots of winks and nudges, but any company putting in a tender 'knows' that if it doesn't apply the 'politically approved' union agreement, its chances of tender success are negligible. My information is that current tender preparations are based on the industrial agreement template I've received.




http://www.contractworld.com.au/general/ica-NBN-industrial-agreement-risk.php
Is a link to the site

http://www.contractworld.com.au/#
There is further information if you scroll down a bit on the page


> National Broadband Nasties---Wikileaks? [6 June 2011]
> No, we're not Wikileaks, but we've been leaked the standard industrial agreement that contractors will allegedly need to use for the rollout of the National Broadband Network. We've done an assessment which reveals that the Agreement will trigger uncontrolled cost blow-outs to the $36 billion project. There's big risk for big construction company CEOs. Here's:




I'm for nbn at this stage, but there are plenty of elements I do not like in the construction/ cost.


----------



## NBNMyths

snowking said:


> What was the forecast take up rate for the NBN?
> And what is the NPV of the project? positive or negative? by how much?




The forecast is 68% by 2010 and 73% by 2025. The Tasmanian situation is not representative for the reasons I've already detailed in this post.

Let me repeat the bit about ADSL takeup, as I think it puts it very much into perspective. The Tassie NBN has a takeup of 18% after 10 months. After a similar period 8 years ago, ADSL takeup was only 3%. If you'd looked at that 3% back then, would you have thought the current rate would be achievable, just 8 years later?

I have no idea what the NPV of it is. My guess would be very much in the negative right now, considering it's not even in volume rollout yet.


----------



## snowking

NBNMyths said:


> The forecast is 68% by 2010 and 73% by 2025. The Tasmanian situation is not representative for the reasons I've already detailed in this post.
> 
> 
> I have no idea what the NPV of it is. My guess would be very much in the negative right now, considering it's not even in volume rollout yet.




2010? Maybe 2020?

The net present value of the project should have been calculated at the beginning and take into account all future cash flows over the entire life of the project and assess whether they are greater than zero. What you have just referred to is the current return. Two very different things.


----------



## NBNMyths

snowking said:


> 2010? Maybe 2020?
> 
> The net present value of the project should have been calculated at the beginning and take into account all future cash flows over the entire life of the project and assess whether they are greater than zero. What you have just referred to is the current return. Two very different things.




I did just find this NPV calculation from a guy on whirlpool. It's a bit out of date now, but the assumptions are in there. Take it as you will.
http://www.thejoie.com/welcome/docs/NBN_NPVyr1-15.xls


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> Oooo. We are cranky today, aren't we?
> 
> The truth? Maybe you should keep checking. The total amount of "taxpayers" dollars invested into the NBN is $27 billion, not 36.
> 
> Next, they aren't _spending_ this money, they are _investing it_ into a project that will repay the money. The NBN is funded by the issuing Government bonds to raise the money, at (currently) about 5%pa. The NBN is forecast to provide a return of 7%pa. Do you understand what this means? Once the network is operational, all of the "taxpayers" dollars are returned, including the interest.




LOLOL ....... And you honestly expect this to happen? Delusional at best. Pie in the sky wankfest at worst. Spending the taxpayers dollars there dude, hardly investing at all.

_TELSTRA'S $9 billion deal with the NBN Co could be settled as early as this week and will include break fees that could be worth more than $1 billion to protect shareholders should the *$36bn rollout be abandoned or substantially revised in the future*. _

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...es-nbn-break-fee/story-e6frg8zx-1226073987329

If it so set in concrete of it's success then why would the Government agree to break fees then? 



> How much evidence would you like?
> 
> Here is the link (again) to the latest ABS stats for internet use. Note that the total amount of data downloaded for December 2010 is 191,839 TB. The total number of connections was 10,446. Divide users into data, and you come up with 18.36GB per user, per month. It's not hard.
> 
> Now, here is a link to Telstra's mobile broadband plans. Note that the largest one is $89.95 per month (without a bundled home phone), and includes 12GB of data per month.




Not that hard now was it? If you are gonna sprout the stats please provide the links. 




> Let me standardise some terminology:
> 
> _Connected to the NBN:_ You have accepted a physical connection to the NBN (ie, you have an NBN box on your house ready for use). This costs you nothing.
> 
> _Active service: _You have accepted a physical connection, _AND_ you have an active NBN service with an RSP (ISP). This costs you a monthly fee.
> 
> In Tasmania, ~49% of people in the covered area have taken up a _connection to the NBN fibre cable_. They have a box on the side of their house, and can ring an RSP and ask for a service whenever they want, but they are not necessarily using it. On the mainland, the average connection rate is about 75%, with the highest being Armidale and Willunga at 90%, and the lowest being Brunswick at 58%.
> 
> In Tasmania, 18% (of the total, not of the 49%) have now taken up an _active service on the NBN_. Active service figures for the mainland are not yet available, because people can't connect yet unless invited to participate in the trial phase.




Bwahahaahahahhaaaaa *gasp* gagagagagaaaahahaha GAG ! I remember when they laid out the deep sewer ........ it was free as well to start with. It was YOUR cost to connect in, which is fine. After a while the people weren't connecting into the deep sewer so the Government MADE YOU PAY FOR IT even when you weren't connected TO FORCE YOU to connect. Internet banking was promoted the same way. NO FEES ... IT'S ALL FREE ........ yeah right !!!!!!!!!! 

So we have all of these people with a box strapped to the side of their house and doing nuffin. YAY !!!!!!! That's sensible now isn't it !!!!



> And there will be a whole range of plans, from a whole range of RSPs under the NBN too. I'd expect final pricing to be out in a month or two, but for now here's some Tasmanian pricing. Note that in Tassie, the RSPs only paid a flat $300 fee for 12 months connection, with no ongoing usage charges. This is $25 per month. Once the OSS/BSS comes online though, it will go up slightly to the final wholesale pricing. eg, a 12/1Mbps connection will cost the RSPs ~$28 per month including about 50GB of data.




I want a Panadol for the crapola you are selling. CHUNKS !!!!!!!!!! :


----------



## boofhead

When governments change, so can projects. There's no hard and fast 100% rules that says the next government has to complete the project. Those involved will want compensation though. Like the Opel project of the coalition. Why have the conditions in the Telstra deal? Tony Abbott.

You're a little hard to stay respectful in replying to you trainspotter. You seem to have little respect for others.


----------



## sptrawler

Trainspotter, you the same as me think this is a stupid waste of money, as was the first home owners boost, home insulation boost, build a canteen boost, give me a solar boost, throw some money to China plasma t.v boost.
Actually the N.B.N is the only initiative that this government came up with that is still floating. That is after four years in government, it is just a sad indictment, rather than step back and reconsider the impost on future living standards. They plough on regardless because they are "committed" and you will just have to suck it up.
Actually not unlike the way the union works, and I have always been and still am a fully paid up union member. That would be 40years


----------



## So_Cynical

trainspotter said:


> LOLOL ....... And you honestly expect this to happen? Delusional at best. Pie in the sky wankfest at worst. Spending the taxpayers dollars there dude, hardly investing at all.
> 
> _TELSTRA'S $9 billion deal with the NBN Co could be settled as early as this week and will include break fees that could be worth more than $1 billion to protect shareholders should the *$36bn rollout be abandoned or substantially revised in the future*. _
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...es-nbn-break-fee/story-e6frg8zx-1226073987329
> 
> If it so set in concrete of it's success then why would the Government agree to break fees then?
> 
> 
> 
> Not that hard now was it? If you are gonna sprout the stats please provide the links.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bwahahaahahahhaaaaa *gasp* gagagagagaaaahahaha GAG ! I remember when they laid out the deep sewer ........ it was free as well to start with. It was YOUR cost to connect in, which is fine. After a while the people weren't connecting into the deep sewer so the Government MADE YOU PAY FOR IT even when you weren't connected TO FORCE YOU to connect. Internet banking was promoted the same way. NO FEES ... IT'S ALL FREE ........ yeah right !!!!!!!!!!
> 
> So we have all of these people with a box strapped to the side of their house and doing nuffin. YAY !!!!!!! That's sensible now isn't it !!!!
> 
> 
> 
> I want a Panadol for the crapola you are selling. CHUNKS !!!!!!!!!! :
> 
> View attachment 43244




= Tranny got PWNED...you got nothing but empty rhetoric and slogans of fear and confusion....alot like 1 vote Tony and the coalition. 

Its just the inevitable Tranny, nothing to be afraid of.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> LOLOL ....... And you honestly expect this to happen? Delusional at best. Pie in the sky wankfest at worst. Spending the taxpayers dollars there dude, hardly investing at all.




OK, so why don't you think it will happen? There are only two real variables here, the cost could blow out, and/or the takeup won't hit 73%. We've already dealt with the likelihood of the takeup not being met, so that leaves the build cost blowout.

By all reports, the tenders for pretty much everything are going swimmingly now. Even if the cost of the fibre portion were to somehow blow out to 150% of the forecast (Incredibly unlikely given the contracts signed so far), that only takes the total from $36bn to $42bn. Hardly the end of the world, and I'd hazard a guess that it would keep the return above the bond rate. And that's still assuming that the conservative revenue predictions from the business case aren't exceeded.

So what exactly is your reasoning for expecting it not to meet expectations, apart from your personal dogmatic reasoning?



> _TELSTRA'S $9 billion deal with the NBN Co could be settled as early as this week and will include break fees that could be worth more than $1 billion to protect shareholders should the *$36bn rollout be abandoned or substantially revised in the future*. _
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...es-nbn-break-fee/story-e6frg8zx-1226073987329
> 
> If it so set in concrete of it's success then why would the Government agree to break fees then?




That's easy. So if the Coalition get in in 2013 or 2016, and they want to try and cancel it, Telstra get compo. Part of the deal with Telstra is that they have to wear the cost of upgrading their pit and pipe where required for use by the NBN. Obviously, if they have spent that cash, then the NBN is cancelled, they will be out of pocket. MT will be spitting chips about that one. Thanks Telstra for being so diligent. 



> Bwahahaahahahhaaaaa *gasp* gagagagagaaaahahaha GAG ! I remember when they laid out the deep sewer ........ it was free as well to start with. It was YOUR cost to connect in, which is fine. After a while the people weren't connecting into the deep sewer so the Government MADE YOU PAY FOR IT even when you weren't connected TO FORCE YOU to connect. Internet banking was promoted the same way. NO FEES ... IT'S ALL FREE ........ yeah right !!!!!!!!!!
> 
> So we have all of these people with a box strapped to the side of their house and doing nuffin. YAY !!!!!!! That's sensible now isn't it !!!!




Yes, it's very sensible. Whether you like the NBN or not, refusing a free connection when it comes through it just plain stupid. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't be too happy about buying a house without a phone line running into it. Same for the NBN in 10 years time.

And when people refuse initially, then 18 months later the copper is switched off, and they are charged a NBN connection fee*, they will be the first ones whinging to Alan Jones about it.

* (Note that at this stage NBN haven't said they will charge for non-rollout connections, but I think that would be inevitable eventually. Telstra certainly do it. It's a waste of time and money to return and do it later, and the customer should be charged IMHO. What I would hope is that they have a first round of freebies during the rollout, then a second round of freebies just before the copper is decommissioned to pick up stragglers. Anything after that, _bill 'em, Dano._)

The water and sewer are exceptions to the service charge rule. There's no service charge if you don't want a phone line, and there's no prospect of a service charge if you don't want an NBN connection.


----------



## sptrawler

Well trainspotter, the NBNMythdick is absolutely correct, at this point in time no one can dispute their statistics. However as time goes by the statistics become more accurate.
He is obviously connected and will become disconnected with the government.LOL


----------



## drsmith

It will run over budget and behind schedule and that's assuming the current government stays in power for the duration of the project which in itself is most unlikely.

Bedding down the biggest cost saving of all, Telstra's pipes and ducts, seems to be taking forever.


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> $36bn to $42bn. Hardly the end of the world,




Are you SURE you are not Wayne Swann??

Truly, a more stupid comment has never been made in the history of comments


----------



## sptrawler

drsmith said:


> It will run over budget and behind schedule and that's assuming the current government stays in power for the duration of the project which in itself is most unlikely.
> 
> Bedding down the biggest cost saving of all, Telstra's pipes and ducts, seems to be taking forever.




This is the whole problem, drsmith, how do you forcibly take back something you have sold for a huge profit and still try and appear moral.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths, I don't want to get into a slanging match and all your posts I have given due respect for their accuracy. However the fact remains this will not in any way increase employment opportunities for my grandkids.
Australia can't compete with the world on a manufacturing base. We are increasingly using remote control for for our mining operations. Our retail is going down the toilet to internet purchasing. 
Where are your kids going to work.
It goes back to do they need high speed internet or jobs. Like putting in a national L.N.G reticulation sytem, dams in the north supplying irrigation for food and work in the south. High speed rail infrastructure so the dependance on air travel is reduced, also giving a steady load to the electricity grid so renewables are feasable.
The problem is this N.B.N is premature a bit like the Tandy trs80 I bought with 16k of extended memory. LOL


----------



## trainspotter

boofhead said:


> When governments change, so can projects. There's no hard and fast 100% rules that says the next government has to complete the project. Those involved will want compensation though. Like the Opel project of the coalition. Why have the conditions in the Telstra deal? Tony Abbott.
> 
> You're a little hard to stay respectful in replying to you trainspotter. You seem to have little respect for others.




Thanks for pointing it out boofhead. Of all the posters in here you are the least likely to play the man. RESPECT.


----------



## trainspotter

So_Cynical said:


> = Tranny got PWNED...you got nothing but empty rhetoric and slogans of fear and confusion....alot like 1 vote Tony and the coalition.
> 
> Its just the inevitable Tranny, nothing to be afraid of.




Are you like 15 or something So_Cyclical?  Go and play some more FPS games and occupy yourself in cyberland.


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> OK, so why don't you think it will happen? There are only two real variables here, the cost could blow out, and/or the takeup won't hit 73%. We've already dealt with the likelihood of the takeup not being met, so that leaves the build cost blowout.
> 
> By all reports, the tenders for pretty much everything are going swimmingly now. Even if the cost of the fibre portion were to somehow blow out to 150% of the forecast (Incredibly unlikely given the contracts signed so far), that only takes the total from $36bn to $42bn. Hardly the end of the world, and I'd hazard a guess that it would keep the return above the bond rate. And that's still assuming that the conservative revenue predictions from the business case aren't exceeded.
> 
> So what exactly is your reasoning for expecting it not to meet expectations, apart from your personal dogmatic reasoning?




The cost blowout for construction in rural areas can very easily be a telling factor. Not that long ago the tenders were way over budget constraints. Head of construction PATRICK Flannigan quit in a veil of secrecy. Tender process cancelled and then lo and behold Silcar to the rescue. I smell something fishy going on there !

Tell me what government (irrespective of colours) has EVER delivered on time and or budget? Some examples are Rail Link, BusWay, Border Protection, Hospitals, City Link, BER, Pink Batts ........ I could go on and on but am limited to the size of the reply to this post. 

The other thing is if the Liberals/Coalition/Whatever get in to power and CANCEL the roll out due to budget constraints for the whole country .... THEN WHAT? The whole thing is in tatters. A few isolated go fast networks and for what? Because we needed to be competitive with South Korea?



> That's easy. So if the Coalition get in in 2013 or 2016, and they want to try and cancel it, Telstra get compo. Part of the deal with Telstra is that they have to wear the cost of upgrading their pit and pipe where required for use by the NBN. Obviously, if they have spent that cash, then the NBN is cancelled, they will be out of pocket. MT will be spitting chips about that one. Thanks Telstra for being so diligent.




See my above response for this.



> Yes, it's very sensible. Whether you like the NBN or not, refusing a free connection when it comes through it just plain stupid. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't be too happy about buying a house without a phone line running into it. Same for the NBN in 10 years time.
> 
> And when people refuse initially, then 18 months later the copper is switched off, and they are *charged a NBN connection fee*, *they will be the first ones whinging to Alan Jones about it.
> 
> * (Note that at this stage NBN haven't said they will charge for non-rollout connections, *but I think that would be inevitable eventually.* Telstra certainly do it. It's a waste of time and money to return and do it later, and the customer should be charged IMHO. What I would hope is that they have a first round of freebies during the rollout, then a second round of freebies just before the copper is decommissioned to pick up stragglers. Anything after that, _bill 'em, Dano._)




Just like the Government to FORCE you into it to pay for it hence my original statement.

The other factor is if there is more of a downturn in global finances then the Government of the day will be toe cutting wherever it can to shore up it's dodgy bottom line. This will happen. The other thing that will happen is that "luxuries" will be the first thing to go ...... as in broadband.


----------



## trainspotter

boofhead said:


> When governments change, so can projects. There's no hard and fast 100% rules that says the next government has to complete the project. Those involved will want compensation though. Like the Opel project of the coalition. Why have the conditions in the Telstra deal? Tony Abbott.
> 
> You're a little hard to stay respectful in replying to you trainspotter. You seem to have little respect for others.




OPEL was cancelled by Labor BTW. I am pretty confident IF the Libs get in the first thing that will go down the **** shute will be the NBN. My response was mainly directed at NBNMyths who is espousing the benefits of the NBN as if it were the Holy Grail and completely untouchable. The word zealot springs to mind. :


----------



## boofhead

I didn't realise I said Coalition cancelled it. All I meant was it was a Coalition project. It is a project of one government that is cancelled by another. So a lot of why things are being setup and where things are rolled out are partly political. Makes it harder to unpick. A lot of votes in the cities - the type that have a lot of input in to newpapers, television and radio. It would be unpopular for city dwellers to have crappier internet than regional people.

I would have benefited from Opel only by having competing backhaul across Bass Strait although the prices are unknown and there may have been little end user difference in service or cost. NBN is way better for me as a consumer.

I can understand NBNMyths' enthusiasm. It isn't a continuation of the mish-mash of crap added on and it doesn't leave a lot of the population outside the major metropolitan areas left behind, like usual.


----------



## trainspotter

boofhead said:


> I didn't realise I said Coalition cancelled it. All I meant was it was a Coalition project. It is a project of one government that is cancelled by another. So a lot of why things are being setup and where things are rolled out are partly political. Makes it harder to unpick. A lot of votes in the cities - the type that have a lot of input in to newpapers, television and radio. It would be unpopular for city dwellers to have crappier internet than regional people.
> 
> I would have benefited from Opel only by having competing backhaul across Bass Strait although the prices are unknown and there may have been little end user difference in service or cost. NBN is way better for me as a consumer.
> 
> I can understand NBNMyths' enthusiasm. It isn't a continuation of the mish-mash of crap added on and it doesn't leave a lot of the population outside the major metropolitan areas left behind, like usual.




Thanks for the explanation. We are both on the same page on this one. A bit like in WA when the Lib Guvmint announced 38 million for a new hospital in the March budget and Labor got into power and took the credit for the hospital upgrade  Samma samma Dong.

NBNMyths claimed there were only 2 things that would cause this thing to not meet expectations which were cost blow outs and low takeup rates. I was pointing out that if this nation building exercise is so gilt edged it would only take an unfriendly Guvmint to unravel the whole catastrophe by cancelling it to shore up the bottom line if necessary. The noises from the blue camp do not lead me to believe otherwise. Also if it is such a foregone conclusion then the powers that be would not agree to compensation on the Telstra dealing either.

Another flood or cyclone on the East Coast and what then? It is possible that money could be diverted to rebuild existing infrastructure rather than lay cable to a populace that does not understand the magnitude nor the capabilities of high speed internet via fibre optic cable. They have not exactly explained themsleves to convince Mr and Mrs average punter that this thing is the best thing to happen to them by a long shot.

I can understand NBNMyths enthusiasm for an NBN as well but methinks the snout is a little too far in the trough and cannot see the pitfalls. Either that or the brainwashing has worked too well. If both parties had agreed to the shiny blue cable and commited to the long haul programme then I don't see too much black smoke on the horizon. Unfortunately the previous examples set by both sides of politics on such major infrastructure contracts have not filled me with much confidence.

The NBN according to Deutsche Bank:-



> But there is only a 45 per cent chance of the network proceeding as planned, according to a note from Deutsche Bank to clients.
> 
> This is based on a 50:50 chance of Labor losing the next election, scheduled for 2013, and the possibility of the Coalition scaling back the project (40 per cent chance) or the project being cancelled altogether (15 per cent chance).




Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/bus...n-agreement-20110530-1fd13.html#ixzz0qu1mEOA7


----------



## DB008

NBN chief takes broad approach to truth

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/nbn-chief-takes-broad-approach-to-truth/story-e6frezz0-1226077720078



> According to the US Department of Justice and Securities and Exchange commission, Acatel allegedly violated the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act between 2001 and 2006 by paying millions of dollars in bribes to foreign officials in more than a dozen countries to win deals.
> 
> The Act prevents US firms from using bribery in foreign markets. It applies to US companies and foreign companies (such as Alcatel) which raise money or borrow in the US. Hundreds of companies and a far smaller number of individuals have been charged, most since 1998.
> 
> Corruption by Alcatel was initially exposed in the Costa Rican press in 2004 and investigated by local authorities.
> 
> Quigley was President of Alcatel Americas (including Latin America) from March 2001 to December 2002, President of Alcatel North America from January 2003 to April 2005, and Alcatel's President and Chief Operating Officer (or effective number two) from April 2005 to late 2006, when the merger with Lucent occurred. He left Alcatel-Lucent in August 2007. Quigley became NBN Co's CEO in July 2009.
> 
> Beaufret joined Alcatel as Deputy Chief Financial Officer in late 1999 and became Chief Financial Officer in 2002.
> 
> He left in November 2007. Beaufret became NBN Co's CFO in September 2009.


----------



## DB008

Former Telstra executive Phil Burgess slams NBN

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/business/former-telstra-executive-phil-burgess-slams-nbn/story-e6frede3-1226077276035




> TELSTRA'S broadband network would be cheaper than the NBN and could have been finished already, a former executive says.
> 
> With his characteristic charisma and bombast, Phil Burgess launched a full-on attack on the Federal Government and the competition regulator for "renationalising the telecommunications network" and stymieing Telstra's own plans to build an NBN.
> 
> Mr Burgess, who was speaking at a business lunch in Adelaide yesterday, was one of former Telstra chief executive Sol Trujillo's so-called "three Amigos" who he brought in to help run the company in 2002.
> 
> Mr Burgess, a guest of Carnegie Mellon University, yesterday railed against the idea of a government-owned monopoly building and owning the NBN.
> 
> A key criticism was the fact that providers such as Telstra and Optus were not allowed to compete with the NBN in metropolitan areas over their already-established cable networks.


----------



## Glen48

Nothing wrong with the NBN 1/2 of OZ will be able to sit at home soon surfing for pr0n , horoscopes, gambling etc at high speed while they wait for their  dole payment to go in the bank a lot quicker.


----------



## todster

Glen48 said:


> Nothing wrong with the NBN 1/2 of OZ will be able to sit at home soon surfing for pr0n , horoscopes, gambling etc at high speed while they wait for their  dole payment to go in the bank a lot quicker.




Lol no need for that where you live.


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> NBN chief takes broad approach to truth




Yep, if you want objective, accurate reporting, look no further than Piers Akerman.  What a despicable fat old slimebag he is.

Personality aside, the irony of his complaint about Quigley allegedly failing to reveal the whole truth is absolutely breathtaking, considering all the pertinent facts he decided to omit from his blog, and the inaccuracies within.

Nobody is claiming that Quigley or Beaufret knew of, approved or in any way were involved in the bribery. While 3 of the countries involved were at some stages under the Americas region Quigley administered, the sham consultants worldwide were the product of Alcatel Standard based in Switzerland, which reported through Europe (outside Quigley's region).

The closest anyone has come to such a claim is Pier's story, which I would suggest is on the knife edge of being libellous. I would hope there are some very highly paid lawyers looking it over right now. 

Anyway, I digress.

The SEC didn't even seek to question either of them during their investigation into Alcatel, and they are not named in any SEC documents. There is absolutely no evidence implicating them in anything. Despite extensive digging no-one has been able to find any, no doubt to the chagrin of Turnbull et al. The whole incident is a coalition attempt to play the man instead of the ball in their attempt to derail the project. Piers (as the self-appointed mouthpiece of everything right-wing) is only too happy to aid the smear.

I think the AFR's David Crowe sums the whole thing up quite well:

http://www.afr.com/p/business/technology/hint_of_mccarthyism_in_coalition_gpkarfG0Zr1dhRO0qzes6J



> The Coalition sought to justify its concerns about Quigley by spending much of the evening looking into the bribery at his former employer, Alcatel.
> 
> It was a pointless effort. *Nothing emerged to suggest that Quigley knew of the bribery, was involved in it, was somehow at fault for not doing anything about it or was to blame in any other way for the affair.*
> 
> Quigley apologised again for suggesting weeks ago that he had not been responsible for Alcatel’s operations in Costa Rica, where many of the bribes were paid. As the head of Alcatel Americas for several years, he should have known what he was responsible for.
> 
> That simple error is hardly the stuff of scandal. Yet for all the digging into Quigley’s past, that mistake is the biggest single revelation to emerge from the Australian end of the bribery affair.
> ...
> *Nothing that has emerged casts any doubt on Quigley’s competence in running the NBN. The bribery was real but nobody suggests Quigley was involved in it. So why keep digging?
> 
> At some point the exercise stops being a valid line of questioning and turns into a witch-hunt. There’s a good argument that the point has already passed. In any case, it makes sense for the Coalition to stop.*




It's a pity, because from all reports Mike Quigley is a very good man, who rose from being a cadet at STC in Sydney to being 2IC at one of the World's largest multinational communication companies. He fought and beat cancer, twice, and donated his entire $2M first year's salary to Australian cancer researchers. But us Australians love nothing better than cutting those tall poppies down to size, facts and consequences be damned.

This from Renai LeMay:
http://delimiter.com.au/2011/05/17/in-defence-of-an-honourable-man/




> Overall, Quigley has been nothing less than honest and straightforward in all of his public dealings — more so than almost any other high-profile executive, politician or bureaucrat in my experience, with the exception of a handful — Defence chief information officer Greg Farr being one notable example of a similar man of impeccable character.
> 
> With all this in mind, what are we to make of the constant and incessant attacks on Quigley’s character?
> 
> We should publicly label them as vile treachery being perpetuated on an honourable man.
> 
> We should publicly label them as the abandonment of any pretense of civilised debate over the NBN policy by those who have tried desperately but have failed to oppose the NBN on reasonable, honourable grounds (of which there are still many) and are now resorting to last gasp dirty tricks.
> 
> We should label them as the hallmark of those who have abandoned their own honour in our cynical society and seek to bring down all those around them who will not abandon theirs.
> 
> It is completely legitimate to debate the merits of the NBN policy; like many others, I myself have been a long-term critic of the project, particularly its economic model. But *it is not legitimate to link an innocent man with bribery and corruption charges simply to serve those ends. As Australians, we should be ashamed to do so, and we should not tolerate the vilification and defamation of an honourable man in this fashion.*





I had thought it wasn't possible, but reading Pier's pathetic smear yesterday lowered my opinion of him even further.


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> Former Telstra executive Phil Burgess slams NBN
> 
> http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/business/former-telstra-executive-phil-burgess-slams-nbn/story-e6frede3-1226077276035




HaHaHa. Phil Burgess. One of the three Amigos that did absolutely nothing for Telstra's customers during their overpaid, underachieving period at the top.

He's probably right about Telstra's "NBN" being cheaper than what we are getting. It was a fibre to the node proposal, which was torpedoed by the ACCC back in 2005 because they wouldn't accept Telstra's ridiculous terms, which were more about restoring their monopoly than improving the network. For example, Telstra proposed building the FTTN, and allowing competitors to access the 'last mile' of copper, but refuse them access to the new fibre portion of the rollout. So other ISPs would have to duplicate all the fibre to every node in order to access customers. Clearly a ludicrous concept designed to eliminate their competition by stranding them at the exchanges.

He's the same Phil Burgess who oversaw Telstra installing ADSL2+ DSLAMs into a thousand telephone exchanges, then refusing to activate them for almost 2 years because they didn't want to share with other ISPs.

Him and Sol were effectively responsible for the NBN we are now getting, because they refused to play the game, forcing the Govt to bypass them with FTTP.

Phil and his attitude is some of the best evidence of why we need a wholesale-only, open access government owned infrastructure monopoly as a base for communications services. Because when a private, vertically-integrated monopoly is calling the shots, you get the farce that is current Australian telecommunications.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Phil and his attitude is some of the best evidence of why we need a wholesale-only, open access government owned infrastructure monopoly as a base for communications services.



Why does it have to be government owned, and why does it have to be a monolopy ?


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Why does it have to be government owned, and why does it have to be a monolopy ?




Because the private sector is more interested in making a profit than delivering a service. I firmly believe that 'essential' services such as water, power, transport should be delivered by Government, because the private sector consistently demonstrate that they only build/upgrade the most profitable area. Which is perfectly understandable from their monetary perspective. The HFC rollout of the 90s is a good example.

I would alternatively accept private sector ownership IF there was a universal service obligation attached, and a mandate for open-access, wholesale only. Unfortunately, as Phil Burgess demonstrated, the private sector isn't very interested in such rules.

...

Because communication cables are a natural monopoly. It is a tremendous waste of money, time and resources building parallel infrastructure. You wouldn't want multiple, competing sets of power lines running down every street and into every house, so why would you want multiple communication lines?

Build the infrastructure, regulate it as open-access, then let the private sector compete in the retail market.


----------



## trainspotter

> Yep, if you want objective, accurate reporting, look no further than Piers Akerman.  What a despicable fat old slimebag he is.




Yep .... discredit the messenger by insults first.



> Personality aside, the irony of his complaint about Quigley allegedly failing to reveal the whole truth is absolutely breathtaking, considering all the pertinent facts he decided to omit from his blog, and the inaccuracies within.




OH really?? And what inaccuracies pray tell are they? Please enlighten us.



> Nobody is claiming that Quigley or Beaufret knew of, approved or in any way were involved in the bribery. While 3 of the countries involved were at some stages under the Americas region Quigley administered, the sham consultants worldwide were the product of Alcatel Standard based in Switzerland, which reported through Europe (outside Quigley's region).




No one has suggested impropriety there NBNMyths BTW. The article articulated thusly:-



> NBN Co chief executive Michael Quigley has made a number of major contradictions or errors over his knowledge of corrupt activities engaged in by his previous employer, Alcatel.
> 
> While Quigley and the NBN chief financial officer Jean-Pascal Beaufret, who also came from Alcatel (now Alacatel-Lucent) have *never been accused *of direct participation or involvement in the Alcatel illegalities, *almost every statement Quigley has made about Acatel’s involvement in corruption has turned out to be exaggerated or incorrect when compared with official court records and proceedings*.




SEE ........ not saying HE did anything wrong whilst the CEO of the company. CORRECTLY stating that he exaggerated or incorrectly stated compared to the official court records and proceedings. Got the bull by the tail on this one. :



> The closest anyone has come to such a claim is Pier's story, which I would suggest is on the knife edge of being libellous. I would hope there are some very highly paid lawyers looking it over right now.




Nope ..... not libelous at all old chum. Nice try to discredit but NON !!!

Anyway, I digress.



> The SEC didn't even seek to question either of them during their investigation into Alcatel, and they are not named in any SEC documents. There is absolutely no evidence implicating them in anything. Despite extensive digging no-one has been able to find any, no doubt to the chagrin of Turnbull et al. The whole incident is a coalition attempt to play the man instead of the ball in their attempt to derail the project. Piers (as the self-appointed mouthpiece of everything right-wing) is only too happy to aid the smear.




Where there is smoke there is fire. The BIG BOSS of the company did not even know what was going on underneath him and now is in charge of 26 billion *SCOFF* of taxpayers money to build a shiny blue cable that no one wants or undersatnds. GREAT !!



> I think the AFR's David Crowe sums the whole thing up quite well:
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/business/technology/hint_of_mccarthyism_in_coalition_gpkarfG0Zr1dhRO0qzes6J
> 
> It's a pity, because from all reports Mike Quigley is a very good man, who rose from being a cadet at STC in Sydney to being 2IC at one of the World's largest multinational communication companies. He fought and beat cancer, twice, and donated his entire $2M first year's salary to Australian cancer researchers. But us Australians love nothing better than cutting those tall poppies down to size, facts and consequences be damned.




Are we not allowed to question such actions? I mean the fraud and bribery in the company was on a wholesale proportion and Mr Quigley did not know about it ?? What was he doing then?? Asleep at the wheel? 



> I had thought it wasn't possible, but reading Pier's pathetic smear yesterday lowered my opinion of him even further.




You had an opinion of him in the first place? A *"despicable fat old slimebag"* in your own words.


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> Phil and his attitude is some of the best evidence of why we need a wholesale-only, open access government owned infrastructure monopoly as a base for communications services. Because when a private, vertically-integrated monopoly is calling the shots, you get the farce that is current Australian telecommunications.




Can easily be replaced with this statement:-

Senator Conroy and his attitude is some of the best evidence of why we don't need a wholesale-only, closed access government owned infrastructure monopoly as a base for communications services. Because when a government owned, vertically-integrated monopoly is calling the shots, you get the farce that will be the future of Australian telecommunications.


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> The HFC rollout of the 90s is a good example.
> 
> Because communication cables are a natural monopoly. It is a tremendous waste of money, time and resources building parallel infrastructure. You wouldn't want multiple, competing sets of power lines running down every street and into every house, so why would you want multiple communication lines?
> 
> Build the infrastructure, regulate it as open-access, then let the private sector compete in the retail market.




Ummmmmmmm so by building the NBN then Optus and Telstra cannot use the HFC they have already rolled out??  2.6 million people down the gurgler because _"why would you want multiple communication lines". _


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> Yep .... discredit the messenger by insults first.




If the shoe fits...



> SEE ........ not saying HE did anything wrong whilst the CEO of the company. CORRECTLY stating that he exaggerated or incorrectly stated compared to the official court records and proceedings. Got the bull by the tail on this one. :




He was never CEO of Alcatel.

The implication from Piers is quite clear.



> OH really?? And what inaccuracies pray tell are they? Please enlighten us.
> 
> Where there is smoke there is fire. The BIG BOSS of the company did not even know what was going on underneath him and now is in charge of 26 billion *SCOFF* of taxpayers money to build a shiny blue cable that no one wants or undersatnds. GREAT !!
> 
> Are we not allowed to question such actions? I mean the fraud and bribery in the company was on a wholesale proportion and Mr Quigley did not know about it ?? What was he doing then?? Asleep at the wheel?




That's exactly the point. There is no smoke.

Again, he wasn't the BIG BOSS. He was the region boss of the Americas for 20 months, then boss of North America only, and then the COO for 18 months. The bribery began before he took over the region, and continued after he left. While occurring within a region he had overall supervision of, the enabling schemes (the sham consultants) were administered from another subsidiary (Alcatel Standard), operating from another region (Switzerland-Europe).

The only major issue Quigley has corrected was whether Costa Rica was under his overall responsibility during the 20 months he was prez of Americas. Turns out Costa Rica has gone in and out of the americas region for Alcatel, because of the language barrier. During some periods, it was administered from Spain and Quigley was told that his was one of those periods. He subsequently corrected himself. This didn't contradict any court documents, because neither he or his position were ever mentioned in any court documents.

Piers' other claim that Quigley "admitted being wrong about who instigated the SEC investigation" is incorrect. Quigley said that the *SEC investigation* was initiated after Alcatel reported it to them. This is correct. The order of proceedings was Costa Rica media uncovered the bribery; Costa Rica began a prosecution; Alcatel commenced an internal investigation; Alcatel informed the SEC. Quigley has never said otherwise.

(I'm going off memory here, so could be out slightly with numbers. I'm sure you can google and find out for yourself) The alcatel americas region had a turnover of about US$15bn during the period where US$8m was paid in bribes in countries where a different language was spoken to the administration of that area (ie the US). You really think that would stand out?

The SEC has prosecuted 44 other companies for similar activities in the last 2 years, including General Electric, Siemens, Daimler, Shell, Fiat, Volvo and BAE Systems. Fines are now in the billions of dollars.

Hell, Tony Abbott can't even stop subordinates in his own country from paying bribes or taking kickbacks. I expect that you'll be demanding his resignation, as obviously he must be asleep at the wheel and incapable of running a $1.2Trillion dollar economy? 

No-one wants the NBN?
http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/opinion-of-nbn-2/



> You had an opinion of him in the first place? A *"despicable fat old slimebag"* in your own words.




Yep, that sums him up.

The bottom line here is that there is not a shred of evidence that Quigley knew about any of this. He was never sought, named, charged or even questioned about it. I have no issue with it being investigated, the SEC did so for 5 years. But the investigations are complete and the only people trying to link Quigley to it are the coalition and their media attack dogs.

It's quite reprehensible and this will be the last time I discuss it here.


----------



## DB008

WOW, what a great debate and thread.

I have been sitting on the fence - although leaning towards the Libs and Anti-NBN, cost wise on this one.


Do l want a NBN for Australia; Yes (for sure). Everyone should get a choice to have fast internet, but l feel that $50Billion is a big chunk of money...

Do l think that the current Government is doing it the most cost effective way; Probably Not, there is always room for improvement.

Do l think that they should have consulted and planned this out better; Yes, the 5 P's come to mind.

With the debacles that the current Government has produced in the last few years, that is the main reason for my doubts and because of that, l have my doubts about the NBN. Where is the dual lane highway from Sydney to Brisbane that has been promised last election? Nowhere, set-top boxes and pink batts are out top priority.

As l get more info, l will post. 
TS and NBNMyths, keep at it....

DB80


----------



## trainspotter

> If the shoe fits...




Good to see you have made your mind up about Piers Akerman being a *"despicable fat old slimebag"* I would call this slanderous. I wonder what his lawyers would make of these remarks?



> He was never CEO of Alcatel.




I stand corrected ..... Mr Quigley was the Amrerican PRESIDENT and COO of ALcatel between *2001 and 2007,* when the events took place. 



> The implication from Piers is quite clear.




Wrong again old chap. Piers maintained it was thus and made it very clear:-



> While Quigley and the NBN chief financial officer Jean-Pascal Beaufret, who also came from Alcatel (now Alacatel-Lucent) *have never been accused *of direct participation or involvement in the Alcatel illegalities, *almost every statement Quigley has made about Acatel’s involvement in corruption has turned out to be exaggerated or incorrect when compared with official court records and proceedings.*




See .... not saying he did anything illegal just couldn't quite tell/recall the truth when it mattered. There is a difference. 



> That's exactly the point. There is no smoke.
> 
> Again, he wasn't the BIG BOSS. He was the region boss of the Americas for 20 months, then boss of North America only, and then the COO for 18 months. The bribery began before he took over the region, and continued after he left. While occurring within a region he had overall supervision of, the enabling schemes (the sham consultants) were administered from another subsidiary (Alcatel Standard), operating from another region (Switzerland-Europe).




Nope .... PRESIDENT and COO is THE BIG BOSS. The (sham consultants) were based in Costa Rica and they were his responsibility. Wooopsies. 

Look here for his response http://www.somewhereincostarica.com/?p=1425



> Mr Quigley, who left Alcatel in August 2007 and joined the NBN Co as chief executive in July 2009, initially said the corruption was confined to “two rogue employees” – a statement backed by Communications Minister Stephen Conroy. And before being presented with *company records showing he had been Alcatel’s Americas president *– responsible for North, South and Central America – he maintained he was not responsible for Costa Rica.
> 
> “I should not have made the mistake about *my responsibility for Costa Rica* at the relevant time,” Mr Quigley said yesterday.






> The only major issue Quigley has corrected was whether Costa Rica was under his overall responsibility during the 20 months he was prez of Americas. Turns out Costa Rica has gone in and out of the americas region for Alcatel,* because of the language barrier.* During some periods, it was administered from Spain and Quigley was told that his was one of those periods. He subsequently corrected himself. This didn't contradict any court documents, because neither he or his position were ever mentioned in any court documents.




Hahahahhahahahah *"because of the language barrier"* What a piss poor excuse. Me no Englese' You claimed it was turning 15 billion a year. I sure as **** as the PRESIDENT and COO of Alcatel would make sure it was under my control. ROFL. 2001 til 2007 BTW 



> (I'm going off memory here, so could be out slightly with numbers. I'm sure you can google and find out for yourself) The alcatel americas region had a turnover of about US$15bn during the period where US$8m was paid in bribes in countries where a different language was spoken to the administration of that area (ie the US). You really think that would stand out?




LOL at this one as well. You really think you would LOSE 8 million and NOT know about it? GEEEEEEEEEEEZZZZZZZZ I am glad you are not a financial officer of ANY kind. You are hopeless with money. A million here a billion there .... whose money is it again?



> The SEC has prosecuted 44 other companies for similar activities in the last 2 years, including General Electric, Siemens, Daimler, Shell, Fiat, Volvo and BAE Systems. Fines are now in the billions of dollars.




And how many of the PRESIDENTS and COO of these companies are running the NBN? 



> Hell, Tony Abbott can't even stop subordinates in his own country from paying bribes or taking kickbacks. I expect that you'll be demanding his resignation, as obviously he must be asleep at the wheel and incapable of running a $1.2Trillion dollar economy?




Trash talk Tony Abbott all you like ..... like I care??? He is not the PM nor the PRESIDENT nor a COO of a company with a turnover of 1.2 trillion pesos. 



> No-one wants the NBN?
> http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/opinion-of-nbn-2/




Other than you my little technocrat spreading the gospel of the ALP.



> The bottom line here is that there is not a shred of evidence that Quigley knew about any of this. He was never sought, named, charged or even questioned about it. I have no issue with it being investigated, the SEC did so for 5 years. But the investigations are complete and the only people trying to link Quigley to it are the coalition and their media attack dogs.
> 
> It's quite reprehensible and this will be the last time I discuss it here.




Wow what a big tongue you have Grandma. 

Ermmmmmmmm Quigley admitted it was his responsibility_ "I should not have made the mistake about my *responsibility* for Costa Rica at the relevant time,” Mr Quigley said yesterday."_


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> *It is a tremendous waste of money, time and resources building parallel infrastructure.* You wouldn't want multiple, competing sets of power lines running down every street and into every house, *so why would you want multiple communication lines?*




_" As part of Telstra's deal with the government and the government's desire to avoid competition, Telstra has agreed to shut off its copper network and *stop offering broadband over its existing pay TV cable*.

This cable runs past 2.5 million homes in metropolitan areas and is capable of 100Mbps speeds for a fraction of the cost of fibre. Optus is in discussions to do the same. *The government's NBN Co doesn't want competition.* "_

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...g-with-fibre-too/story-e6frg6z6-1225964988917

Oh deary, deary me ....... the wheels have fallen off.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> _" As part of Telstra's deal with the government and the government's desire to avoid competition, Telstra has agreed to shut off its copper network and *stop offering broadband over its existing pay TV cable*.
> 
> This cable runs past 2.5 million homes in metropolitan areas and is capable of 100Mbps speeds for a fraction of the cost of fibre. Optus is in discussions to do the same. *The government's NBN Co doesn't want competition.* "_
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...g-with-fibre-too/story-e6frg6z6-1225964988917
> 
> Oh deary, deary me ....... the wheels have fallen off.




Is this supposed to be some great revelation? In case you haven't been paying attention, it was announced over 12 months ago that Telstra would begin migrating their customers and shut down their copper and HFC.

If you read that article and came away thinking that it somehow shows the wheels are falling off the NBN, I think you need to go back for another look.

There are a few issues here:

1. The HFC cannot do 100Mbps. That is a speed per node, not per user. And it only applies to areas that have been upgraded. At this stage, Telstra have only upgraded Melbourne even though the 100Mbps specification has been out for 4 years. Ask anyone with cable what sort of speeds they get during normal hours. It's nowhere near 100Mbps. Optus only guarantee that _"76% of Optus Cable customers can access speeds of over 8Mbps."_ So much for 100Mbps, huh? A quarter of their cable customers can't even get 1/10th of that speed.

Fibre is not shared to the same degree, and the NBN is geared to (initially) be capable of 100Mbps to every home simultaneously (The true speeds will be subject to contention of the source, and the ISP, but the NBN component itself will not be a bottleneck, unlike ADSL or HFC).

2. The Telstra and Optus HFC networks are closed vertical monopolies. No other ISP can offer services over them.

3. The NBN business model is geared to deliver the Government's objective of universal broadband at a universal price. Obviously the cost of rolling out goes up the further you get from the CBD. So to offer a universal price, there is some cross-subsidy involved between metro and suburban and regional areas. Just as there is for every utility.

For the NBN to work, it needs a high takeup rate. The Govt are not apologetic about putting things in place to ensure that happens, like shutting down the copper and migrating customers. Telstra also want to dump their copper and the associated multi-billion annual maintenance costs. So there's no argument from them about shutting down the copper. Customers are no worse off. In fact, they will be able to choose from a huge range of retailers, who are currently unable to offer them fast services. If they don't want faster speeds, they won't pay any more for phone or internet than they do now, it will just come via fibre instead of copper. If they do want faster speeds, then they pay for them.

It's already been clearly shown that the market won't build it here. No infrastructure has been built for a decade. What makes anyone think it would start now?

It's a vastly different situation than in Singapore, where high population density ensures multiple networks _can_ be viable, and the private sector is willing to spend on a much lower per-capita cost. Multiple networks is still a ridiculous idea though, and Japan's NTT agrees. The boss there thinks it's stupid to keep copper, and they now remove it as they install the fibre. It wasn't always the case:


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths, I just have to jump in again, point 3, is what really gets up my nose. The average priceing model that the ACCC wouldn't allow Telstra to adopt, is now acceptable for N.B.N.
Also it's a bit rich to say no infrastructure has been built for a decade, when it was expected to be payed for by Telstra shareholders.
Telstra and it's infrastructure was sold by the goverment for (someone correct me) $50Billion dollars. To mum and dad Telstra shareholders, then it was systematicaly destroyed by the goverment ACCC attack dog to allow competitors to cherry pick high return areas.
So in summary sell a pig for $50B to the taxpayers who owned it, legislate to cripple it, then charge the taxpayers another $50B to replace it. Then tell them you will sell it back to them again in 5 years. Priceless just Priceless.  

Actually if the same was done by the private sector it would be seen as a scam and ASIC would be investigating.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> NBNMyths, I just have to jump in again, point 3, is what really gets up my nose. The average priceing model that the ACCC wouldn't allow Telstra to adopt, is now acceptable for N.B.N.
> Also it's a bit rich to say no infrastructure has been built for a decade, when it was expected to be payed for by Telstra shareholders.
> Telstra and it's infrastructure was sold by the goverment for (someone correct me) $50Billion dollars. To mum and dad Telstra shareholders, then it was systematicaly destroyed by the goverment ACCC attack dog to allow competitors to cherry pick high return areas.
> So in summary sell a pig for $50B to the taxpayers who owned it, legislate to cripple it, then charge the taxpayers another $50B to replace it. Then tell them you will sell it back to them again in 5 years. Priceless just Priceless.
> 
> Actually if the same was done by the private sector it would be seen as a scam and ASIC would be investigating.




That's my point about the whole issue. Telstra is now a private company, and they have no directive to improve anything beyond the USO. 

Telstra should have been structurally separated before it was privatised (if it was privatised at all). Perhaps the idea would have been to separate it, then float the retailer and the Govt keep the fixed infrastructure/wholesale portion. The problem of course is that the Govt of the day wanted to sell the goose for the biggest price possible, in order to hang on to their budget surpluses. A split Telstra wouldn't have been as valuable.

But we can't turn back the clock.

Some critics say that the NBN is just another Telstra, but it isn't. This time it isn't a vertical monopoly, it's just the infrastructure set up to provide strong retail competition, without worrying about the conflicting interests of wholesale and retail arms. I am hoping that it is never privatised, but it probably will be eventually.

It was Telstra who proposed different wholesale access pricing in metro and regional areas, not the ACCC. They subsequently amended their proposal to a universal price, which was also rejected by the ACCC as too high, but then provided different pricing in different areas which was approved by the ACCC.

It's true that the ACCC has been at war with Telstra, but that's the issue with incumbent vertical-monopoly telco operators. They have such a massive advantage over any new competitors that regulation is required to deliver any semblance of competition. The interests of consumers are often opposite to the interests of Telstra shareholders. They have the advantage of owning a 50-year-old, Government funded infrastructure network covering almost the entire population. Without regulation to share that, there would be no hope of any competition to Telstra and consumers would lose out even more.

Telstra's defunct 2005 FTTN proposal was all about restoring their monopoly, not about improving services. They wanted to install the nodes and say _"Yep, all you competitors who are now in our exchanges, you can still access all the same customers as you do now. You'll just have to roll your own fibre out to our 40,000 nodes to access them."_ They wanted to strand all their competitors in the exchanges. The proposal, if successful, would have destroyed all competition outside the most profitable, highly populated areas. The ACCC was perfectly right to put the kibosh on it.

Sol Trujillo has a lot to answer for, as nicely explained (and foretold) by Alan Kohler back in 2006:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/busin...k/2006/06/30/1151174395540.html?page=fullpage


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> Is this supposed to be some great revelation? In case you haven't been paying attention, it was announced over 12 months ago that Telstra would begin migrating their customers and shut down their copper and HFC.




*GOSH* you are so blind it is unbelievable. 

You wrote this *"It is a tremendous waste of money, time and resources building parallel infrastructure."*

And I pointed out this "As part of Telstra's deal with the government and the government's desire to avoid competition, Telstra has agreed to shut off its copper network and *stop offering broadband over its existing pay TV cable."*

So on one hand you are saying it is a waste of money to install parallel infrastructure and yet we are paying Telstra to stop offering broadband on a perfectly good HFC. 

Yeppers ...... we all need this shiny blue cable. 

Better yet ....... just ignore the facts and claim high indignation.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> *GOSH* you are so blind it is unbelievable.
> 
> You wrote this *"It is a tremendous waste of money, time and resources building parallel infrastructure."*
> 
> And I pointed out this "As part of Telstra's deal with the government and the government's desire to avoid competition, Telstra has agreed to shut off its copper network and *stop offering broadband over its existing pay TV cable."*
> 
> So on one hand you are saying it is a waste of money to install parallel infrastructure and yet we are paying Telstra to stop offering broadband on a perfectly good HFC.
> 
> Yeppers ...... we all need this shiny blue cable.
> 
> Better yet ....... just ignore the facts and claim high indignation.





There is a massive difference between _laying parallel equivalent infrastructure_ (ie: multiple competing fibre networks) and _replacing inferior technology with new stuff_, then turning off the old stuff.

When the water board replace the old cast iron pipes with plastic ones, they don't keep the old ones running in parallel.

The waste of equivalent competing networks is beautifully illustrated by the Telstra and Optus pay TV cable wars, from which no-one came out a winner and both companies lost hundreds-of-millions of dollars. 

On this, Optus say:



> *People talk about letting infrastructure competition work. Maybe you should learn a lesson from history.*
> 
> We have empirical evidence of what happened in the late nineties where Optus rolled out a pay TV network down streets in suburban Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane.
> 
> Telstra went down the same streets, carpet-bombed the business case and effectively Optus and Telstra wrote off over $1 billion through that period. We were losing $300 million a year through that period at Optus.
> 
> So for those that are very brave to ask - and this is always interesting when people tell other people how to spend their money - for those who are very brave to say we should let infrastructure competition continue, [I say] throw money into it.
> 
> *We've certainly seen empirical evidence that that will not work and that's one of the main reasons we support the NBN.*


----------



## trainspotter

One of the great furphys of having an NBN was sprouted that more people will work from home thus saving traffic congestion, pollution etc etc.

But in reality this happens:-



> *EMPLOYER groups are outraged by a legal decision that makes employers responsible for injuries suffered by staff working from home.*
> 
> Telstra will be made to pay legal and medical costs in a multimillion-dollar ruling by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.
> 
> Telstra worker Dale Hargreaves, 42, said she slipped down the stairs twice in two months while working on marketing campaigns from her Brisbane townhouse.




Read more: http://www.news.com.au/business/tel...me/story-e6frfm1i-1226081649913#ixzz0rphfoMz5


----------



## DB008

Sorry for the delay in posting this, l'm getting slack.

The government has always said that the NBN will be competitively priced....

Internode is the first ISP off the block, lets have a look at what they have to offer;



> NBN Retail Pricing Pressure Points
> 
> Thursday, July 21st, 2011 by Simon Hackett
> The National Broadband Network (NBN) is the subject of promises from the government that consumers will pay comparable prices to current day ADSL2+ and phone service bundles in order to access entry level NBN based services, and that NBN based retail pricing will be nationally uniform.
> 
> Unfortunately, a number of pressure points in the wholesale pricing model exist which will make these promises (from the government) untenable in practice, unless serious issues with the underlying pricing model are addressed by NBNCo and the ACCC.
> 
> This post elaborates on some of the relevant issues that serve to place upward pressure on NBN based retail pricing in general and even more pressure upon retail pricing in regional areas in particular.






> *Executive Summary*
> A focus on the end-state (ten years from now) in terms of wholesale pricing without apparent consideration of how the industry needs to get ‘there’ from here’ means that NBNCo have, in my view, not yet properly addressed the full lifetime impact of the costs of participation by RSPs across the build period.
> 
> In particular the NBNCo “CVC” cost construct (when sufficient CVC capacity is installed for adequate customer service quality) will generate huge monthly ‘overhead’ costs for RSPs (ahead of sufficient customers being connected to defray those costs), for several years, cumulatively and separately in each point of interconnect.
> 
> A simple change to the pricing model (first 200 megabits of CVC included at no added cost) would solve this almost entirely.
> 
> Solving this issue is essential to ensuring an adequate participation rate by RSPs in the NBN, and to ensuring consumer pricing is not driven far higher than it would otherwise be driven during the first several years of the NBN’s build phase.
> 
> Second, the ACCC’s ’121 POI’ decision is fundamentally at odds with stated government policy in terms of consumer retail pricing outcomes, it will drive the continued market dominance of Telstra (as the only party not exposed to the resulting additional costs), and it will cause all consumers to pay more for their Internet access as a result. Hence this decision is clearly not in the Long Term Interests of End Users.




Pricing


> Internode is offering all its NBN-delivered services as "bundled" plans that include telephone and Internet access services.
> 
> Internode's initial residential NBN plan pricing will start at $59.95 a month, with a port speed of 12 megabits per second (Mb/s) downstream and 1 Mb/s upstream *and a 30 gigabyte (GB) data quota.* A 100/40 Mb/s service with a 1000 GB data quota will cost $189.95. All Internode’s NBN plans include $10 worth of monthly call credits for the bundled NodePhone Voice over IP (VoIP) telephony service.
> 
> It will also become possible to obtain the bundled phone service as a conventional analogue fixed line voice service instead of using VoIP, once NBNCo releases this capability later in 2011.
> 
> *Internode’s NBN pricing aligns its entry-level NBN service with its 30GB data quota Easy Naked ADSL2+ voice and data bundle, which costs from $59.95 a month. *The following table summarises proposed prices for Internode's residential NBN services.
> http://www.internode.on.net/news/2011/07/236.php




That's expensive!


----------



## IFocus

From what I  hear Internode are not that competitive in the market and certainly not a low cost operator.

I think its an opening bid at best, for me on that pricing I would win hugely, inner city would likely lose.


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> Sorry for the delay in posting this, l'm getting slack.
> 
> The government has always said that the NBN will be competitively priced....
> 
> Internode is the first ISP off the block, lets have a look at what they have to offer;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pricing
> 
> 
> That's expensive!




Internode is a premium ISP. Their NBN bundle pricing is the same as their ADSL2+ bundle pricing:

http://nbnconcerns.wordpress.com/2011/07/22/nbn-retail-pricing/


----------



## tayser

IFocus said:


> From what I  hear Internode are not that competitive in the market and certainly not a low cost operator.
> 
> I think its an opening bid at best, for me on that pricing I would win hugely, inner city would likely lose.




Hackett has some legit points re: the backhaul scenario - but their headline prices are guesstimating costs they're anticipating passing on from NBNCo.  Internode's probably on the Liberal Party donation list.


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> Internode is a premium ISP. Their NBN bundle pricing is the same as their ADSL2+ bundle pricing:
> 
> http://nbnconcerns.wordpress.com/2011/07/22/nbn-retail-pricing/




*sniff sniff* what's this? UNLIMITED broadband for $59.99 per month including phone line? 

http://www.tpg.com.au/products_services/adsl2plus_pricing.php


----------



## joea

trainspotter said:


> *sniff sniff* what's this? UNLIMITED broadband for $59.99 per month including phone line?
> 
> http://www.tpg.com.au/products_services/adsl2plus_pricing.php




My basic understanding is basic for $59.99/mth. and $190/mth. all in .
As was explained on TV.
joea


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> *sniff sniff* what's this? UNLIMITED broadband for $59.99 per month including phone line?
> 
> http://www.tpg.com.au/products_services/adsl2plus_pricing.php




Have you seen the typical speeds you get from TPG? Well known for industry-leading(!) backhaul contention. You get what you pay for:

TPG stats from www.speedtest.net:

Average: 4.87Mbps
Best result: 14.2Mbps
Worst result: 0.04Mbps

http://www.speedtest.net/wave/6e966a4a129c55dd?o=desc&sb=download

Pretty good chance that TPG will offer a similar sort of budget service over the NBN, reducing their costs in the same way as they do now over ADSL. 

The problem for them might be that while they can blame (and thank) distance for speed issues now, they won't be able to do the same over fibre.

Also, TPG's unlimited is only available in certain metro areas where they have their own DSLAMs (about 400 of Telstra's 5,000 exchanges). Here's what I see when I enter my phone number:


----------



## trainspotter

joea said:


> My basic understanding is basic for $59.99/mth. and $190/mth. all in .
> As was explained on TV.
> joea




$29.99 per month for unlimited ADSL Broadband 24/7 (bundled or not) and $30 per month line rental = $59.99 All in.


----------



## sptrawler

trainspotter said:


> $29.99 per month for unlimited ADSL Broadband 24/7 (bundled or not) and $30 per month line rental = $59.99 All in.




Unlike you trainspotter not to add the cost of the initial capital outlay in your calculation. LOL
I would expect that from NBNmyths.


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> Have you seen the typical speeds you get from TPG? Well known for industry-leading(!) backhaul contention. You get what you pay for:
> 
> TPG stats from www.speedtest.net:
> 
> Average: 4.87Mbps
> Best result: 14.2Mbps
> Worst result: 0.04Mbps
> 
> http://www.speedtest.net/wave/6e966a4a129c55dd?o=desc&sb=download
> 
> Pretty good chance that TPG will offer a similar sort of budget service over the NBN, reducing their costs in the same way as they do now over ADSL.
> 
> The problem for them might be that while they can blame (and thank) distance for speed issues now, they won't be able to do the same over fibre.
> 
> Also, TPG's unlimited is only available in certain metro areas where they have their own DSLAMs (about 400 of Telstra's 5,000 exchanges). Here's what I see when I enter my phone number:




Compared to an NBN that is only in a few isolated places with a non existant take up rate TPG is looking pretty good value for money. Seeing how my tax has not paid for it to be installed in the first instance.


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> Have you seen the typical speeds you get from TPG? Well known for industry-leading(!) backhaul contention. You get what you pay for:
> 
> TPG stats from www.speedtest.net:
> 
> Average: 4.87Mbps
> Best result: 14.2Mbps
> Worst result: 0.04Mbps
> 
> http://www.speedtest.net/wave/6e966a4a129c55dd?o=desc&sb=download
> 
> Pretty good chance that TPG will offer a similar sort of budget service over the NBN, reducing their costs in the same way as they do now over ADSL.
> 
> The problem for them might be that while they can blame (and thank) distance for speed issues now, they won't be able to do the same over fibre.
> 
> Also, TPG's unlimited is only available in certain metro areas where they have their own DSLAMs (about 400 of Telstra's 5,000 exchanges). Here's what I see when I enter my phone number:




They are available in rural and regional areas too.

I just cannot see $40 billion in value when current technology provides speed acceptable to 99% of Australians, for use which is applicable.

The push behind this is CONSUMPTION.

eg online shopping, and dvd rentals etc


Govt loves it cause they generate more GST ( a little like how their GST take is increased slightly by a carbon tax, but this is OT)

Sure, provide NBN to schools (however I fail to see how internet makes children learn more, to me it is more of a distraction) and certain businesses.  But to provide it to Joe blogs is stupid. I mean, as long as the streaming = 1sec to watch 1 sec of streamed pr0n, then there is no real point is there?


----------



## sptrawler

Yes this is a good article from a business lunch in Melbourne.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/gillard-hits-new-low-with-business-20110722-1ht0k.html

The NBN summed up perfectly " a thought bubble that became public policy"
The way this government is going about implementing public policy decisions despite public opinion is not unlike what Margret Thatcher did in the U.K.
When she had decimated the countries manufacturing and mining, unemployment went through the roof. 
Fortunately for England it's proximity to Europe and the U.S and due its ties to international financial services it could eek out a survival plan through commerce and tourism. However there are large areas of U.K that have still not recovered from the mass closing of manufacturing.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> Compared to an NBN that is only in a few isolated places with a non existant take up rate TPG is looking pretty good value for money. Seeing how my tax has not paid for it to be installed in the first instance.




Are you serious? 

It's in a "few isolated places" because it's under construction. When complete, you'll be able to get that 12Mbps (A speed TPG can't even deliver in most cities) anywhere in the country. From inner-Melbourne to Innamincka. And can you show me where TPG can do 100Mbps? Or 50Mbps? Or even 25Mbps?

The takeup rate for the NBN is much, much higher than ADSL was when introduced (18% after 10 months v 3% after 18 months - Do the maths).

Actually, "tax dollars" did effectively pay for TPG service, since it's using the Telstra copper network, installed by the Government through the PMG. Tax dollars that were repaid many times over.

Fair dinkum, the short sightedness of some people never ceases to astound me. If not for people like those imagining, designing and constructing the NBN (and other projects before it), we'd still be using the telegraph and getting around in a horse and cart. Come to think of it, who needs a telegraph when you can use smoke signals. What a waste of money.


----------



## trainspotter

> Second, the NBN is a government-owned monopoly that is likely, as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development said, *to weaken competition in wholesale broadband services with the risk that prices will be higher than otherwise* (highlighting Labor's constant willingness to impose higher prices on households).




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-labors-strength/story-e6frgd0x-1226059944394

Put some more wet wood on the fire so I can send smoke signals will ya. This shiny blue cable stuff doesn't burn too well.



> The takeup rate for the NBN is much, much higher than ADSL was when introduced (18% after 10 months v 3% after 18 months - Do the maths).




_NBN Co chief Mike Quigley has revealed data on Tasmanian take-up rates in the state's three stage-one sites, with 600 premises holding an active connection to the network and over 740 services ordered by the end of May.

Almost 40 percent of the services were between 20 Mbps and 100 Mbps, he told a Senate Estimates hearing last night.

*NBN Co was scheduled to start billing the customers for services from August 1.*

“As a trial, we believe these are very positive outcomes,” Quigley said._

http://www.itnews.com.au/News/260809,nbn-chief-talks-up-tassie-take-up.aspx

WOWEEEEEEEEEEE 740 premises on a TRIAL basis in the whole of Tasmania. Exciting **** man.


----------



## boofhead

trainspotter said:


> WOWEEEEEEEEEEE 740 premises on a TRIAL basis in the whole of Tasmania. Exciting **** man.




I don't understand your point of whole of Tasmania? The majority of Tasmania will not get access until stage 3.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-labors-strength/story-e6frgd0x-1226059944394
> 
> Put some more wet wood on the fire so I can send smoke signals will ya. This shiny blue cable stuff doesn't burn too well.
> 
> 
> 
> _NBN Co chief Mike Quigley has revealed data on Tasmanian take-up rates in the state's three stage-one sites, with 600 premises holding an active connection to the network and over 740 services ordered by the end of May.
> 
> Almost 40 percent of the services were between 20 Mbps and 100 Mbps, he told a Senate Estimates hearing last night.
> 
> *NBN Co was scheduled to start billing the customers for services from August 1.*
> 
> “As a trial, we believe these are very positive outcomes,” Quigley said._
> 
> http://www.itnews.com.au/News/260809,nbn-chief-talks-up-tassie-take-up.aspx
> 
> WOWEEEEEEEEEEE 740 premises on a TRIAL basis in the whole of Tasmania. Exciting **** man.




You really should do some research before speaking of things you apparently do not understand.

As Boofhead has pointed out, the whole of Tasmania isn't covered. There are about 4,000 premises passed in Tasmania, with about 2,000 premises connected and 740 with an active service. The 18% takeup figure was based on 723 connections of the 4,000 passed premises, which was the number on 6th May. 

While Tassie is still technically in trial, it is the only place where you can request a NBN connection and have it activated at will. The mainland sites are invite-only at present.

As for billing...In Tassie, ISPs paid a one-off $300 connection fee for each connection for 12 months access. This equates to $25/month wholesale per customer. Once the NBN OSS/BSS kicks in (it says August there, but I've read elsewhere that it's actually September or October), the one-off fee goes and is replaced by the standard NBN wholesale charging system based on speeds and capacity. These range from $24/month for 12Mbps to $70 for 100Mbps.


----------



## NBNMyths

Ohhh. Lookie here:

Trial services have begun in Kiama/Minnamurra now as well:

http://www.internode.on.net/news/2011/07/237.php


----------



## NBNMyths

And the discounting begins already:

A LOW-COST option for the national broadband network has emerged, with a discount carrier promising broadband and telephone services for less than $40 per month.

*Dodo confirmed plans yesterday to offer an entry-level product for less than $40 per month.*

http://www.smh.com.au/business/discounts-begin-entrylevel-option-drops-below-40-20110722-1hsst.html


----------



## trainspotter

Aaaaaaah it's good to have you back NBNMyths as it was getting boring talking about the CO2 tax for so long.

YES as in the WHOLE of Tasmania has 4000 homes that the NBN passes. Yes yers yes there will be more in Stage 3 Boofhead. Can't wait.

So there is 740 houses connected out of 4000 plus in a TRIAL situation at a lousy $25 per month and they cannot achieve a full coverage? Just LOL at this one.

Oh oh what is this ? 50mbps over copper with VDSL2? Is this possible here in Australia?

*PTCL Announcing Bandwidth (DSL) Data Rate Up to 50 Mbps Using VDSL2 Bonding Technology *

PTCL has become the 1st operator in the world to use VDSL2 Bonding technology to provide to its bandwidth hungry DSL customers with *Bandwidth up to 50 Mbps on its existing Copper network.*

VDSL2 Bonding takes two copper based lines per subscriber and aggregates them to almost double the bandwidth speed available to the existing customers and also expands high speed broadband access to areas that are underserved today. Using VDSL2 Bonding technology, service providers can extend the life of their existing copper infrastructure supporting the delivery of bandwidth intensive services such as Triple play service, data and IPTV

http://pakbee.com/2011/04/ptcl-broadband-50mb-vdsl-internet-price/


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> Oh oh what is this ? 50mbps over copper with VDSL2? Is this possible here in Australia?
> 
> *PTCL Announcing Bandwidth (DSL) Data Rate Up to 50 Mbps Using VDSL2 Bonding Technology *
> 
> PTCL has become the 1st operator in the world to use VDSL2 Bonding technology to provide to its bandwidth hungry DSL customers with *Bandwidth up to 50 Mbps on its existing Copper network.*
> 
> VDSL2 Bonding takes two copper based lines per subscriber and aggregates them to almost double the bandwidth speed available to the existing customers and also expands high speed broadband access to areas that are underserved today. Using VDSL2 Bonding technology, service providers can extend the life of their existing copper infrastructure supporting the delivery of bandwidth intensive services such as Triple play service, data and IPTV
> 
> http://pakbee.com/2011/04/ptcl-broadband-50mb-vdsl-internet-price/




Yes, we could implement VDSL2 tech here. There's a few BUTs though.

The first is (as stated in the quote) to get 50Mbps you need 2 pairs of copper. Unfortunately, only about 20% of premises in Australia have 2 functioning pairs of copper. That fact drastically reduces the cost savings involved. Because if you have to run a 2nd pair of copper to 80% of homes, you may as well just run fibre to them and be done with it.

The 2nd biggie is distance. VDSL2 is even more susceptible to distance dropoff than ADSL. By the time you hit 1500m line length you're back to ADSL2 speeds.


----------



## boofhead

A part of the limited initial take in Tasmania trial areas are conditions imposed by NBN. That is - only customers using an ISP for ADSL could then use the same ISP for fibre - that is if recent comments by Internode representatives in the last 4 days have made on Whirlpool are correct. Telstra I think limited their trial numbers. Telstra have something like 50% of marketshare. Many ISPs are not participating in the NBN trials so more customers got chopped. NBN is not wholesaling voice port services yet.

ACCC look in to it all won't amount to much. Seems ACCC caused some of the mess themselves.


----------



## trainspotter

boofhead said:


> A part of the limited initial take in Tasmania trial areas are conditions imposed by NBN. That is - only customers using an ISP for ADSL could then use the same ISP for fibre - that is if recent comments by Internode representatives in the last 4 days have made on Whirlpool are correct. Telstra I think limited their trial numbers. Telstra have something like 50% of marketshare. Many ISPs are not participating in the NBN trials so more customers got chopped. NBN is not wholesaling voice port services yet.
> 
> ACCC look in to it all won't amount to much. Seems ACCC caused some of the mess themselves.




So why the limiting on the trial conditions? What the hell has having an previous account ISP with ADSL have to do with running through fibre? Why has Telstra who has 50% market share according to the above post put the brakes on the numbers? Why are many ISP's NOT participating in the trials?

As everyone keeps pointing out, this shiny blue cable is not new technology. It has been around and in service for years. FORGAWDSAKE we even have it here in a local subdivision (until the rats ate the shield cable in the pits) So why the hell cant they just connect the damn stuff together and make it work? Afterall it was rammed down our throats that all these other countries have it and if we don't, we will fall behind and BOO HOO and all that other rubbish that was touted as the saviour of our nation.

Where are all the people who are using this amazing technology being reported as to how much it has changed their lives? Where is the headmaster of the school saying that learning has gone up 157% and producitivity approximately the same. The hospital has not come out stating they have saved dozens more lives due to diagnosis by video link up blah blah bloody blah.

Nuffin.


----------



## boofhead

If you are honestly interested in many of the whys then contact NBNCo and your local member for parliament. Furthermore ask the senators for your state/territory why NBNCo were not grilled about that during the recent hearings.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> So why the limiting on the trial conditions? What the hell has having an previous account ISP with ADSL have to do with running through fibre? Why has Telstra who has 50% market share according to the above post put the brakes on the numbers? Why are many ISP's NOT participating in the trials?
> 
> As everyone keeps pointing out, this shiny blue cable is not new technology. It has been around and in service for years. FORGAWDSAKE we even have it here in a local subdivision (until the rats ate the shield cable in the pits) So why the hell cant they just connect the damn stuff together and make it work? Afterall it was rammed down our throats that all these other countries have it and if we don't, we will fall behind and BOO HOO and all that other rubbish that was touted as the saviour of our nation.
> 
> Where are all the people who are using this amazing technology being reported as to how much it has changed their lives? Where is the headmaster of the school saying that learning has gone up 157% and producitivity approximately the same. The hospital has not come out stating they have saved dozens more lives due to diagnosis by video link up blah blah bloody blah.
> 
> Nuffin.





I don't think Boofhead is totally correct with respect to the Tassie customers having to have an existing ADSL connection. This is true of the mainland trial sites, and is a condition imposed by the ISPs, because they are giving the NBN connection away for free during the trial period (ie, customers must agree to keep paying for their ADSL until the conclusion of the trial).

This is apart from Telstra, who are still invite-only in Tassie, and so may have those conditions on their customers.

While fibre networks have been installed in quite a few places, there is still much testing to do because no-one in the World has rolled out a network exactly the same as this (with fibre, wireless and sat on a wholesale-only basis). There is no real 'standard' for networks, and most countries have done it differently to each other. This means NBN had to have their OSS/BSS built from scratch to interface with all these mediums and ISPs need to get their own billing and systems software to play nicely with the NBN.

If you'd like to see a video from the school in Tassie, take a look at this one:


----------



## trainspotter

ROFL ..... I would rather watch playschool instead. Your answer is not an answer NBNMyths. What a joke.


----------



## noco

Does anyone know or can you tell me how to find out:-
a) the number of connections currently using NBN.
b) the cost to date.
c) the average monthly rental paid by those who are using it.


----------



## NBNMyths

noco said:


> Does anyone know or can you tell me how to find out:-
> a) the number of connections currently using NBN.
> b) the cost to date.
> c) the average monthly rental paid by those who are using it.




a) I don't know exactly. NBN Co usually state the current number at estimates or committee hearings. At least 870 though, by my educated guess:

(Being made up of:
740 in Tassie announced as at end of May 
96 in Armidale (7 at launch + 3 additions per week/ISP in the 8 weeks since launch (3x4x8)
2 in Willunga (Probably more, but no announcements made)
1 in Kiama (Probably more, but no announcements made)
Probably 20 satellite 1st release customers

Although only internode have publicly announced they have connected people in Willunga and Kiama, there are probably a few from each ISP in those locations. Also, NBN have announced that there are 15 ISPs who are going to participate in the trials, with each one allowed to connect a maximum of a few customers per week per site as they test the network and their own systems. Only 4 have been named as already participating, so we don't know if the others are as yet. There's a good chance at least a few of them have started by now, which would add more numbers.

In addition to the above, Fujitsu have been contracted to connect the 133,000 greenfield properties for which applications to connect have already been received from developers between January and May this year. Those services won't go live until people start moving in to those estates.

If you listen or read the hansard for the hearings when NBN give an update, you'll be able to find out progressive numbers.


b) No idea of cost to date, but you wouldn't be able to use that in any meaningful way anyway, because the cost to date is for a lot more than supply of those services to those customers. There would be a massive cost associated with the implementation of an entire network. eg, 3x datacentres already in operation which will serve the nationwide network, the exec and engineers designing and contracting for the network, contracts let for wireless and satellite, contracts for 2yrs of greenfield rollout let, contracts for 5yrs of fibre cable and associated hardware let, contracts for 4yrs of brownfields fibre construction in NSW, QLD and ACT let, software and hardware to run the company itself.....the list goes on. I think I read a few months back that NBN co have signed about $8.5bn in contracts so far, although most of that is paid progressively.

According to various reports, they have received $2bn in equity so far and the Govt said in the budget this year that they will inject another $3.1bn in 2011-12, increasing each year to a total of $18.2bn by 2014-15.


c) No idea, but I did read recently that 40% of NBN's Tasmanian connections were either 50 or 100Mbps speeds, so that might give some idea of what people are paying.

Connections at the mainland trial sites are currently free, so long as customers maintain their existing ADSL connections with their trial ISP. This will remain until the conclusion of the trial in a couple of months, after which they'll have to choose a plan and start paying (or return to ADSL).


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> According to various reports, they have received $2bn in equity so far and the Govt said in the budget this year that they will inject another $3.1bn in 2011-12, increasing each year to a total of $18.2bn by 2014-15.




As Sir Humphrey would say.

This is a rather "brave" prediction.

"They"  the ALP/Green Government may not be about, to do anything, let alone spend our deficit on the NBN.

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> As Sir Humphrey would say.
> 
> This is a rather "brave" prediction.
> 
> "They"  the ALP/Green Government may not be about, to do anything, let alone spend our deficit on the NBN.
> 
> gg




Yes that's true, they may not be around. Quite a good chance actually, unless the next two years go spectacularly well for them.! 

Problem for the coalition will be that the NBN will have billions in binding contracts signed by then, and a far higher portion of money spent than network complete, due to high ramping costs. There will also be numerous pieces of supporting legislation which they won't be able to repeal even if they still want to (which I hope they don't, of course).

Other massive issue will be the millions that all the ISPs will have spent installing, upgrading and implementing NBN-related systems. Imagine the uproar from them if they are forced to throw that investment away and do the same thing again for _Broadband Plan 56,489_ from the Coalition!

Not to mention the multi-year delay that would result from trying to stop, redesign and re-implement another totally new idea.

http://www.budde.com.au/News/#The-economic-cost-of-the-coalition’s-NBN-plan-could-cost-close-to-$10-billion


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Yes that's true, they may not be around. Quite a good chance actually, unless the next two years go spectacularly well for them.!
> 
> Problem for the coalition will be that the NBN will have billions in binding contracts signed by then, and a far higher portion of money spent than network complete, due to high ramping costs. There will also be numerous pieces of supporting legislation which they won't be able to repeal even if they still want to (which I hope they don't, of course).
> 
> Other massive issue will be the millions that all the ISPs will have spent installing, upgrading and implementing NBN-related systems. Imagine the uproar from them if they are forced to throw that investment away and do the same thing again for _Broadband Plan 56,489_ from the Coalition!
> 
> Not to mention the multi-year delay that would result from trying to stop, redesign and re-implement another totally new idea.
> 
> http://www.budde.com.au/News/#The-economic-cost-of-the-coalition’s-NBN-plan-could-cost-close-to-$10-billion




Yes it's really sad stitching everyone up for something most don't want, there is a certain ideological arrogance to it. Very much like what is happening with the carbon tax.
It's a bit like a parent stitching up the family for a huge debt, if it all works out the family is wrapped, if it turns to ***** the family is on struggle street.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> Problem for the coalition will be that the NBN will have billions in binding contracts signed by then, and a far higher portion of money spent than network complete, due to high ramping costs. There will also be numerous pieces of supporting legislation which they won't be able to repeal even if they still want to (which I hope they don't, of course).
> 
> Other massive issue will be the millions that all the ISPs will have spent installing, upgrading and implementing NBN-related systems. Imagine the uproar from them if they are forced to throw that investment away and do the same thing again for _Broadband Plan 56,489_ from the Coalition!
> 
> Not to mention the multi-year delay that would result from trying to stop, redesign and re-implement another totally new idea.




So you are saying that because a government wastes our surplus on an out of date technology, future generations should pay, on the whim of one party's brain fart! 

gg



sptrawler said:


> Yes it's really sad stitching everyone up for something most don't want, there is a certain ideological arrogance to it. Very much like what is happening with the carbon tax.
> It's a bit like a parent stitching up the family for a huge debt, if it all works out the family is wrapped, if it turns to ***** the family is on struggle street.




Couldn't have put it better myself.

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Yes it's really sad stitching everyone up for something most don't want, there is a certain ideological arrogance to it.




I wonder where you get that impression? There has never been a single conducted survey or poll that has shown that most people don't want the NBN.

To the contrary, public opinion is very strongly behind it.

There is the Swinburne University study, which found 76% support:
http://cci.edu.au/sites/default/files/sewing/CCi Digital Futures 2010 1.pdf

Then there have been several Essential Media polls which also showed strong support:

http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/importance-of-nbn/
http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/benefit-of-nbn/
http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/opinion-of-nbn-2/

If you only read News Ltd and listed to AM radio, you might have that impression. But out in the real world, it's quite the opposite.

If you'd like to supply evidence to the contrary, I welcome it.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> If you only read News Ltd and listed to AM radio, you might have that impression. But out in the real world, it's quite the opposite.
> 
> If you'd like to supply evidence to the contrary, I welcome it.




Most people in the bush read News Ltd. or listen and watch News Ltd. outlets, or News Ltd. sentiment friendly outlets.

Nobody listens to the bush, you included mate, nor your smarmy polls.

Come an election we'll see who has listened.

gg


----------



## drsmith

It has my support,

as long as someone else pays for it.


----------



## trainspotter

> However, if 40% of broadband users were exclusively 4G wireless, this would be a disaster for the NBN - NBN Co and the Government maintain that the percentage of exclusively wireless users will only be in the low teens at best.




http://www.itwire.com/opinion-and-a...d-to-fibre-poll-equals-nbn-financial-headache


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> So you are saying that because a government wastes our surplus on an out of date technology, future generations should pay, on the whim of one party's brain fart!




Seriously?
        

I thought people (Alan Jones aside) had finally accepted the fact that there is no technology known that can make optical fibre "out of date"? Even Alan has been quiet on the topic since the Laserbeam incident.

Doesn't it make you wonder why it's only the occasional journo and shock jock who makes this claim? Where are the engineers saying fibre is out of date? Where are all the telco companies saying fibre is out of date? Why are they out there all over the World installing either fibre or (cheaper) Fibre To The Node (FTTN) at their own cost?

The fact is that the GPON fibre system being run by the NBN is state-of-the-art. There is not a faster network being installed anywhere in the World. There are several countries and telcos rolling out the same technology.

Why isn't there a single country in the World proposing to replace their urban fixed networks with wireless if that is the future? Even wireless companies don't claim it can replace the fixed network in urban areas. 

Do people really not understand that the capacity of fibre is virtually unlimited, and that once the expensive bit is done (burying it), the speeds of the NBN can be constantly increased. On current theory, the NBN fibre network could deliver 69Tbps in the future.

Even Malcolm Turnbull has stopped the wireless BS and moved on to promising FTTN, but only because it's potentially cheaper than FTTP rather than being better.

To be blunt, the only people claiming the NBN is out of date are clueless on the topic. There's simply no-one with any technical knowledge saying this.

Maybe it's time for a re-read:
http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/what-do-the-experts-say/

Again, feel free to provide a link to any telco engineer or telco company who thinks FTTP is out of date. Good luck with that.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> http://www.itwire.com/opinion-and-a...d-to-fibre-poll-equals-nbn-financial-headache




You're kidding aren't you?

If someone asked me the question: "All else being equal, would you prefer a 4G wireless or the NBN fibre", I'd say 4G wireless too.

But then, all else isn't equal. Wireless is much more expensive than fibre, and it's much slower. It always has been, and it always will be. The fact is that the light spectrum can carry 20,000 times more bandwidth than the entire radio spectrum. That's a physical limit.

As I wrote in my last post, there's no telco engineers saying wireless can replace fixed in urban areas. It just can't cope with that volume of data.

There are already 4G networks running in the US and few European countries. Speeds are unimpressive, averaging under 10Mbps indoors.

Telstra have already said they don't expect their 4G wireless to be any cheaper than their 3G wireless, which is currently (at best) $90 for 12GB/month.

Now some relevant ABS stats:

Between Dec09 and Dec10, the total monthly data downloaded in Australia over ADSL/cable networks grew by 61,000TB to 174,000. The total data over wireless networks grew just 2,000TB to 16,000.

The number of ADSL connections grew by 300,000, which is double the rate of new dwellings over the 12 months. 

The average monthly download grew 6GB to 18GB......So the biggest wireless broadband plan Telstra offer can't even manage the average download in Australia.

In practise, 4G delivers less than 10Mbps.

So all things are not equal. For $90 you can have:
12GB at maybe 10Mbps over wireless *OR*
150GB at 100Mbps over the NBN

12x the volume at 10x the speed for the same money. Alternatively, you could have the NBN for 1/3 the price of wireless for 3x the data and still at a faster speed. You really think that's a viable alternative.


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> You're kidding aren't you?
> 
> If someone asked me the question: "All else being equal, would you prefer a 4G wireless or the NBN fibre", I'd say 4G wireless too.
> 
> But then, all else isn't equal. Wireless is much more expensive than fibre, and it's much slower. It always has been, and it always will be. The fact is that the light spectrum can carry 20,000 times more bandwidth than the entire radio spectrum. That's a physical limit.
> 
> As I wrote in my last post, there's no telco engineers saying wireless can replace fixed in urban areas. It just can't cope with that volume of data.
> 
> There are already 4G networks running in the US and few European countries. Speeds are unimpressive, averaging under 10Mbps indoors.
> 
> Telstra have already said they don't expect their 4G wireless to be any cheaper than their 3G wireless, which is currently (at best) $90 for 12GB/month.
> 
> Now some relevant ABS stats:
> 
> Between Dec09 and Dec10, the total monthly data downloaded in Australia over ADSL/cable networks grew by 61,000TB to 174,000. The total data over wireless networks grew just 2,000TB to 16,000.
> 
> The number of ADSL connections grew by 300,000, which is double the rate of new dwellings over the 12 months.
> 
> The average monthly download grew 6GB to 18GB......So the biggest wireless broadband plan Telstra offer can't even manage the average download in Australia.
> 
> In practise, 4G delivers less than 10Mbps.
> 
> So all things are not equal. For $90 you can have:
> 12GB at maybe 10Mbps over wireless *OR*
> 150GB at 100Mbps over the NBN
> 
> 12x the volume at 10x the speed for the same money. Alternatively, you could have the NBN for 1/3 the price of wireless for 3x the data and still at a faster speed. You really think that's a viable alternative.




You have completely missed what the article was driving at. The goverment has scheduled a 70% takeup rate for the NBN to be viable. The poll evidences that the 4G "could" be a threat if the people do not take up the NBN and prefer to remain wireless. All your facts and figures and links are exactly that .... hypothesis as the NBN is STILL the great unknown. 840 people on a trial basis is hardly earth shattering stuff. 

We will have to wait until this thing is actually functioning on a day to day basis to see if it going to work or not.  And therein lies the conundrum. (Rolls eyes again)


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> I wonder where you get that impression? There has never been a single conducted survey or poll that has shown that most people don't want the NBN.
> 
> To the contrary, public opinion is very strongly behind it.
> 
> There is the Swinburne University study, which found 76% support:
> http://cci.edu.au/sites/default/files/sewing/CCi Digital Futures 2010 1.pdf
> 
> Then there have been several Essential Media polls which also showed strong support:
> 
> http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/importance-of-nbn/
> http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/benefit-of-nbn/
> http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/opinion-of-nbn-2/
> 
> If you only read News Ltd and listed to AM radio, you might have that impression. But out in the real world, it's quite the opposite.
> 
> If you'd like to supply evidence to the contrary, I welcome it.




Yes we all want the N.B.N and a cleaner atmosphere, thats why Labor have been polling so well for the last couple of years. LOL.
It's o.k asking someone do you want an ice cream, answer: yes. Do you want an ice cream if it costs $50, answer: no.
A bit like a poll, do you want a cleaner planet answer: yes. Do you want to pay twice as much for your electricity answer: no.
That sunshine is why the government is going down the toilet, like yourself they are not listening. 
It's o.k saying 76% want it, but do 76% want to pay for it, the next election will give you the answer.
But like you said, put in place lots of contracts so that it costs too much to unwind it, that shows confidence. 
The Labor party went to the last election with the N.B.N and were creamed. 
They have now thrown in the carbon tax and they are looking like they will be smashed. Like I said earlier they don't listen, they are too busy ramming, what they want, down peoples throats.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

drsmith said:


> It has my support,
> 
> as long as someone else pays for it.




Good one doc.

It just about sums it up.

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> You have completely missed what the article was driving at. The goverment has scheduled a 70% takeup rate for the NBN to be viable. The poll evidences that the 4G "could" be a threat if the people do not take up the NBN and prefer to remain wireless. All your facts and figures and links are exactly that .... hypothesis as the NBN is STILL the great unknown. 840 people on a trial basis is hardly earth shattering stuff.
> 
> We will have to wait until this thing is actually functioning on a day to day basis to see if it going to work or not.  And therein lies the conundrum. (Rolls eyes again)




Not at all. I was merely pointing out, based on known variables, that there's a huge distance between 'could', 'might' and 'will'.

We know that there is no sign people are abandoning fixed lines for wireless. In fact, the opposite is true. 
We know about 93% of Australian premises currently have fixed phone/net connections.
We know wireless is much slower. 
We know wireless is much more expensive. 
We know that the 'move to wireless' theory is false, and that in fact most data delivered to wireless devices comes via WiFi (ie the fixed network), not mobile broadband.
We know that NBN connections are available for less money than current copper connections.
We know that average broadband downloads have been growing at 50% per year (compounded) since at least 2001.
We know that you cannot get a Telstra wireless plan that copes with the current average 18GB/mon download for any price.
We know that there is a massive shortage of spectrum for mobile data, and capacity is not growing fast enough to meet even smartphone demand, let alone trying to cope with fixed-net replacement.

So, on what is known, the chance that wireless-only households will be a substantial portion of the population is slim. There's simply nothing in it for people.


----------



## trainspotter

Once again all good in theory. We will not know until the shiny blue cable is operational


----------



## trainspotter

Evil hacker had control of NBN for 6 weeks !!

http://www.news.com.au/technology/evil-hacker-charged-with-nbn-attack/story-e6frfro0-1226102480479


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> Evil hacker had control of NBN for 6 weeks !!
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/technology/evil-hacker-charged-with-nbn-attack/story-e6frfro0-1226102480479




Another load of absolute crap from News Ltd. What a surprise.

The hacker was in the systems of ISP _Platform Networks_ in December 2010. Platform became aware of the hack, put the hacker into a "sandbox", notified the AFP and they then monitored him for several months.

http://www.itnews.com.au/News/264880,police-arrest-truckie-over-evil-network-hack.aspx

_Platform became aware of "unlawful traffic transiting our network.... in December 2010 during routine systems and network monitoring".

"The activity in question was far reaching, involved a large number of networks both in and outside of Australia, and was not focused on either Platform Networks or any of its customers specifically," Hooton said in a letter to its customers.

The company had undertaken a six-month investigation into the traffic and had begun working with the AFP to resolve the issue.

*"In fact the company said to have been involved has not yet connected services over the NBN."*_


In other words, the hack had absolutely nothing to do with the NBN and he never accessed any NBN-related systems, because the company he hacked isn't even connected to the NBN yet.

Who would have thought that News Ltd would have a demonstrably false story relating to the NBN. That's a first.

http://michaelwyres.com/2011/07/the-australian-fuds-it-again/

Keep trying Trainspotter....


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Another load of absolute crap from News Ltd. What a surprise.
> 
> The hacker was in the systems of ISP _Platform Networks_ in December 2010. Platform became aware of the hack, put the hacker into a "sandbox", notified the AFP and they then monitored him for several months.
> 
> http://www.itnews.com.au/News/264880,police-arrest-truckie-over-evil-network-hack.aspx
> 
> _Platform became aware of "unlawful traffic transiting our network.... in December 2010 during routine systems and network monitoring".
> 
> "The activity in question was far reaching, involved a large number of networks both in and outside of Australia, and was not focused on either Platform Networks or any of its customers specifically," Hooton said in a letter to its customers.
> 
> The company had undertaken a six-month investigation into the traffic and had begun working with the AFP to resolve the issue.
> 
> *"In fact the company said to have been involved has not yet connected services over the NBN."*_
> 
> 
> In other words, the hack had absolutely nothing to do with the NBN and he never accessed any NBN-related systems, because the company he hacked isn't even connected to the NBN yet.
> 
> Who would have thought that News Ltd would have a demonstrably false story relating to the NBN. That's a first.
> 
> http://michaelwyres.com/2011/07/the-australian-fuds-it-again/
> 
> Keep trying Trainspotter....




Just to keep it fair and unbiased at 15.00 in the S.M.H the were headlining it as an N.B.N hack.
http://www.smh.com.au/technology/se...sed-bail-over-nbn-attacks-20110727-1hzdk.html


----------



## trainspotter

And just to keep it truly unbiased there is this from Aunty.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-27/hacker-refused-bail/2812714/?site=newcastle


----------



## NBNMyths

Looks like the total number of NBN customers has hit 1,000 (insert party poppers here) There are 200 on the interim satellite, not 20 as I had guessed in the earlier post. And they're rather happy, if this customer is anything to go by:

_There is a big shiny satellite dish sitting upon a roof near O’Connell, one of only 200 across the country.

It is all part of the National Broadband Network (NBN) First Release Satellite Service (FRSS) trial.

O’Connell resident Julie Stott was selected to be one of 200 householders across Australia to trial satellite broadband internet.

Mrs Stott said there was less lag (the time it takes for things to load) and the response much faster.

“It is six times faster uploading, and twice as fast downloading,” she said.
_​http://www.westernadvocate.com.au/n...nnell-resident-part-of-nbn-trial/2240259.aspx





sptrawler said:


> Just to keep it fair and unbiased at 15.00 in the S.M.H the were headlining it as an N.B.N hack.
> http://www.smh.com.au/technology/se...sed-bail-over-nbn-attacks-20110727-1hzdk.html






trainspotter said:


> And just to keep it truly unbiased there is this from Aunty.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-27/hacker-refused-bail/2812714/?site=newcastle




And NBN Co has given it to all of them in a press release today:

_NBN Co today hit out at misleading reporting in relation to an alleged hacking incident.

The company was responding to a raft of provocative headlines over the past 24 hours such as “NBN hacking scandal” (Sky News), “Self-taught hacker charged over NBN attack” (ABC), “NBN hack charges” (Daily Telegraph, Sydney), “Police arrest lone hacker after NBN system compromised” (Sydney Morning Herald) and “More arrests to come over NBN hacking” (The Australian).

NBN Co CEO Mike Quigley said:

“The NBN was not hacked. It has not been compromised. It has not been placed at risk. NBN Co’s security has not been breached.

“The incident yesterday related to a commercial customer of NBN Co that has not yet connected services over the NBN.

"Of course we take security seriously. We have controls and processes in place and are working with telcos, ISPs and the broader industry in security scenario planning.

“Nevertheless any suggestion that the NBN was hacked or could have been hacked in relation to this incident is entirely wrong.”​_​
http://nbnco.com.au/news-and-events/news/hacks-and-hacking.html


----------



## trainspotter

WOW ...... a thousand people !!!! Out of 22 million we are going great guns. I can't wait for the shiny blue cable to come past my house so I can pop my party popper.


----------



## Logique

This article also says there are just 41 active customers at the two mainland test sites.



> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...future-proof-nbn/story-fn59niix-1226104623595
> *Wireless challenge to 'future-proof' NBN  -*Mitchell Bingemann From: The Australian July 30, 2011
> 
> A technology guru who has been described as the Thomas Edison of Silicon Valley claims to have developed a new wireless technology that could one day rival the download speeds on the National Broadband Network..
> 
> The new technology, called DIDO, allows internet users to access download speeds up to 1000 times faster than possible on conventional wireless networks, without any fall in speed as more users get on to the network..
> 
> ..New figures reveal the NBN has just 41 active customers at its two operating mainland test sites, despite more than 6000 homes having been connected to the grid and access being offered for free.


----------



## DB008

New 802.22 Wi-Fi Technology Allows Wireless Data Over 60 Miles



> According to IEEE, this new standard for Wireless Regional Area Networks (WRAN) allows data transfers up to 100 km from the source transmitter. Also, they have explained that the technology will be extremely useful in less populated areas and developing countries where the number of unused TV channels is more.
> 
> An immediate result, if the new 802.22TM Wi-Fi technology is implemented at homes is – no more expensive data plans from mobile network providers will be required. Imagine using your home connection for high speed data transfer while you’re travelling. Couple this with a new unlimited data plan from your ISP. Now, that’s definitely great news considering how much money this would save..


----------



## sptrawler

Logique said:


> This article also says there are just 41 active customers at the two mainland test sites.




Two of them would be Wilkie and Oakeshott.LOL


----------



## sails

sptrawler said:


> Two of them would be Wilkie and Oakeshott.LOL




Wouldn't include Windsor because I don't think he has a computer.  No point..


----------



## noco

Logique said:


> This article also says there are just 41 active customers at the two mainland test sites.




Looks like NBN Co. could be another Green/Labor socialist left "WHITE ELEPHANT" like everything else they touch. More wasted tax payers money.


----------



## NBNMyths

Logique said:


> This article also says there are just 41 active customers at the two mainland test sites.






noco said:


> Looks like NBN Co. could be another Green/Labor socialist left "WHITE ELEPHANT" like everything else they touch. More wasted tax payers money.




I am shocked. _The Australian_, a bastion of accurate and objective reporting has published demonstrably false information about the NBN.

I don't know how many times it has to be said, but the mainland sites are in trial, and customers cannot connect if and until they are accepted into the trial by their ISP and NBN Co:

_
Unlike the NBN Stage 1 areas in Tasmania, National Broadband Network services in the First Release sites are *not yet available for general sale*.

Internode is currently provisioning services for *a limited number of existing Internode customers* in the First Release areas, on a trial basis. Internode customers who are interested in being part of this trial can register their interest via the expression of interest webform.

Trial participants will be selected by Internode and NBNCo, based on the specific network, systems, facilities, products or process testing that is being undertaken at that time._

http://www.internode.on.net/residential/fibre_to_the_home/nbn_plans/nbn_first_release/

_Two of the ISPs participating in the trial - iiNet and Internode - have both announced that they have two initial customers connected and one of them told iTWire he understood *they would be restricted to connecting "a couple of existing customers" each week until the end of September.*_

http://www.itwire.com/business-it-n...armidale-nbn-still-a-trial-despite-the-hoopla

On the same day in a different article, the Oz wrote that there were 624 customers in Tasmania, despite it being public information that there were 723 on the 6th of May.

Unfortunately, what was once a great paper has declined into a big, nationwide tabloid, with all the associated bias and sensationalism. I suppose when sales are in a constant death spiral, you have to do something.


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> New 802.22 Wi-Fi Technology Allows Wireless Data Over 60 Miles




Surely you're not suggesting this as an alternative to fibre??? An example of someone who has no idea proposing a concept they don't understand?

Let me explain it to you. Here's a quote from the article about the technology:


> "...capable of data transfers at *22 Mbps per channel* over a range of a whopping *60 miles*"




Yep, that range is great. An absolute boon for remote properties for example, so long as the transmitter was sufficiently high up. But what about the other numbers there: _"22Mbps per channel"_

I'm guessing you don't understand what that means. WiFi has 11 channels. So with 11 users connected, this new technology can deliver 22Mbps over 60 miles to 11 people.

Yup, fibre is dead.


----------



## NBNMyths

Logique said:


> This article also says there are just 41 active customers at the two mainland test sites.
> 
> Wireless challenge to 'future-proof' NBN -Mitchell Bingemann From: The Australian July 30, 2011
> 
> A technology guru who has been described as the Thomas Edison of Silicon Valley claims to have developed a new wireless technology that could one day rival the download speeds on the National Broadband Network..
> 
> The new technology, called DIDO, allows internet users to access download speeds up to 1000 times faster than possible on conventional wireless networks, without any fall in speed as more users get on to the network..




While DIDO looks fascinating, let's keep it in perspective:

It's vapourware. There are no technical specifications, detailed explanations or independent tests of the technology.  Outside the self-published and extremely basic white paper released by the venture capitalist there is almost no information about it.

DIDO is a series of grandiose promises from a small startup technology company in the USA, who are trying to raise capital after failing to generate interest in the concept. The promotor claims that the system can overcome one of the limitations of regular wireless technologies, being the massive speed reductions that occur as more users join the network. They claim that the entire capacity of the wireless network can be delivered to each user at the same time. Sounds rather unlikely. Is it just another example of Silicone Valley’s too-good-to-be-true _Next Big Things_?

It's only been tested with 10 users in a lab (and 3 users outside), not 100 and certainly not 1000 _(Yes, just for a change the Oz got it wrong again)_

There is currently no regulatory approval of the system, and no testing alongside other users of adjacent radio spectrum. The US regulator has so-far refused to grant even an experimental licence for the technology.

DIDO doesn’t overcome any of the other limitations of wireless, such as distance, signal loss and obstruction penetration.

It has not been tested at all with moving receivers, and it has not been tested at long range except using ridiculously low frequencies of 3-5MHz, requiring the signal to bounce off the atmosphere, creating more potential interference and latency.

It has not been tested at all in a “cellular” system, which would be required to achieve fixed-network replacement.

Each DIDO base station must be connected to a datacentre by a fast internet connection (ie: Optical fibre). So even if DIDO works, it will happily plug into the NBN, just like WiFi.

http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/why-not-wireless/#dido

http://www.itwire.com/opinion-and-a...ims-of-nbns-death-by-dido-greatly-exaggerated

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/08/01/dido_snake_oil_or_saviour/


----------



## Julia

An acquaintance of mine is using Dido.  She has no internet access 90% of the time.


----------



## trainspotter

Julia said:


> An acquaintance of mine is using Dido.  She has no internet access 90% of the time.




The whole population of Australia is using the NBN and we have 99.98% no internet all of the time.


----------



## Aussiejeff

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Good one doc.
> 
> It just about sums it up.
> 
> gg




*gag*

Townsville to get NBN rollout in September!!! http://www.news.com.au/technology/n...eas-listed-below/story-e6frfro0-1226107032994

Will that include the Ross Island Hotel, GG? 

Conroy must read this thread & noted your anguish at not being NBN'ed yet...

LOL

Wonder when Wodonga will be hooked up? 2013??


----------



## sptrawler

Aussiejeff said:


> *gag*
> 
> Townsville to get NBN rollout in September!!! http://www.news.com.au/technology/n...eas-listed-below/story-e6frfro0-1226107032994
> 
> Will that include the Ross Island Hotel, GG?
> 
> Conroy must read this thread & noted your anguish at not being NBN'ed yet...
> 
> LOL
> 
> Wonder when Wodonga will be hooked up? 2013??




What the hell is going on Geralton in W.A is one of the first locations also. That means trainspotter gets it, obviously buttering up nbnmyths has made him put in a good word for trainspotter.
LOL


----------



## trainspotter

Shiny blue cable has been in the ground in a subdivision for a while here. Not a quantum leap to connect into the spine of the NBN.


----------



## Aussiejeff

trainspotter said:


> Shiny blue cable has been in the ground in a subdivision for a while here. Not a quantum leap to *connect into the spine* of the NBN.




Spinal Tap eh?


----------



## spooly74

sptrawler said:


> What the hell is going on Geralton in W.A is one of the first locations also. That means trainspotter gets it, obviously buttering up nbnmyths has made him put in a good word for trainspotter.
> LOL



Could be for the ASKA project near Geralton. I'm fairly sure there's some construction camps under way atm, albeit in the very early stages.


----------



## trainspotter

spooly74 said:


> Could be for the ASKA project near Geralton. I'm fairly sure there's some construction camps under way atm, albeit in the very early stages.




That is a small part reason to assist in the tender process. It is between us and South Africa, ATM.

http://www.ska.gov.au/news/Pages/110707_eVLBI_Big_Step_Forward.aspx


----------



## nulla nulla

Because of the enthusiastic downloading of my offspring in July my internet usage exceeded the allowable download limit and was choked down to dial up speeds on the last billing day of the cycle which happened to be monday this week. 

Try taking advantage of trade opportunities when you are still waiting for screens to download/open and the price has raced away from your attempted entry point and reached your proposed exit point before the first bloody window has finished downloading.

Turned the computer off and went to the movies. NBN can't come to Sydney fast enough for me.


----------



## dutchie

Scrap the NBN - put the money towards a fast train between Melbourne - Sydney - Brisbane.
Better value for Australia.


----------



## drsmith

dutchie said:


> Scrap the NBN - put the money towards a fast train between Melbourne - Sydney - Brisbane.



It would cost a bit more.

http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/...h-as-108-billion/story-e6frfq80-1226107821693

Approximately $5k for every man, woman and child. 

It also wouldn't be a vote winner in the west.


----------



## bellenuit

Not a replacement for the NBN, but interesting how communications technology is evolving in ways not previously imagined.

*Wireless Data From Every Light Bulb*

http://www.dump.com/2011/08/03/wireless-data-from-every-light-bulb-video/


----------



## dutchie

NBN will be scrapped - we just can't afford to spend that sort of money.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

If Jac Nasser and Ralph Norris are against the waste of the NBN, it is time for the government to listen, and abandon this folly.

And folly it is.

http://smarthouse.com.au/Wireless_And_Networking/Broadband/P9J9X6B9 

gg



> Two of the most experienced Australian business executives, BHP Billiton chairman Jac Nasser and Ralph Norris the outgoing chief executive of the Commonwealth Bank, have slammed the NBN which is set to cost tax payer $36B.
> 
> After announcing a rebate on capacity chargers in the early days of the NBN's establishment, Former Ford CEO Nasser was telling the American Chamber of Commerce audience in Sydney that the $36 billion being spent on the project was not an appropriate allocation of capital in Australia.
> 
> He said "When you try and marry large capital expenditures with a fast-moving pace of technology change, I think that is fraught with risk," he told an American Chamber of Commerce in Australia event.
> 
> "I am always concerned when a project such as this is driven by government rather than private enterprise. I worry about that. Little warning signs come up in my head."
> 
> Ralph Norris, the outgoing chief executive of the Commonwealth Bank, joined the criticism of the NBN saying governments did not have a strong track record of operating commercial ventures. "I've never been a great fan of government's running commercial or business entities," he told The Australian. "What ends up happening is that they end up getting run on a non-commercial basis."
> 
> Mr Norris said the cost of the NBN was a major investment that needed to be supported by a business case: "As for the NBN, there is a lot of infrastructure being made redundant and you have to ask yourself if that is cost-effective."


----------



## medicowallet

nulla nulla said:


> Turned the computer off and went to the movies. NBN can't come to Sydney fast enough for me.




So that they can download the more expensive, less of a quota, faster?

NBN plans are more expensive with less capacity.

NBN can't be scrapped fast enough for me.


----------



## nulla nulla

Garpal Gumnut said:


> If Jac Nasser and Ralph Norris are against the waste of the NBN, it is time for the government to listen, and abandon this folly.
> 
> And folly it is.
> 
> http://smarthouse.com.au/Wireless_And_Networking/Broadband/P9J9X6B9
> 
> gg




You are texting tongue in cheek, eh gg. 

Jack Nasser who was leveraged out of Ford for almost sending it broke and a kiwi that ran a bank famous for gouging fees out of the Australian populace are qualified to tell Australians what is good for us now and long term. Good one. pee myself laughing.


----------



## sails

nulla nulla said:


> You are texting tongue in cheek, eh gg.
> 
> Jack Nasser who was leveraged out of Ford for almost sending it broke and a kiwi that ran a bank famous for gouging fees out of the Australian populace are qualified to tell Australians what is good for us now and long term. Good one. pee myself laughing.




And if they had endorsed the NBN, I think you would be on your soap box crowing about it...

Yes, it seems to be the labor/green way.  Discredit anyone  who doesn't agree with them...


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> If Jac Nasser and Ralph Norris are against the waste of the NBN, it is time for the government to listen, and abandon this folly.
> Two of the most experienced Australian business executives, BHP Billiton chairman Jac Nasser and Ralph Norris the outgoing chief executive of the Commonwealth Bank, have slammed the NBN which is set to cost tax payer $36B.
> 
> After announcing a rebate on capacity chargers in the early days of the NBN's establishment, Former Ford CEO Nasser was telling the American Chamber of Commerce audience in Sydney that the $36 billion being spent on the project was not an appropriate allocation of capital in Australia.
> 
> He said "When you try and marry large capital expenditures with a fast-moving pace of technology change, I think that is fraught with risk," he told an American Chamber of Commerce in Australia event.
> 
> "I am always concerned when a project such as this is driven by government rather than private enterprise. I worry about that. Little warning signs come up in my head."
> 
> Ralph Norris, the outgoing chief executive of the Commonwealth Bank, joined the criticism of the NBN saying governments did not have a strong track record of operating commercial ventures. "I've never been a great fan of government's running commercial or business entities," he told The Australian. "What ends up happening is that they end up getting run on a non-commercial basis."
> 
> Mr Norris said the cost of the NBN was a major investment that needed to be supported by a business case: "As for the NBN, there is a lot of infrastructure being made redundant and you have to ask yourself if that is cost-effective."
> And folly it is.
> 
> http://smarthouse.com.au/Wireless_And_Networking/Broadband/P9J9X6B9
> 
> gg




I'm sure Jac and Ralph are good businessmen in their respective fields, but surely you don't think a Govt should be ignoring all the expert opinion on the NBN, and abandoning it on the basis of statements by two people who -by their own admission- know very little about the NBN, and have no experience in the IT or communications fields?

Let me reverse the rolls. Let's say Bill Gates said to Jac Nasser _"I don't really know much about it, but on paper I question BHP's $13bn investment in the Canadian Jansen potash project. You should cancel it". _

Would you seriously suggest BHP accept that advice, or would you think they should be taking their advice from experts in the field, and perhaps people running successful businesses in the field?

So with that, I take your Jac Nasser and Ralph Norris and raise you: 

*Eric Schmidt (Google CEO):*
_“…Australia is leading the world in understanding the importance of fibre. .... the folks in the cities – will have gigabit or equivalent service using fibre, and the other 7% will be handled through wireless services of a nature of LTE. This is leadership. And again, from Australia, which I think is wonderful.”[ref]_

*Steve Wozniak (Apple founder and on the board of various IT companies):*
_"The NBN is a great model…When I was here a few years ago, the attitude [in terms of broadband] was ‘Telstra is letting us down! It’s expensive and slow and the company is not making Australia number one in the world… I think the Australian Government finally recognised that recently and that is why it is putting in this network” [ref]
_
*Phil Cronin (Managing Director of Intel): *
_“It’s now time to move beyond debate… the NBN has the potential to deliver significant long term benefits to consumers and small businesses alike”[ref]_

*Vittorio Colao (CEO Vodafone Worldwide): *
_“Australia is taking a very bold step….I honestly think that the vision that in this country the Government has is a very healthy one”[ref]_

*Dr Philip McCrea (CEO of AC3, former Managing director of Softway and Business Development Manager at CSIRO):*
_“Our belief is that Australia will benefit enormously from the introduction of the NBN”[ref]_

*Dr Gordon Bell (head of research at Microsoft)*
_"The NBN is essential infrastructure that needs to be put in place. I admire Australia for moving ahead to build such a network."[ref]
_
The list goes on......


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> So that they can download the more expensive, less of a quota, faster?
> 
> NBN plans are more expensive with less capacity.
> 
> NBN can't be scrapped fast enough for me.




Going on currently available NBN plans, the above statement applies to _very_ few people. For most, the NBN is faster, cheaper and with bigger data allowances than they currently get. By most, I mean:

Anyone using Telstra Bigpond, be it cable or ADSL/ADSL2+.
Anyone with another ISP but living outside the 3rd-party ADSL2+ footprint (ie: getting their ADSL2+ via Telstra wholesale)
Anyone on ADSL1
Anyone on wireless
Anyone on satellite

Given that Telstra Bigpond alone have 47.8% broadband market share, Optus cable has <10%, DoDo have <3% and TPG only even _offer_ ADSL2 in 400/5000 exchanges, it's pretty clear that the vast majority of Australians will be able to get bigger, faster and cheaper communication services than they get now.


The only people who may get lower data allowances (but at higher speeds) for the same money would be those on the "unlimited" ADSL2+ plans (eg TPG/DoDo), and some Optus cable customers. That said though, Optus, TPG and DoDo are yet to release their NBN pricing.


----------



## So_Cynical

sails said:


> And if they had endorsed the NBN, I think you would be on your soap box crowing about it...
> 
> Yes, it seems to be the labor/green way.  Discredit anyone  who doesn't agree with them...




And if they had criticised the NBN, I think you wouldn't be on your soap box crowing about it...

Yes, it seems to be the liberal/conservative/redneck way, disregard anyone who doesn't agree with them.


----------



## dutchie

The future is mobility, mobility, mobility...


----------



## NBNMyths

dutchie said:


> The future is mobility, mobility, mobility...




The NBN does not preclude mobility. WiFi will boom under the NBN, because you'll finally be able to connect your WiFi router to a network that can cope with the available speeds.

Stats from the ABS clearly show that data over fixed networks is growing 16x faster than data over cellular networks. The same stats show that fixed lines are growing at 2x the rate of growth of new dwellings. In other words, the growth in wireless is not coming at the expense of fixed networks.

92% of iPad data is delivered via WiFi on fixed networks, not mobile networks.

With the exception of the DIDO vapourware, which is at least a decade away from reality if it actually works as the promoter says (which is hardly a given, and disputed by many in the field), it is the consensus amongst electrical engineers and telco experts that there is no wireless technology that can cope with fixed-network replacement. Even the DIDO people don't make this claim of their vapourware.
http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/why-not-wireless/
http://people.eng.unimelb.edu.au/rtucker/publications/files/tja10043.pdf


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> And if they had criticised the NBN, I think you wouldn't be on your soap box crowing about it...
> 
> Yes, it seems to be the liberal/conservative/redneck way, disregard anyone who doesn't agree with them.




Most people are not against the N.B.N they are against the cost verses benefits. 
It's the same as the carbon tax, most people want clean energy( I have solar hot water and solar panels, recycle my grey water) it is just not at any cost. 
The government is throwing away money like a person with 6 arms ($130B in debt from $20B surplus).
These grandiose ideas are fine but they have to be payed for, it won't effect me personaly, but I know it will have a huge effect on the people who can least afford it.
Nothing the government has done up untill now has been very successful. Therefore on their track record why take on bigger and bigger projects when they have had little success with small ones.
With the carbon tax, why not build a pilot power plant of say 100MW, to prove the viability. Before jumping in the deep end.
Why not build fibre to the node and fibre to the C.B.D and business hubs the businesses could probably self fund fibre to their building if they required the speed.


----------



## dutchie

sptrawler said:


> Most people are not against the N.B.N they are against the cost verses benefits.
> It's the same as the carbon tax, most people want clean energy( I have solar hot water and solar panels, recycle my grey water) it is just not at any cost.
> The government is throwing away money like a person with 6 arms ($130B in debt from $20B surplus).
> These grandiose ideas are fine but they have to be payed for, it won't effect me personaly, but I know it will have a huge effect on the people who can least afford it.
> Nothing the government has done up untill now has been very successful. Therefore on their track record why take on bigger and bigger projects when they have had little success with small ones.
> With the carbon tax, why not build a pilot power plant of say 100MW, to prove the viability. Before jumping in the deep end.
> Why not build fibre to the node and fibre to the C.B.D and business hubs the businesses could probably self fund fibre to their building if they required the speed.




Good post sptrawler.

That all makes a lot of sense - pity this government has none!


----------



## dutchie

NBNMyths said:


> The NBN does not preclude mobility. WiFi will boom under the NBN, because you'll finally be able to connect your WiFi router to a network that can cope with the available speeds.
> [/url]




I would be happy with my current speeds on wireless. I would not have a land line (even if it meant greater speed). I think a lot of people would say the same.


----------



## sails

Is there anything about this government that is not downright deceitful?


From the Age by Clancy Yeates: *Treasury warned of risk to taxpayers on broadband* 

PREVIOUSLY secret documents show the federal government was warned that the national broadband network would expose taxpayers to ''considerable financial risks'', only weeks after the ambitious high-speed internet plan was unveiled.

Treasury told the government it would have to consider shielding the network from private-sector rivals to help it be viable.​

No wonder this government want to control the media so that their lies and dishonesty are not made known to the public.  Shame on them.

It beggers belief that a government who is supposed to be representing the people and in the best interests of Australia is allowed to continue these horrendous and often deceitful decisions which they try to keep "secret" so the public don't find out.

I think the rant has ended, but the steam is still coming out...


----------



## todster

I wonder if people for and against put there age next to there comment we would see a pattern.


----------



## So_Cynical

Just watching the ABC 24 news channel and they were showing a speech by 1 vote Tony to the WA Liberal party transmitted via broadband, so there was the usual small amount of pixellation and low video resolution on my big HD plasma...funny thing was just 2 or 3 minutes into his diatribe about how we didn't need the NBN the sound dropped out and the picture started freezing..he he.


----------



## sails

So_Cynical said:


> Just watching the ABC 24 news channel and they were showing a speech by 1 vote Tony to the WA Liberal party transmitted via broadband, so there was the usual small amount of pixellation and low video resolution on my big HD plasma...funny thing was just 2 or 3 minutes into his diatribe about how we didn't need the NBN the sound dropped out and the picture started freezing..he he.





Hmmm, I wonder if that was delibertely sabotaged by ABC?....  Timing seems a bit too convenient and we all know ABC does tend to have a left bias.  Perhaps we need a media inquiry to the ABC.

I don't remember ABC having any such problems before.


----------



## NBNMyths

sails said:


> Is there anything about this government that is not downright deceitful?
> 
> 
> From the Age by Clancy Yeates: *Treasury warned of risk to taxpayers on broadband*
> 
> PREVIOUSLY secret documents show the federal government was warned that the national broadband network would expose taxpayers to ''considerable financial risks'', only weeks after the ambitious high-speed internet plan was unveiled.
> 
> Treasury told the government it would have to consider shielding the network from private-sector rivals to help it be viable.​
> 
> No wonder this government want to control the media so that their lies and dishonesty are not made known to the public.  Shame on them.
> 
> It beggers belief that a government who is supposed to be representing the people and in the best interests of Australia is allowed to continue these horrendous and often deceitful decisions which they try to keep "secret" so the public don't find out.
> 
> I think the rant has ended, but the steam is still coming out...




Far from your claim that the Government ignored the treasury, the documents show just how hard they listened to that advice, and have addressed the risks over the past 2 years.

They appointed KPMG/McKinsey to conduct a study into the viability of the NBN, it's costing assumptions and technologies. They accepted the advice and recommendations of that study.

They have put in place the anti-cherry picking provisions of the NBN legislation, they have secured deals with Telstra and Optus to migrate customers, and they have secured deals with Telstra to reduce the cost of the rollout by using existing pit/pipe/duct/pole infrastructure.

The treasury advice referred to in the article is now 2 years old, and other (later) documents released with them show how treasury's warnings have reduced and evolved as their concerns have been addressed. You can read all the treasry docs released as part of the FOI here, if you so desire:
http://www.treasury.gov.au/contentitem.asp?NavId=087&ContentID=2120



> *Treasury docs show NBN worries evolve*
> The evolving outlook of the Treasury reflects the evolving state of the network. A number of key pieces of legislation have been passed since 2009, including competition and consumer safeguards legislation and the NBN companies Bill, aimed at preventing cherry picking by fibre providers, which could have made achieving a return on investment for the network unviable. Alongside these changes, the roll-out of the network progressed in mainland and Tasmanian sites. Definitive agreements were also reached, with Telstra and Optus to ensure that their customers are migrated onto the NBN, as the telcos' copper and hybrid fibre-coaxial networks are shut down over the next ten years.
> 
> While the Treasury will likely perceive factors of the NBN as being a risk until the entire network is rolled out, paid off and privatised, factors that may have caused alarm for the department two years ago are not the same risks that the network faces today. And rather than being a worrying sign that the NBN is doomed, the changing nature of the concerns show that a number of the Treasury's issues have been addressed. The downgrading of risks from being "considerable" to just risks, and the Telstra concerns disappearing, show that problems can be eased or worked around. The replacement of these risks with considerations about cost blowouts is also heartening, since such a statement could be in the risk assessment of any major project, particularly one of the scale of the NBN.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Far from your claim that the Government ignored the treasury, the documents show just how hard they listened to that advice, and have addressed the risks over the past 2 years.
> 
> They appointed KPMG/McKinsey to conduct a study into the viability of the NBN, it's costing assumptions and technologies. They accepted the advice and recommendations of that study.
> 
> They have put in place the anti-cherry picking provisions of the NBN legislation, they have secured deals with Telstra and Optus to migrate customers, and they have secured deals with Telstra to reduce the cost of the rollout by using existing pit/pipe/duct/pole infrastructure.
> 
> The treasury advice referred to in the article is now 2 years old, and other (later) documents released with them show how treasury's warnings have reduced and evolved as their concerns have been addressed. You can read all the treasry docs released as part of the FOI here, if you so desire:
> http://www.treasury.gov.au/contentitem.asp?NavId=087&ContentID=2120




Thats the part that makes sick to the stomach, the government shafting a public listed company, in order to get market advantage.
The sooner this lot are thrown out the better, hopefully Thompson will be the catalyst.
Then we will see how much the public want the N.B.N and carbon tax.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Thats the part that makes sick to the stomach, the government shafting a public listed company, in order to get market advantage.




I assume you mean Telstra?They certainly don't seem unhappy about the deal.

What would you suggest instead? Telstra have an atrocious record of overcharging, using their monopoly power and not improving infrastructure outside profitable areas. No other company is big enough to take them on. Even Optus stopped trying 10 years ago.

To see their vision of fast broadband, you only need to look at South Brisbane. You really think we'd be better off leaving it to Telstra?

*Why we can't trust Telstra with FTTP*

_...What, then, will the NBN's foes make of the revelation this week that pricing for Telstra's new fibre-to-the-premise (FTTP) services in South Brisbane ”” which I have previously held up as a prime example of why nobody believes wireless can be a full replacement for fixed lines ”” is not only going to be high, but will force wholesale customers to bundle data services with overpriced voice lines customers don't want or need.

Telstra's proposed wholesale pricing was revealed by industry journal CommsDay and showed that Telstra has no compunction in pricing its FTTP wholesale services at rates far higher than its existing ADSL services. A service provider wanting to offer 8Mbps/384Kbps FTTP services would be paying Telstra as much as $28 per month; $35 per month for a 30Mbps/1Mbps service; and $50 per month for a 100Mbps/5Mbps service.

Compare that with NBN Co's proposed wholesale pricing, where $27 per month will get internet service providers (ISPs) a 25Mbps/5Mbps service, $34 per month will get a 50Mbps/20Mbps service, and a 100Mbps service costs just $38 per month with a 40Mbps backchannel and *Telstra's pricing looks positively extortionate*._​


----------



## sptrawler

All the other operaters were allowed to "cherry pick" and pay less for high density access. While having no obligation to supply services to non profitable areas. I am sure Telstra wouldn't have been extended the same breaks in Asia.
Also if the N.B.N was about providing competition, why would they let Telstra keep its network as competition for the N.B.N
Why doesn't the N.B.N want to allow it, because it doesn't make business sense.
Anyway we are going over a well worn path. You may feel the government carried out the process in an admirable manner, I don't. 
We will just have to agree to disagree.


----------



## bellenuit

Some Hiccups?

*Plan to seperate Telstra to pave way for NBN facing objections by the ACCC*

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/aus...tute-for-the-nbn/story-e6frgakx-1226125493744

.....

_The ACCC has highlighted concerns about provisions against Telstra promoting wireless services as a substitute for NBN Co's fibre services, and the limitation on the telco's ability to provide cable internet services to customers, as among issues that would prevent its approval of the plan.

The ACCC is also concerned that the $11 billion deal between the NBN Co and Telstra for the telco giant to migrate its customers on to the new fibre network could potentially be exempt from competition laws without undergoing further ACCC scrutiny.

“The ACCC has serious concerns about arrangements between Telstra and NBN CO that include the parties' ability to vary the arrangements without further scrutiny by the ACCC,” the regulator said.
_
.......


----------



## sptrawler

Don't worry bellinuit, the government will just tell the ACCC to shut up or they will sack them, yep that works, that's why they use Conroy. 
Pig of a government with a pig of a minister with a lackey ACCC.
Don't mean to upset anyone just my opinion.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

I have recently been privy to some huddles in Canberra, and the NBN will be scrapped.

The rollout will go, somewhat, but the NBN will not exist.

Think about it.

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I have recently been privy to some huddles in Canberra, and the NBN will be scrapped.
> 
> The rollout will go, somewhat, but the NBN will not exist.
> 
> Think about it.
> 
> gg






Sure GG, sure it will. Will this prediction be any more accurate than the one that began this thread? Remember this:



Garpal Gumnut said:


> I have it on good opinion from one of my Queensland ALP contacts , that the NBN is to be "modified".
> 
> This will free up money for the Flood and Cyclone Reconstruction.
> 
> The word "scrapped" will not be used.
> 
> "Modified" is the buzzword.
> 
> One can imagine a Dalek saying it...."Modified, modified, modified"
> 
> gg




Sorry mate, but the only thing that could stop the NBN would be a change in Government.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> Sure GG, sure it will. Will this prediction be any more accurate than the one that began this thread? Remember this:




I wish I got paid for every time someone posted a reply to a thread.

Gotcha.

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

bellenuit said:


> Some Hiccups?
> 
> *Plan to seperate Telstra to pave way for NBN facing objections by the ACCC*
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/aus...tute-for-the-nbn/story-e6frgakx-1226125493744
> 
> .....
> 
> _The ACCC has highlighted concerns about provisions against Telstra promoting wireless services as a substitute for NBN Co's fibre services, and the limitation on the telco's ability to provide cable internet services to customers, as among issues that would prevent its approval of the plan.
> 
> The ACCC is also concerned that the $11 billion deal between the NBN Co and Telstra for the telco giant to migrate its customers on to the new fibre network could potentially be exempt from competition laws without undergoing further ACCC scrutiny.
> 
> “The ACCC has serious concerns about arrangements between Telstra and NBN CO that include the parties' ability to vary the arrangements without further scrutiny by the ACCC,” the regulator said.
> _
> .......






sptrawler said:


> Don't worry bellinuit, the government will just tell the ACCC to shut up or they will sack them, yep that works, that's why they use Conroy.
> Pig of a government with a pig of a minister with a lackey ACCC.
> Don't mean to upset anyone just my opinion.




According to the Chairman of the ACCC, (transcript: http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2011/s3305905.htm ) they have only identified three major issues in Telstra’s separation undertaking, which is quite remarkable given that we are talking about splitting one of Australia's largest companies.

Of the three, the first is identified as a technical issue which will be easily rectified. The other two are identified by the ACCC chairman as being “clearly not insurmountable”, and that he has already begun discussions with Telstra about them.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> According to the Chairman of the ACCC, (transcript: http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2011/s3305905.htm ) they have only identified three major issues in Telstra’s separation undertaking, which is quite remarkable given that we are talking about splitting one of Australia's largest companies.
> 
> Of the three, the first is identified as a technical issue which will be easily rectified. The other two are identified by the ACCC chairman as being “clearly not insurmountable”, and that he has already begun discussions with Telstra about them.




You know as well as anyone the N.B.N will be covering its behind in case there is a change of government. Which is a slight possibility, the N.B.N management are dealing with a collapsing government and have to fullfill a long term project.
The whole project will be hamstrung with lack of long term contract security and contract "get out clauses" will be rife.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> You know as well as anyone the N.B.N will be covering its behind in case there is a change of government. Which is a slight possibility, the N.B.N management are dealing with a collapsing government and have to fullfill a long term project.
> The whole project will be hamstrung with lack of long term contract security and contract "get out clauses" will be rife.




My guess (and hope) is that there will be some difficult and expensive "get out" clauses in there. If I were tendering, I'd want some serious guarantees before spending big $$$ investing in people, training and equipment to conduct the rollout. 

And if I were NBN Co, I'd be quite happy to oblige them. Why not? If you are planning a 10-year rollout, why wouldn't you be happy to sign ~5 year contracts with expensive escape clauses?


----------



## Knobby22

NBNMyths said:


> My guess (and hope) is that there will be some difficult and expensive "get out" clauses in there. If I were tendering, I'd want some serious guarantees before spending big $$$ investing in people, training and equipment to conduct the rollout.
> 
> And if I were NBN Co, I'd be quite happy to oblige them. Why not? If you are planning a 10-year rollout, why wouldn't you be happy to sign ~5 year contracts with expensive escape clauses?




If the contracts are signed they will be difficult to get out of.
The Libs will probably do some modification but keep it essentially in my view. They would lose a lot of votes in the bush if some get it and others don't.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> My guess (and hope) is that there will be some difficult and expensive "get out" clauses in there. If I were tendering, I'd want some serious guarantees before spending big $$$ investing in people, training and equipment to conduct the rollout.
> 
> And if I were NBN Co, I'd be quite happy to oblige them. Why not? If you are planning a 10-year rollout, why wouldn't you be happy to sign ~5 year contracts with expensive escape clauses?




For once I agree with you. 
N.B.N is between a rock and a hard place.


----------



## sptrawler

Oakeshott came out with a classic today, he wants Conroy to explain to the Australian people the productivity improvements and the jobs that will be created by the N.B.N.
Conroy would have already spelled it out, if he knew.
Also wouldn't you think, as the chairman of the joint parliamentary committee of the N.B.N, Oakeshott would already have the answers. 
It just goes to show another government stuff up about to explode.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...h-says-oakeshott/story-fn59niix-1226126660341


----------



## sptrawler

At last analysts are starting to look at the N.B.N business case and finding there isn't one.
It is just like all the other poorly thought out projects this government has started.
I only hope it hasn't gone too far.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/analyst-pokes-hole-in-nbn-business-plan-20110831-1jlyf.html

And it is from the S.M.H so nbnmyths can't say it's biased. LOL


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> At last analysts are starting to look at the N.B.N business case and finding there isn't one.
> It is just like all the other poorly thought out projects this government has started.
> I only hope it hasn't gone too far.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/business/analyst-pokes-hole-in-nbn-business-plan-20110831-1jlyf.html
> 
> And it is from the S.M.H so nbnmyths can't say it's biased. LOL




Reading the article, the guy says that NBN are expecting a wholesale average of $33 per customer, but that the current average is only $24.64.

I suspect the analyst isn't including a broadband wholesale *plus* a line rental wholesale in his $24.64 current average, considering Telstra charge about $26 for wholesale line rental alone. 

iiNet said recently that the wholesale NBN pricing is similar to what they pay in ULL areas (on-net) and much, much less than they pay outside ULL areas (off-net).

_"(iiNet CEO) Malone didn’t provide any further details about what precisely iiNet will charge customers to connect to the predominantly fibre-based network. However, company briefing documents released today contained a slide which stated iiNet’s current costs for connecting customers to its own network were “*similar to [the] proposed NBN” costs ”” at around $32 or $33 per month*.However, the costs came down dramatically, the slide revealed ”” from about *$57 a month* ”” for customers who were not currently using iiNet’s own network but were connecting through the ISP’s resold services from telcos like Telstra or Optus._​
http://delimiter.com.au/2011/08/15/iinets-nbn-costs-similar-to-adsl/


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Reading the article, the guy says that NBN are expecting a wholesale average of $33 per customer, but that the current average is only $24.64.
> 
> I suspect the analyst isn't including a broadband wholesale *plus* a line rental wholesale in his $24.64 current average, considering Telstra charge about $26 for wholesale line rental alone.
> 
> iiNet said recently that the wholesale NBN pricing is similar to what they pay in ULL areas (on-net) and much, much less than they pay outside ULL areas (off-net).
> 
> _"(iiNet CEO) Malone didn’t provide any further details about what precisely iiNet will charge customers to connect to the predominantly fibre-based network. However, company briefing documents released today contained a slide which stated iiNet’s current costs for connecting customers to its own network were “*similar to [the] proposed NBN” costs ”” at around $32 or $33 per month*.However, the costs came down dramatically, the slide revealed ”” from about *$57 a month* ”” for customers who were not currently using iiNet’s own network but were connecting through the ISP’s resold services from telcos like Telstra or Optus._​
> http://delimiter.com.au/2011/08/15/iinets-nbn-costs-similar-to-adsl/




The N.B.N is also factoring an increase to $65 per connection by 2025, which is an increase of over 5% annually, which would appear ambitious. 
However, as has been shown, the government can do what it likes and rewrite the rules as required, it doesn't have the ACCC to contend with. 
If they aren't making enough money they will just put up the prices and say it is in the national interest and guess what there is no competition. LOL What a joke.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> The N.B.N is also factoring an increase to $65 per connection by 2025, which is an increase of over 5% annually, which would appear ambitious.
> However, as has been shown, the government can do what it likes and rewrite the rules as required, it doesn't have the ACCC to contend with.
> If they aren't making enough money they will just put up the prices and say it is in the national interest and guess what there is no competition. LOL What a joke.




Remember that that's average revenue per customer. It's an average of home and business customers, plus multicast (ie IPTV).

To achieve their forecast of $65 per customer by 2025, they are banking on a gradual move up the speed tiers. I don't see why that's unlikely when you consider the constant speed increases we have demanded for the last 15 years. Their projections are based on industry-standard forecasts of bandwidth growth, which have always proved to be accurate or even conservative. IPTV is set to explode, and that alone adds $5/month from every user per 20Mbps (say per 4x HD channels). The $65 also includes inflation, so would be closer to $40 in todays dollars.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Remember that that's average revenue per customer. It's an average of home and business customers, plus multicast (ie IPTV).
> 
> To achieve their forecast of $65 per customer by 2025, they are banking on a gradual move up the speed tiers. I don't see why that's unlikely when you consider the constant speed increases we have demanded for the last 15 years. Their projections are based on industry-standard forecasts of bandwidth growth, which have always proved to be accurate or even conservative. IPTV is set to explode, and that alone adds $5/month from every user per 20Mbps (say per 4x HD channels). The $65 also includes inflation, so would be closer to $40 in todays dollars.




Like I said it doesn't really matter because the government is the owner, it will have a monopoly. 
It will put up the prices if it so wishes, no different to putting up electricity.
They just say "unfortunately we are losing too much money and have to put up prices".
Game over, ACCC butt out and mind your own business and by the way we castrated Telstra so you needn't think you can go there for alternative service.
It is so predictable it is sickening and when they have jacked up prices so N.B.N is profitable, they float it to Dad and Mum investors and make a killing.
Then, you guessed it they sic the ACCC on them and screw them over, heard it all before.


----------



## bellenuit

NBNMyths said:


> To achieve their forecast of $65 per customer by 2025, they are banking on a gradual move up the speed tiers. I don't see why that's unlikely when you consider the constant speed increases we have demanded for the last 15 years.




Yes, I am one of those who have gradually moved up the speed tiers in the last 15 years. I started at 9.6Kbps, I think, and today get about 20 to 30Mbps on a good day. My download quotas have increased in a similar manner.

The only thing is......  I have being paying LESS at each upgrade due to competition forcing prices downwards.

I don't know if consumers will be happy to pay more and more over time just keeping up with the increased demands of the evolving internet


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Like I said it doesn't really matter because the government is the owner, it will have a monopoly.
> It will put up the prices if it so wishes, no different to putting up electricity.
> They just say "unfortunately we are losing too much money and have to put up prices".
> Game over, ACCC butt out and mind your own business and by the way we castrated Telstra so you needn't think you can go there for alternative service.
> It is so predictable it is sickening and when they have jacked up prices so N.B.N is profitable, they float it to Dad and Mum investors and make a killing.
> Then, you guessed it they sic the ACCC on them and screw them over, heard it all before.




That's the whole point of the SAU with the ACCC. They can't "just jack up the prices".



bellenuit said:


> Yes, I am one of those who have gradually moved up the speed tiers in the last 15 years. I started at 9.6Kbps, I think, and today get about 20 to 30Mbps on a good day. My download quotas have increased in a similar manner.
> 
> The only thing is......  I have being paying LESS at each upgrade due to competition forcing prices downwards.
> 
> I don't know if consumers will be happy to pay more and more over time just keeping up with the increased demands of the evolving internet




Yes, I agree that prices for speed have been falling. And if you look at the NBN business case, they also forecast to lower their prices over time. However, they expect that the move up the speed tiers will be faster than the fall in their pricing.

I should also repeat, that while download limits have been increasing, total prices haven't really been falling over time:

In 1998 line rental was $11.65. It's about to hit $34. That's a 300% increase in 13 years. While line rental isn't broadband per se, it is a cost that most people have to pay in order to get broadband, and therefore is part of the Average Revenue Per User that the telco makes.

Look back at a few points in history:

In 1998 we were paying $11.65 line rental plus ~$20 for 56k dialup internet. That's a total of say $32 per user in 1998.

In 2001, Telstra charged $15 for line rental plus $29.95 for 256k ADSL1. A total per user of $45 per month. More speed, more data and more cost.

Currently, Telstra charge a minimum of $89 per month for a phone/ADSL2 bundle. Again, more speed, more data and more cost. There are cheaper providers out there for sure. But Telstra have 45-50% of the market, and the cheap providers are not available in very many exchanges (~400 of ~5000).

So while speeds and data allowances have indeed improved (ie, there is better value), the total price most people are paying has not actually gone down. Since ADSL2 appeared and ULL competition has been added to *some* exchanges, prices have fallen somewhat in those areas and download allowances have drastically increased. But speeds haven't improved. Once you're on ADSL2+, that's it and without the NBN (or something like it) there's no sign of that improving.


----------



## sptrawler

Nbnmyths, you can say what you like the SAU is something they put in place now but if it doesn't suit them later they can and will change it.
The ACCC forced Telstra to allow "cherry picking" by the other mutinationals which stripped shareholder value. 
Yet when the government want to get involved again they legislate to stop "cherry picking" or directly competing, because they say they can't make money if competitors cherry pick or supply competing services.
Then you have the audacity to say Telstra didn't spend shareholder money to upgrade the infrastructure for the multinationals to cherry pick on.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Nbnmyths, you can say what you like the SAU is something they put in place now but if it doesn't suit them later they can and will change it.
> The ACCC forced Telstra to allow "cherry picking" by the other mutinationals which stripped shareholder value.
> Yet when the government want to get involved again they legislate to stop "cherry picking" or directly competing, because they say they can't make money if competitors cherry pick or supply competing services.
> Then you have the audacity to say Telstra didn't spend shareholder money to upgrade the infrastructure for the multinationals to cherry pick on.




Any change to the SAU will have to be approved by the ACCC. It will be a binding document.

The problems between the ACCC and Telstra are long and complex, but have a lot to do with the vertical monopoly situation of Telstra. In the past, it didn't just come down to areas, but also the conflict Telstra have between their wholesale and retail divisions.


----------



## NBNMyths

The NBN have today signed fibre construction contracts for Victoria and Western Australia, adding to those already signed for NSW, ACT and QLD:

http://www.zdnet.com.au/nbn-co-inks-vic-wa-construction-deals-339321784.htm

Getting more expensive every day for the coalition to cancel it.


----------



## sptrawler

Yes nbnmyths, today I told my daughter, who is completely wireless, if it goes by your house and it's free get it pulled in, your tax is paying for it.
I did the same with foxtel 20yrs ago $19.00 free connection 1 months subsciption. Haven't had it since the month finished, but the connections good.
I wonder if it will end up the same for her, 20years later superceded.
Actually my other daughter is deaf, doesn't use a phone, I have told her the same.
So the connection rate should be great, service take up rate?


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Yes nbnmyths, today I told my daughter, who is completely wireless, if it goes by your house and it's free get it pulled in, your tax is paying for it.
> I did the same with foxtel 20yrs ago $19.00 free connection 1 months subsciption. Haven't had it since the month finished, but the connections good.
> I wonder if it will end up the same for her, 20years later superceded.
> Actually my other daughter is deaf, doesn't use a phone, I have told her the same.
> So the connection rate should be great, service take up rate?




Ignoring for a moment the fact that telcos, Governments and physicists/electrical engineers have made it blatantly clear that wireless does not have the capability to replace a fixed network in urban areas...

I don't deny that some households will opt for wireless-only connections, and the NBN assume 16% of households will take that option (up from 8% today).

NBN Co have made assumptions on what is known now, historic trends and future predictions about internet usage. And when you look at those, it's hard not to accept what NBN have to say. There's not really anyone in the industry that disputes them.

_Let me summarise and comment on some known facts:_

According to the ABS, the average monthly download is now 18GB. This has been growing at about 50% per year (compounded) since statistics began.

The largest download offered by Telstra over wireless broadband is 12GB/month.

_*The biggest wireless broadband carrier in Australia doesn't even offer a plan that copes with anywhere near the average current download.*​_
Also according to the ABS, for 2010 the number of ADSL connections grew by 300,000 but in the same period, the number of new dwellings only grew by 160,000.

_*There is no decline in the number of fixed connections. In fact, despite an almost saturated market, they are growing faster than new premises.​*_
Telstra's 12GB wireless broadband plan costs a staggering $90/month, and will provide typical speeds of maybe 10Mbps once upgraded to LTE.

Exetel's entry level NBN plan provides 20GB of data, at 12Mbps speeds for $34.50 per month.

_*Wireless is slower, offers about half the data volume and is three times more expensive than the NBN. That's a lot of money to pay for mobility.​*_ 
Now let me comment on the mobility argument. As I wrote, I agree that for some people, wireless will be a suitable solution. But they are a small minority for a few reasons.

Many young singles are heavily into video, music etc. These types of uses are unsuitable for wireless broadband. Download 2 movies from iTunes, and you've used almost all of Telstra's biggest plan.

For families, why on earth would you go wireless? The idea of mobility is gone, because as soon as Dad takes the broadband dongle to work with him, it leaves the household with no internet at all. You would have to be mad to spend $90/month for 12GB just to leave it at home, when you could get massively better value by just connecting to the NBN.

Same for businesses. Why on earth would any premises-based business have a wireless connection instead of a fixed one? What would they gain, apart from a much bigger bill?

Then there's the coverage problem. I live relatively close to Sydney, but even Telstra's NextG can only deliver me less than 1Mbps at home because of poor coverage. It only takes a hill to destroy the signal, and there are millions of people in similar situations.


----------



## Knobby22

I also would add to NBN scenario, the upcoming internet/TVs.

You will be downloading movies, games etc. through a central TV in your house.
People will pay for this as they pay for Foxtel (which is far inferior in my view and a waste of money), I would pay for it if I could get it with a local phone for $120 a month.

Wireless broadband will become the domain for phones and tablets in my view.


----------



## demiser

NBNMyths said:


> Now let me comment on the mobility argument. As I wrote, I agree that for some people, wireless will be a suitable solution. But they are a small minority for a few reasons.




Wrong.  Mobility comes up a lot, but are people talking about travelling with work, travel etc, or in their own home ?  The problem is both.

While I semi agree that the the market for real mobility is somewhat more select, there is definitely a growing niche for mobile communications (smart phones / laptops / and tablets).  Yes, this market is generally exclusive to the NBN target audience.

BUT, and it's a BIG BUT.  What about the inclusive argument ? and by this, I mean the people / families / business who want mobile internet within their premises ?  These are the people that want a broadband connection, but also want the mobility within their house.  They want to be able to use wifi on their laptops, use wifi on their phones when in the home, move the wifi printers around the house, and generally be able to connect different devices without the burden of cables.

Although the NBN can be used to compliment the above, the wifi router is still a bottle neck, and would someone on ADSL now using a wifi router really see any advantage with the NBN ?

Sure, technology improves, which means new home wifi routers may increase the speed and allow for faster wireless connections at home, but wouldn't this also allow for the possibility that with improved technology, wireless in general wouldn't also improve ?


----------



## medicowallet

Knobby22 said:


> I also would add to NBN scenario, the upcoming internet/TVs.
> 
> You will be downloading movies, games etc. through a central TV in your house.
> People will pay for this as they pay for Foxtel (which is far inferior in my view and a waste of money), I would pay for it if I could get it with a local phone for $120 a month.
> 
> Wireless broadband will become the domain for phones and tablets in my view.




And, as its intention is no doubt, you become a consumption slave to a $45 billion government owned monopoly.

There is no way, that this $45 billion investment, AND the cash it sucks out of consumers will ever be offset by any miniscule increase in exports it will provide.

It is a purely consumption initiative. ADSL2 is sufficient for homes, businesses have fast internet already.

A joke of a government with a joke of a policy.


----------



## NBNMyths

demiser said:


> Although the NBN can be used to compliment the above, the wifi router is still a bottle neck, and would someone on ADSL now using a wifi router really see any advantage with the NBN ?
> 
> Sure, technology improves, which means new home wifi routers may increase the speed and allow for faster wireless connections at home, but wouldn't this also allow for the possibility that with improved technology, wireless in general wouldn't also improve ?




It is ADSL that's the bottleneck, not the WiFi router. The current top speed for WiFi is about 300Mbps, with 54Mbps having been around for several years now. So yes, people using WiFi will most certainly notice the speed difference.


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> businesses have fast internet already.




Possibly the most factually inaccurate statement I have ever read on this topic.

Seriously, you really believe that? If so, you should get out more.


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> It is ADSL that's the bottleneck, not the WiFi router. The current top speed for WiFi is about 300Mbps, with 54Mbps having been around for several years now. So yes, people using WiFi will most certainly notice the speed difference.




How many billions will it cost Australians to upgrade every wifi router in every house, wiring, and every single wifi device to get to 300Mbps

Consumption at its finest.

MW

PS 

What productive endeavours will people at home be able to achieve with this new found consumption device?


----------



## Knobby22

medicowallet said:


> And, as its intention is no doubt, you become a consumption slave to a $45 billion government owned monopoly.




I don't have a problem with that. Someone will own the infrastructure. The government owned the phone lines for many years. Electricity used to be run by the SECV in Victoria and it ws pretty much the cheapest worldwide. Now we have Singaporte and HongKong basewd consortiums running them. Power is now expensive and reduction in maintenance has caused a bushfire in Horsham, the court case presently going on.



medicowallet said:


> There is no way, that this $45 billion investment, AND the cash it sucks out of consumers will ever be offset by any miniscule increase in exports it will provide. .




True. But everything isn't measured by how much export income it brings. It will help.



medicowallet said:


> It is a purely consumption initiative. ADSL2 is sufficient for homes, businesses have fast internet already.
> 
> A joke of a government with a joke of a policy.




The policy isn't perfect but it is hardly a joke. It will be a real boon to country towns and give the opportunity for businesses (including small biusinesses) to operate out of the major cities.


----------



## demiser

NBNMyths said:


> Possibly the most factually inaccurate statement I have ever read on this topic.
> 
> Seriously, you really believe that? If so, you should get out more.




How is this inaccurate ? Buisnesses that are within metro regions and want to have a 1gig connection only need to sign up to get it.


----------



## demiser

NBNMyths said:


> It is ADSL that's the bottleneck, not the WiFi router. The current top speed for WiFi is about 300Mbps, with 54Mbps having been around for several years now. So yes, people using WiFi will most certainly notice the speed difference.




How many of your devices are running at 300mbps ? At what about the average joe on the steet ?

My point was that if the NBN was to install fibre to a house today, how much 'extra' would the average person get out of it ?

Sure as time progresses, various house hold items will be churned, but considering the life time of some devices it ain't going to be over night, and by the time it does happen, the NBN will still be as useless as it is today.


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> How many billions will it cost Australians to upgrade every wifi router in every house, wiring, and every single wifi device to get to 300Mbps
> 
> Consumption at its finest.




Why do you need to upgrade any wiring?

My guess is that people will upgrade their WiFi routers as required. I have one from 2009 that already does 150Mbps. The vast majority of NBN customers are forecast to be on 12, 25 and 50Mbps plans for quite some time, so the standard 54Mbps WiFi will do them easily without need for replacement. The vast majority of people are already using either 54 (2003) or 100-300 (2009) WiFi. This includes routers and devices, so there's no need to upgrade them to get the speeds the NBN will provide.

BTW, what's the problem with consumption? Without it, we wouldn't have an economy.

Apart from the obvious parts like the retail sector, the mining industry depends on consumption. If people weren't buying cars, houses, TVs, phones, WiFi routers etc etc etc, then there wouldn't be a market for our raw materials.

Sorry to burst your reality, but consumption makes the World go around.


----------



## sptrawler

Yep, the pensioners will be able to put the router next to their set top box. LOL


----------



## NBNMyths

demiser said:


> How is this inaccurate ? Buisnesses that are within metro regions and want to have a 1gig connection only need to sign up to get it.




For starters, because not all businesses are in metro regions.  The vast, vast majority of businesses have access to nothing more than ADSL2+, unless they are willing to pay the incredible prices for a private connection.

Only enormous businesses can afford a "1 gig" connection currently. I haven't checked recently, but when I last checked in 2007 I was quoted $18,000 for a fibre connection to my SOHO business (3km from an exchange, in a city 2hrs from Sydney CBD), plus ~$3,000 per month for a 30/30Mbps service. I shudder to think what they'd charge for a 1Gbps connection.

How many small and medium businesses can justify $4k per month for internet? Especially when you consider that the NBN would provide that for zero installation cost, plus about $80 per month for a 50/20 connection. 

$80 v $3,000. Hmmm. That's a toughie.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Interesting developments today.

It appears that on the NBN, that those who need it , the poor and unwell, can't afford it, and those who can afford it, the affluent and rich, don't need it.

Business Plan 101 it ain't.

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Interesting developments today.
> 
> It appears that on the NBN, that those who need it , the poor and unwell, can't afford it, and those who can afford it, the affluent and rich, don't need it.
> 
> Business Plan 101 it ain't.
> 
> gg




Yes, another demonstrably false beatup in the Oz, repeated on the LOLbolt blog. Never let the facts get in the way of a good anti-NBN/ALP rant. 

As NBN co have always said, a 1Mbps upload speed (ie the theoretical -but unobtainable- maximum you can get on ADSL2+) is not sufficient for HD video conferencing. For this, you need to go to the next speed, the 25/5 plan.

The Australia nicely quote Internode's (quite reasonable) pricing, which puts the cheapest 25/5 plan at $69.95 per month (including a phone and $10 of calls). This is less than most people pay today for ADSL, and much less than Telstra's current ADSL entry level bundle.

They fail though to quote Exetel's NBN pricing (I guess since it would make their story moot), which has 25/5 NBN pricing starting at $37.50 per month. *That's 25% cheaper than any phone+ADSL2 service available today.* Therefore, if the poor/unwell can currently afford phone+ADSL, then they can certainly afford 25/5 on the NBN since it's 25% cheaper. It's also only $3/month more than their entry level which is $34.50.

I wonder what more the NBN could do? They are providing a service with 3x faster downloads and 6x faster uploads than the current average, for 25% _less_ money than the cheapest bundle available over copper today. Just goes to show that some people are so blindly opposed to the NBN and/or the ALP that absolutely nothing could be produced that would appease them. Yet those same people will be yelling from the rooftops with praise if the coalition policy delivers them 12Mbps for $50/month.


----------



## sails

Do we really need 100mbps?

This is what we are getting and there is very little delay in loading pages. And I see we are slower thatn 60% of Australians - NBN seems a massive overkill.  A little more speed would be good, but 100 mbps seems quite unnecessary for the average home user.


----------



## NBNMyths

demiser said:


> How many of your devices are running at 300mbps ? At what about the average joe on the steet ?
> 
> My point was that if the NBN was to install fibre to a house today, how much 'extra' would the average person get out of it ?
> 
> Sure as time progresses, various house hold items will be churned, but considering the life time of some devices it ain't going to be over night, and by the time it does happen, the NBN will still be as useless as it is today.




I have a router capable of 150Mbps and a laptop that is capable of 300Mbps. I have a TV capable of 150Mbps (though it will never need it) plus an old airport express at 54Mbps plus two iPhones and an iPad that (I believe) can also do 150Mbps.

What the "average" person will get out of it depends on what standard their router and devices support. If they are 802.11g (ie the 2003 standard), then they will be able to get roughly 54Mbps, assuming they choose a fast enough NBN plan. If they have an 802.11n router (the 2009 standard), then they could get anywhere between 100 and 600Mbps depending on the channel bonding level supported by their router and devices. Most WiFi devices these days support 300Mbps.

Whatever they have though, the NBN will make a significant difference to their capability. The ADSL2+ average in Australia is only 8-9Mbps, which is obviously far below any WiFi device capacity.

Why is the NBN useless? What would you prefer?


----------



## NBNMyths

sails said:


> Do we really need 100mbps?
> 
> This is what we are getting and there is very little delay in loading pages. And I see we are slower thatn 60% of Australians - NBN seems a massive overkill.  A little more speed would be good, but 100 mbps seems quite unnecessary for the average home user.




Then don't take the 100Mbps plan. That's the beauty of the NBN. If you are happy with the speeds you get, take the entry level at $35/month. You'll save 30% on what you pay now (and get 2x the speed to boot). In the future when you require more speed, you can gradually increase it. People who want 100Mbps now will pay for it, subsidising your cheap plan.

Saying what you have now copes and therefore the NBN is a waste is incredibly short sighted. 10 years ago, 128kbps ADSL1 seemed to cope perfectly with the needs then. But would it cope now? Of course not. The NBN isn't just about satisfying the need _right now_. It's about satisfying our future needs, and copper cannot do that. Considering the time it takes to roll out new networks, you need to plan for the future, not the present.

Imagine if they'd built the Sydney Harbour Bridge with 2 lanes, because "that will cope perfectly well with current demands".

People really don't get this. It's also not about loading web pages. It's about multiple users, video, uploads, conversations. It's about the rapid move towards broadband being the centre of our lives. Learning, medicine, entertainment, services, the cloud.

Here's an experiment for you though. Let's pretend you have a family using the internet at the same time.

Open three browser windows.

In the first, go to NASA.gov and watch a video of the Mars rover.

While that loads, open a skype conversation with your mother.

While that's happening, upload a album of photos to facebook.

_Now_ tell me how fast a web page loads.​ 
The cloud is probably the next big thing. Try running that with your 240kbps upload speed. It would take _a month_ to back up an average hard drive for the first time!


----------



## sails

NBNMyths said:


> If you are happy with the speeds you get, take the entry level at $35/month. You'll save 30% on what you pay now (and get 2x the speed to boot)....




I will? ? ?

We pay lass then $40 now - maybe get your facts straight before spewing out propaganda...

And I would love to talk to my mother on Skype.  Unfortunately they don't have Skype in heaven...


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> That's the beauty of the NBN. If you are happy with the speeds you get, take the entry level at $35/month. You'll save 30% on what you pay now




+ the $40 - $50 billion of capital outlay/ working taxpayers= $35 + some.


----------



## NBNMyths

sails said:


> I will? ? ?
> 
> We pay lass then $40 now - maybe get your facts straight before spewing out propaganda...




You pay "less than $40", plus $30 in line rental = ~$70 total per month.

There's no "line rental" on the NBN, as the price is a total which is all inclusive of phone + broadband. So in your case, Exetel's $34.50 entry level plan is 2x faster for about half what you currently pay.

Hows _them_ facts? 

A nice illustration of just how poorly informed the public is about what the NBN plans include, no thanks to the media who constantly fail to compare apples with apples. In none of the Oz's articles have they made mention that there's no line rental cost attached to the NBN plans and they include a phone "line" (and calls too in Internode's case).


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> You pay "less than $40", plus $30 in line rental = ~$70 total per month.
> 
> There's no "line rental" on the NBN, as the price is a total which is all inclusive of phone + broadband. So in your case, Exetel's $34.50 entry level plan is 2x faster for about half what you currently pay.
> 
> Hows _them_ facts?
> 
> A nice illustration of just how poorly informed the public is about what the NBN plans include, no thanks to the media who constantly fail to compare apples with apples. In none of the Oz's articles have they made mention that there's no line rental cost attached to the NBN plans and they include a phone "line" (and calls too in Internode's case).




a $40billion plus investment for a product that provides naked ADSL2 like performance with less download quota.

RIP OFF

OR faster speeds at ripoff monopoly pricing.

http://www.tpg.com.au/products_services/ull_pricing.php

Take a look here, and the ACCC and govt could provide this quite easily, with limited compensation.


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> Why do you need to upgrade any wiring?
> 
> My guess is that people will upgrade their WiFi routers as required. I have one from 2009 that already does 150Mbps. The vast majority of NBN customers are forecast to be on 12, 25 and 50Mbps plans for quite some time, so the standard 54Mbps WiFi will do them easily without need for replacement. The vast majority of people are already using either 54 (2003) or 100-300 (2009) WiFi. This includes routers and devices, so there's no need to upgrade them to get the speeds the NBN will provide.
> 
> BTW, what's the problem with consumption? Without it, we wouldn't have an economy.
> 
> Apart from the obvious parts like the retail sector, the mining industry depends on consumption. If people weren't buying cars, houses, TVs, phones, WiFi routers etc etc etc, then there wouldn't be a market for our raw materials.
> 
> Sorry to burst your reality, but consumption makes the World go around.




A VAST majority run wireless G which is not fast enough for the faster speeds.

Consumption is great, in moderation, because, as you might not understand, we are in a world market where people are ramping up offerings better than ours (both in mining and manufacturing) and we need to position ourselves in a much more stable place.

and the NBN investment will not do that.

Can you quantify the increase in exports directly linked to the transition from ADSL1 to ADSL2?   

Why would ADSL2 to NBN be any different?


----------



## sails

NBNMyths said:


> You pay "less than $40", plus $30 in line rental = ~$70 total per month.
> 
> There's no "line rental" on the NBN, as the price is a total which is all inclusive of phone + broadband. So in your case, Exetel's $34.50 entry level plan is 2x faster for about half what you currently pay.
> 
> Hows _them_ facts?
> 
> A nice illustration of just how poorly informed the public is about what the NBN plans include, no thanks to the media who constantly fail to compare apples with apples. In none of the Oz's articlen that there's no line rental cost attached to the NBN plans and they include a phone "line" (and calls too in Internode's case).




Nice illustration of how* little you know...*

We are on broadband cable.  Don't need line rental, mr smarty pants...

Try and get your facts straight.  *You clearly know very little*.


----------



## NBNMyths

sails said:


> Nice illustration of how* little you know...*
> 
> We are on broadband cable.  Don't need line rental, mr smarty pants...
> 
> Try and get your facts straight.  *You clearly know very little*.




Wow, that's even worse. You're on _cable_ and you only get 6Mbps??? You'd better tell Malcolm Turnbull, since he's under the impression cable will deliver 100Mbps. 

Anyway...So you're on broadband cable, and you pay Telstra a TOTAL of less than $40 per month for a phone _and_ broadband? *I think not.*

Telstra's cheapest standalone cable broadband is $49.95 per month (with 2GB data and no phone). Or, $39.95 per month if you do have a home phone (ie are spending another $30 per month for that). Like I said, paying $70 per month for much, much less than the NBN would give you for $35.

How about we just stick to the facts huh, instead of leaving out half of them.


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> A VAST majority run wireless G which is not fast enough for the faster speeds.
> 
> Consumption is great, in moderation, because, as you might not understand, we are in a world market where people are ramping up offerings better than ours (both in mining and manufacturing) and we need to position ourselves in a much more stable place.
> 
> and the NBN investment will not do that.
> 
> Can you quantify the increase in exports directly linked to the transition from ADSL1 to ADSL2?
> 
> Why would ADSL2 to NBN be any different?




As I wrote, Wireless G will cope with all but the fastest NBN plan. And I suspect that people signing up for 100Mbps would either have an N router, or be happy to buy one (You can get a decent one for $60 these days, or plenty of Telcos will give you one if you sign up for 2 years).

So who chooses what level/type of consumption is good and what's bad? Can you give some examples of each, and why they are good or bad?


----------



## sptrawler

sptrawler said:


> Oakeshott came out with a classic today, he wants Conroy to explain to the Australian people the productivity improvements and the jobs that will be created by the N.B.N.
> Conroy would have already spelled it out, if he knew.
> Also wouldn't you think, as the chairman of the joint parliamentary committee of the N.B.N, Oakeshott would already have the answers.
> It just goes to show another government stuff up about to explode.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...h-says-oakeshott/story-fn59niix-1226126660341




Obviously Conroy can't answer the question.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...forum-in-october/story-e6frg90f-1226134005712

Just shows these idiots don't know what they are doing, now they are going to ask people to come up with the job ideas for their stupid N.B.N and carbon tax policies.
Thats because they haven't got any idea if it will create jobs and in all probability will cause loss of jobs.
Oakeshott must be wondering what he has got himself tied up in, well more fool him.
IMO


----------



## medicowallet

sptrawler said:


> Obviously Conroy can't answer the question.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...forum-in-october/story-e6frg90f-1226134005712
> 
> Just shows these idiots don't know what they are doing, now they are going to ask people to come up with the job ideas for their stupid N.B.N and carbon tax policies.
> Thats because they haven't got any idea if it will create jobs and in all probability will cause loss of jobs.
> Oakeshott must be wondering what he has got himself tied up in, well more fool him.
> IMO




I would like him to do this, AND do projections for net exports/imports for the country AND the costs vs current ADSL2

He won't, cause he knows the answers. 

A RIP OFF $45 billion endeavour to increase consumption and government revenue.


----------



## stacks

medicowallet said:


> I would like him to do this, AND do projections for net exports/imports for the country AND the costs vs current ADSL2
> 
> He won't, cause he knows the answers.
> 
> A RIP OFF $45 billion endeavour to increase consumption and government revenue.




Do you seriously think that the aim of the NBN is " to increase consumption and government revenue" ? 

Come on, you seem like an intelligent person so I hope you are not serious. Debate about the merits or the best way to go about providing fast internet is fair enough, but to say that the above is the agenda of the government in building the NBN is ridiculous to say the least...


----------



## medicowallet

stacks said:


> Do you seriously think that the aim of the NBN is " to increase consumption and government revenue" ?
> 
> Come on, you seem like an intelligent person so I hope you are not serious. Debate about the merits or the best way to go about providing fast internet is fair enough, but to say that the above is the agenda of the government in building the NBN is ridiculous to say the least...




In the absence of a business case that proves that it will generate export dollars for the country, yes I do believe that the only use for the NBN is for consumption.

What is that alternative agenda?


----------



## stacks

medicowallet said:


> In the absence of a business case that proves that it will generate export dollars for the country, yes I do believe that the only use for the NBN is for consumption.
> 
> What is that alternative agenda?




So the only aim of any government investment should be export dollars for the country?? And the only use for the NBN is consumption?? Again, that is ridiculous...


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Obviously Conroy can't answer the question.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...forum-in-october/story-e6frg90f-1226134005712
> 
> Just shows these idiots don't know what they are doing, now they are going to ask people to come up with the job ideas for their stupid N.B.N and carbon tax policies.
> Thats because they haven't got any idea if it will create jobs and in all probability will cause loss of jobs.
> Oakeshott must be wondering what he has got himself tied up in, well more fool him.
> IMO




On the original article, I'd like to point out that the committee hasn't questioned whether those benefits exist, they have stated that the Govt needs to do a better job of articulating them. I agree. The report is actually quite useful and comprehensive, and there were numerous recommendations. Perhaps you should take a read.

As for jobs, well there will be the 20,000 people who will be up-skilled and directly employed rolling out the network over the next 8 years. Then there will be another thousand new employees at the manufacturing facilities of Corning and Prysmian in Sydney and Melbourne. Then there will probably be several thousand more who will get jobs indirectly from the rollout.

Aside from the rollout itself, you may not be aware that Deloitte Access Economics released a *report* last month that found that *there are 190,000 Australians currently employed in occupations directly related to the internet*. They expect this to *increase by 80,000 in the next 5 years as the NBN is rolled out.*

The Government have already articulated many benefits and uses for the NBN, and they will continue to do so I'm sure.

But surely, anyone with even a fraction of a brain must realise that many benefits which will come from high speed networks cannot yet be articulated, because they haven't been invented yet. Are there really people out there who are so short-sighted that they believe every use for broadband has already been invented and implemented?

Do you think, if asked 100 years ago, that Alexander Graham Bell could have forecast the future uses for his invention? Or forecast how many millions of people would be employed building and maintaining it, or directly and indirectly through its use?

I think I'll finish with a quote from acclaimed Professor Rod Tucker, awarded the Australia Prize in 1997 by PM John Howard for his services to telecommunications: 

*An enduring characteristic of human nature is our inability to understand and accept the rate of technological change and its impact on society.*




medicowallet said:


> I would like him to do this, AND do projections for net exports/imports for the country AND the costs vs current ADSL2




You do realise, don't you, that even the coalition are no longer proposing that we stick with basic ADSL2? They are now proposing a gradual improvement through fibre to the node and HFC cable upgrades.

The same Deloitte Access Economics report linked to above also found numerous other facts relating to the internet and broadband in Australia, and the impact of the NBN:


The internet currently provides $27 billion pa in productivity savings in Australia

The internet provides $53bn pa in household savings in Australia

They predict the internet sector will grow at double the rate of the general economy.

The internet directly contributes $50 billion to the Australian economy (the same as iron ore exports), and this will grow by $20 billion over the next 5 years. 

They base these expectations on *"the rollout of the National Broadband Network connecting more Australians at higher speeds, government and business making better use of the internet, and government developing a policy framework that supports investment and innovation in the internet economy."*

I suppose you know the economy better than Deloitte Access?


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> In the absence of a business case that proves that it will generate export dollars for the country, yes I do believe that the only use for the NBN is for consumption.
> 
> What is that alternative agenda?




Oh gee, I don't know. What could we possibly use a fast data network for?

Hmmm. 

How about improving education and the availability of information?

How about improving and distributing scientific research (eg: the NBN already contributing to the incredible SKA telescope bid)
_ (personally, education and scientific research are my big tips)_

How about improving productivity through a reduction in business waiting and down times?

How about improving the ability of SOHO business to develop and compete with larger and offshore businesses?

How about reducing vehicle traffic through viable telecommuting?

How about facilitating home healthcare in certain circumstances?

How about reducing the burden of aged care?

How about reducing household costs by providing expanded business and government services online?


*BTW, you never did define good and bad consumption and how the determination is made. I am really looking forward to your reply on that....*


----------



## sptrawler

Oh well, with all these new jobs we should see a reversal of the trend in unemployment very quickly.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> As for jobs, well there will be the 20,000 people who will be up-skilled and directly employed rolling out the network over the next 8 years. Then there will be another thousand new employees at the manufacturing facilities of Corning and Prysmian in Sydney and Melbourne. Then there will probably be several thousand more who will get jobs indirectly from the rollout.




As with everything else this Government says, it has a habit of falling short.

http://www.theage.com.au/business/b...-falls-short-by-thousands-20110925-1krmo.html


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> As with everything else this Government says, it has a habit of falling short.
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/business/b...-falls-short-by-thousands-20110925-1krmo.html




Does whether there are 16,000 or 20,000 really make a difference in deciding if the project should go ahead or not?

I would have thought you blokes would be happy about it. Fewer workers means lower costs. Perhaps the reason for the budget being revised down from $43bn to $36.9?

Given the gradual rise in unemployment and the looming possibility of another global recession, beginning a project that will employ 16,000 Australians for the next 8 years must surely be something you'd be supporting?

_Using my crystal ball....._Assuming the NBN is in volume rollout in 2013 and we see a federal election where the Coalition get in, at a time when we have an unemployment rate of 7% and rising.

.....Would you still support the axing of the project then? Putting those 16,000 people out of work? What would that do to the economy? How many downstream jobs would also be lost? The loss of the NBN workforce _alone_ would result in a 0.2% increase in the unemployment rate.

Man, you guys are funny. On one hand criticising the Govt for employing too many people generally, then criticising when the numbers are revised down for this project.

Just goes to show the blind opposition you have to this and any other ALP project. If it were the Coalition announcing these changes, you'd be applauding them as demonstrating their "superior management skills".


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Does whether there are 16,000 or 20,000 really make a difference in deciding if the project should go ahead or not?
> 
> I would have thought you blokes would be happy about it. Fewer workers means lower costs. Perhaps the reason for the budget being revised down from $43bn to $36.9?
> 
> Given the gradual rise in unemployment and the looming possibility of another global recession, beginning a project that will employ 16,000 Australians for the next 8 years must surely be something you'd be supporting?
> 
> _Using my crystal ball....._Assuming the NBN is in volume rollout in 2013 and we see a federal election where the Coalition get in, at a time when we have an unemployment rate of 7% and rising.
> 
> .....Would you still support the axing of the project then? Putting those 16,000 people out of work? What would that do to the economy? How many downstream jobs would also be lost? The loss of the NBN workforce _alone_ would result in a 0.2% increase in the unemployment rate.
> 
> Man, you guys are funny. On one hand criticising the Govt for employing too many people generally, then criticising when the numbers are revised down for this project.
> 
> Just goes to show the blind opposition you have to this and any other ALP project. If it were the Coalition announcing these changes, you'd be applauding them as demonstrating their "superior management skills".




Actualy you probably have a valid point there, it will provide employment through this next rough patch we are heading for. Also it it past the project development stage and is ramping up. 
There you go nbnmyths, you've made me feel better allready.
I knew if we kept talking we would find common ground.


----------



## dutchie

NBNMyths said:


> Does whether there are 16,000 or 20,000 really make a difference in deciding if the project should go ahead or not?
> 
> I would have thought you blokes would be happy about it. Fewer workers means lower costs. Perhaps the reason for the budget being revised down from $43bn to $36.9?
> 
> Given the gradual rise in unemployment and the looming possibility of another global recession, beginning a project that will employ 16,000 Australians for the next 8 years must surely be something you'd be supporting?
> 
> _Using my crystal ball....._Assuming the NBN is in volume rollout in 2013 and we see a federal election where the Coalition get in, at a time when we have an unemployment rate of 7% and rising.
> 
> .....Would you still support the axing of the project then? Putting those 16,000 people out of work? What would that do to the economy? How many downstream jobs would also be lost? The loss of the NBN workforce _alone_ would result in a 0.2% increase in the unemployment rate.
> 
> Man, you guys are funny. On one hand criticising the Govt for employing too many people generally, then criticising when the numbers are revised down for this project.
> 
> Just goes to show the blind opposition you have to this and any other ALP project. If it were the Coalition announcing these changes, you'd be applauding them as demonstrating their "superior management skills".





How about spending the money, and thus creating the jobs, on a more worthwhile project(s) - like some dams in the north, improving ports, roads, hospitals etc etc.


----------



## sptrawler

dutchie said:


> How about spending the money, and thus creating the jobs, on a more worthwhile project(s) - like some dams in the north, improving ports, roads, hospitals etc etc.




It's already past that point, there is a lot of contracts already let, so the best we can hope for is the scale is reduced.


----------



## NBNMyths

dutchie said:


> How about spending the money, and thus creating the jobs, on a more worthwhile project(s) - like some dams in the north, improving ports, roads, hospitals etc etc.




That issue has been covered numerous times, but I'll repeat it concisely.

The NBN is forecast to provide a return. That is, all of the money invested (including any interest) is forecast to be paid back. This makes it off-budget. If you wanted to redirect the money to dams, hospitals etc etc, then they would also have to provide a return, which they wouldn't. This would mean the spend goes on-budget, and must be found from consolidated revenue.

If the other projects _did _provide a return (say you build a dam, and charge farmers enough for the water to enable the dam to break even), then there's no reason we couldn't do them as well as build the NBN.

I'd also like to point out on the subject of hospitals, for example, that even if the NBN didn't provide a return, and all of its $27bn 10-year govt investment were to be paid from the budget, it would still represent less that 0.3% of what Australian Governments will spend on public healthcare over the next 10 years. ($27billion v $1200billion).


----------



## NBNMyths

*Latest ABS internet stats back need for NBN*

The ABS have just released their latest stats about internet use in Australia. 

Just has industry commentators have always said, they show that while wireless is the fastest growing sector by _number of connections_, those connections are _not_ coming at the expense of fixed lines which also continue to grow at a faster rate than the growth in new premises, despite an almost saturated market.

More interesting is the explosive growth in the volume of data downloaded over fixed-line networks (ADSL, Cable and fibre), which increased by an incredible 46% in the last 6 months. The largest increase for any 6-month period since statistics have been recorded.

Total data volume downloaded over fixed lines grew 81 Terabytes (TB) to 255TB from December 2010 to June 2011. Over the same period, the total downloaded over mobile broadband grew 2.5TB to 19TB.

The average data consumed per connection grew 15GB to 49GB for fixed lines, while the average per connection _decreased_ 0.1GB to 4GB for wireless.

*This data again demonstrates that wireless and fixed are complementary services, with wireless being used for low volume mobility, while the fixed network is used for the vast (and increasing) majority of "heavy lifting".
*

The largest plan offered on Telstra's new 4G wireless broadband network (15GB for $100 per month) does not even provide 1/3 of the average fixed line monthly download, making it totally unusable as a replacement for an average ADSL or cable connection. There is not a single mobile wireless broadband plan offered by _any_ provider that includes sufficient data to supply the average monthly download volume of fixed lines.

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/8153.0/


----------



## IFocus

NBNMyths said:


> That issue has been covered numerous times, but I'll repeat it concisely.
> 
> The NBN is forecast to provide a return. That is, all of the money invested (including any interest) is forecast to be paid back.




you wont read about that in the Australian.

It drives me nuts when people go on about the cost, you have summed it up well Myths fact is even if we only get 1/2 the money back it is still a worthy project.

Interesting that the Coalition have gone quite on the NBN do you think we will still get fibre to the home after the next election given the Coalition are really a shoe in for government?


----------



## boofhead

Judging by Turnball at some thing in the last couple of days, he's still fighting against it.

Surprising Coalition don't really have much positive stuff to do with broadband with Turnball and Fletcher onboard. Nothing much that variations of their past policies that leave gaps, haves and havenots.


----------



## So_Cynical

iinet have just released there new NBN plans... basically anything you want starting at just $49.95 per month going up to the top of the range 500 GIG plan at $99.95 per month.

http://www.iinet.net.au/nbn/
~


----------



## todster

dutchie said:


> How about spending the money, and thus creating the jobs, on a more worthwhile project(s) - like some dams in the north, improving ports, roads, hospitals etc etc.




You have been a member since 2004 out of interest did you have this attitude when the Libs were sitting on a  huge surplus.


----------



## Bill M

Oh dear, another rainy night which = poor wireless internet. I can't get ADSL so have to live with it, (I'm on pair gain rubbish). Bring on the NBN, I could really use an internet service that actually works.


----------



## todster

Bill M said:


> Oh dear, another rainy night which = poor wireless internet. I can't get ADSL so have to live with it, (I'm on pair gain rubbish). Bring on the NBN, I could really use an internet service that actually works.




Same boat


----------



## DB008

Bill M said:


> Oh dear, another rainy night which = poor wireless internet. I can't get ADSL so have to live with it, (I'm on pair gain rubbish). Bring on the NBN, I could really use an internet service that actually works.




Bill M,
When do you expect to get NBN where you live?


----------



## Bill M

DB008 said:


> Bill M,
> When do you expect to get NBN where you live?



 I really don't know but by just doing a few checks right now only tells me sometime from 2012 to 2018. That's for Central Coast NSW. Is there any way of getting a definitive answer?


----------



## sptrawler

Oh well have to resurect this one again. Apparently all is not going well, cost blowouts and slipping time frames.
It may be back to the future for Labor and big projects.
Hopefully nbnmyths can give us an update on cost per connection, word is the cost has doubled.


----------



## todster

sptrawler said:


> Oh well have to resurect this one again. Apparently all is not going well, cost blowouts and slipping time frames.
> It may be back to the future for Labor and big projects.
> Hopefully nbnmyths can give us an update on cost per connection, word is the cost has doubled.




How many big projects run on time or budget?
Look at the Pluto LNG project.


----------



## dutchie

todster said:


> You have been a member since 2004 out of interest did you have this attitude when the Libs were sitting on a  huge surplus.




Hi Todster

Sorry about the delay in replying (slipped thro' the system).

A good question and to be honest I am not really sure how I felt back in 2004 (my how the years fly).

I suppose it depends on the economic situation at the time.

I just feel that:
1. Its always good to have a surplus for a rainy day. Which was used by Labor when storm clouds where looming (how effectively is another matter).
2. this government does not have a good record in spending money.
3. although an ideal to aspire to (fast internet for everyone) perhaps not the best way to go about it:- 
Wireless or other technologies improving before NBN is completed.
Govt. money instead of free enterprise (always dangerous for taxpayers)
4. Probable blow out of cost to implement.
5. There are other projects which would make us more prosperous.
    New infrastructure for mining industry and opening up WA
    Better roads and possibly rail.
    Better funding of hospitals etc

Cheers

dutchie


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Hopefully nbnmyths can give us an update on cost per connection, word is the cost has doubled.




The only person saying that is Kevin Morgan, who has been a staunch critic of the NBN since day one.

On the topic of his figures, perhaps NBN boss Mike Quigley summed it up best, when he said something along the lines of "How would Mr Morgan know?".

There's quite a good writeup about Morgan's ridiculous criticisms here, from someone who isn't a huge fan of the NBN:
http://delimiter.com.au/2011/10/13/nbn-critics-cant-you-do-better-than-this/

_We’ve come to expect this kind of approach from Bolt when it comes to the NBN. Far more disturbing, however, is this opinion article which appeared in The Australian newspaper (where else?) this morning, and is referred to in Bolt’s second post on the NBN, entitled ‘National Blowout Network’. Published by self-styled “independent” telecommunications consultant Kevin Morgan, the article also cites the Economist report, but goes far further than Bolt’s brief missive, arguing that NBN Co chief Mike Quigley needs to explain “what value is being delivered by the network”, why the NBN Co “gravy train” of costs is exploding, and why there is “pork-barrelling” in the NBN rollout in Tasmania.

*To put it mildly, I was flabberghasted that anyone who calls themselves a “telecommunications consultant” could write such tripe.*

I wondered as I read the article … who, faced with this garbage, would employ Kevin Morgan as a consultant of any kind? I did a quick Google search for his name, but couldn’t find his organisation’s web site. Is Mr Morgan, in fact, employed? Or, the Google search results appears to imply, does he merely spend his days ensconced in his basement, writing rant after rant about the evils of government-funded optical fibre rollouts, like some modern-day digital Ebenezer Scrooge?_​Click through for the rest...


----------



## Knobby22

I was having a holiday recently on Hamilton Island and all I could get was the Australian or the Courier mail.  Bought the Australian every day.

It really has got less in it these days from what I remember and plenty of bias and hearsay. It may as well call itself the Courier Mail. I bet many people in Queensland don't buy papers if that is the best there is to offer.

Another fact you won't find in the Australian, most people support the NBN project.


----------



## NBNMyths

dutchie said:


> 1. Its always good to have a surplus for a rainy day. Which was used by Labor when storm clouds where looming (how effectively is another matter).



Yes, but not at the cost of running down infrastructure. There's no point having a few billion dollars in the bank if the roads are in gridlock, the schools are falling apart, hospital waiting lists are blowing out and businesses in Sydney are stuck on satellite internet.


> 2. this government does not have a good record in spending money.



In some cases that's quite true. But the same can be said of any Government. I might also point out that if you don't invest in any projects, then there's no opportunity to spend too much on them!



> 3. although an ideal to aspire to (fast internet for everyone) perhaps not the best way to go about it:-
> Wireless or other technologies improving before NBN is completed.
> Govt. money instead of free enterprise (always dangerous for taxpayers)




The technology decisions of the NBN are those recommended by technology experts as the best solutions. There are no tech experts predicting wireless will ever eclipse the capability of fibre, that argument is strictly one of technological incompetents like Andrew Bolt and Alan Jones. Seriously, go and find a SINGLE telecommunications company that thinks/says wireless can replace fixed networks in urban areas. There simply isn't one. There are no other technologies with a prospect either.

Yes, it's true that there is a risk to "taxpayer's" money. But the same could be said of any Government spending. We could spend money on roads, only to have teleportation invented in the next decade. But, there aren't any physicists saying that's likely, just as there aren;t any telecommunication engineers saying fibre will be obsolete anytime soon.



> 4. Probable blow out of cost to implement.




So because the cost of something may "blow out" that's a reason to just do nothing? Should we apply that reason to everything we do, or just to Government projects? Or just to the NBN? If not, what makes it different to everything else?



> 5. There are other projects which would make us more prosperous.
> New infrastructure for mining industry and opening up WA
> Better roads and possibly rail.
> Better funding of hospitals etc




We've been through this several times. The NBN provides a return. It doesn't effect our ability to invest in other projects. You can't simply "redirect" the NBN money unless....

a) Whatever you redirect it to also provides a return (eg: a toll road); OR
b) You find the money in the budget.

Either way though, whether the NBN is built or not makes not one iota of difference.

I'd also like to point out that even if the NBN provided zero return, and every cent of the $27bn Govt investment was on-budget. That is still less than 3% of the money Australian Governments will spend on public healthcare over the 10 year build of the NBN. What would we have to show for it if we increased the public health budget by 3% over 10 years do you think?


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> So because the cost of something may "blow out" that's a reason to just do nothing? Should we apply that reason to everything we do, or just to Government projects? Or just to the NBN? If not, what makes it different to everything else?
> 
> We've been through this several times. The NBN provides a return. It doesn't effect our ability to invest in other projects. You can't simply "redirect" the NBN money unless....
> 
> a) Whatever you redirect it to also provides a return (eg: a toll road); OR
> b) You find the money in the budget.
> 
> Either way though, whether the NBN is built or not makes not one iota of difference.
> 
> I'd also like to point out that even if the NBN provided zero return, and every cent of the $27bn Govt investment was on-budget. That is still less than 3% of the money Australian Governments will spend on public healthcare over the 10 year build of the NBN. What would we have to show for it if we increased the public health budget by 3% over 10 years do you think?



The problem with the above economic analysis is that it is not, in any way, rigorous.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> The problem with the above economic analysis is that it is not, in any way, rigorous.




It's not for me to be rigorous. I'm merely pointing out that the NBN funding is apparently misunderstood with the constant comments that the funding should be redirected. Redirection is neither possible (without satisfying one of the two provisos), nor required in order to achieve one of the "alternatives".

The project itself was assessed by KPMG-McKinsey who found it achievable for $42.8bn, and the NBN Co Business Plan was subsequently assessed by Greenhill-Caliburn, who found the assumptions therein to be reasonable.


----------



## sails

Knobby22 said:


> I was having a holiday recently on Hamilton Island and all I could get was the Australian or the Courier mail.  Bought the Australian every day.
> 
> It really has got less in it these days from what I remember and plenty of bias and hearsay. It may as well call itself the Courier Mail. I bet many people in Queensland don't buy papers if that is the best there is to offer.
> 
> Another fact you won't find in the Australian, most people support the NBN project.




Haha Knobby.   People choose what they read.  Smart media will give people the news they want to read. Labor is on the nose in Qld so that might explain why the Courier mail seems biased.  I don't think they caused it, I think they swing with the opinion polls.  It's a supply and demand business.  I wonder if Fairfax realise why  many prefer to read Murdoch papers than Fairfax...

Perhaps less people than you think support the NBN...


----------



## NBNMyths

sails said:


> Haha Knobby.   People choose what they read.  Smart media will give people the news they want to read. Labor is on the nose in Qld so that might explain why the Courier mail seems biased.  I don't think they caused it, I think they swing with the opinion polls.  It's a supply and demand business.  I wonder if Fairfax realise why  many prefer to read Murdoch papers than Fairfax...
> 
> Perhaps less people than you think support the NBN...




I think it goes both ways. Yes, people choose the paper that best represents their world view, which I think leads that paper to move further towards that view in order to appease their readership.

Either way, the newspaper is a dying form of delivery. Paper sales are in freefall and have been for a decade. My guess is that in 20 years there won't be an Australian, or a Courier-Mail. At least not in their current form. The problem for the papers is that their costs remain constant, while their readership (and therefore advertising revenue) continue to fall. At some stage it will have to reach the point of being unviable.

As for public support of the NBN.... There hasn't been a single survey published by a recognised research agency that has shown more opposition than support for the NBN. The most recent NBN poll by Essential Media gave the NBN 54% approval to 28% opposed. Since 2010 _in favour_ is up by 6%, _opposed_ is down by 3%. That's a pretty big margin by any standard.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> It's not for me to be rigorous. I'm merely pointing out that the NBN funding is apparently misunderstood with the constant comments that the funding should be redirected. Redirection is neither possible (without satisfying one of the two provisos), nor required in order to achieve one of the "alternatives".



It needs to be regorous however, to ensure that scarce financial resources are best allocated.



NBNMyths said:


> The project itself was assessed by KPMG-McKinsey who found it achievable for $42.8bn, and the NBN Co Business Plan was subsequently assessed by Greenhill-Caliburn, who found the assumptions therein to be reasonable.



Anything is achievable with enough money.

The extent to which it is worthwhile relative to other priorities is quiet another matter.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> It needs to be regorous however, to ensure that scarce financial resources are best allocated.
> 
> 
> Anything is achievable with enough money.
> 
> The extent to which it is worthwhile relative to other priorities is quiet another matter.




And that's why only Labor Governments get anything done...if it was up the the conservatives we would still be using wind up telephones.

Rigorous  was the opera house financially rigorous  buying Blue Poles  the Trans-Australian Railway....your a dinosaur Doc, get with the system!


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> ....your a dinosaur Doc, get with the system!



This too is not a substantive economic or even social argument.


----------



## Julia

Knobby22 said:


> I was having a holiday recently on Hamilton Island and all I could get was the Australian or the Courier mail.  Bought the Australian every day.
> 
> It really has got less in it these days from what I remember and plenty of bias and hearsay. It may as well call itself the Courier Mail.



You can't be serious!  Since the Courier Mail went tabloid, its content has become that of all the other rubbish tabloids.  "The Australian" has some thoughtful comment, though probably is too willing to expose the government's foolishness for your taste.


----------



## drsmith

A darkening cloud on the horizon over cost/benefit ?



> *Compared to the NBN Co Corporate Plan, a lower than expected capital expenditure (capex) and higher than expected operating expenditure (opex) result, will be watched closely by the committee. This could be an early warning that it is costing more to do less, when compared to the expected results in the NBN Co Corporate Plan, even though the committee has at this stage accepted the argument from NBN Co that other reasons are behind this.* The committee will watch this capex/opex combination closely, as value for money to taxpayers is the critical key performance indicator in turning this good concept into an even better reality for all.




http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/jcnbn/report2/fullreport.pdf


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Knobby22 said:


> I was having a holiday recently on Hamilton Island and all I could get was the Australian or the Courier mail.  Bought the Australian every day.
> 
> It really has got less in it these days from what I remember and plenty of bias and hearsay. It may as well call itself the Courier Mail. I bet many people in Queensland don't buy papers if that is the best there is to offer.
> 
> Another fact you won't find in the Australian, most people support the NBN project.




Mate, I was forced to have some work done on the Arnage recently in Melbourne, and had to suffer a populace divorced from the reality of Australian life, fed on a diet of The Age, 7 and 9 TV and a number of bogan Radio Rogans.

Give me the Australian any day.

btw  Most Australians also support free love, getting pissed and making decisions without consequence, but that should not drive government decisions.

gg


----------



## sptrawler

Drsmith, NBNmyths will give you a serve if you keep up with this negative sentiment. Actually I wonder if he isn't Tim.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> A darkening cloud on the horizon over cost/benefit ?
> 
> http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/jcnbn/report2/fullreport.pdf






sptrawler said:


> Drsmith, NBNmyths will give you a serve if you keep up with this negative sentiment. Actually I wonder if he isn't Tim.




That's fine, I have no issue with that. The whole purpose of the committee is to assess the progress of the NBN rollout, and that's exactly what they should be doing, including noting any potential problems.

As they said though, they have accepted NBN Co's reasoning for the differences to their forecasts and it doesn't take a brain surgeon to do so. The delay in signing the Telstra deal in particular caused considerable well-documented problems, costs and delays. Now that it's finally done, and fibre rollout contracts (on budget, I might add) have been signed for every state and territory, the project should be able to settle down as the volume rollout commences.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> The delay in signing the Telstra deal in particular caused considerable well-documented problems, costs and delays. Now that it's finally done, and fibre rollout contracts (on budget, I might add) have been signed for every state and territory, the project should be able to settle down as the volume rollout commences.



The proof of the pudding will obvously be in the easting, but saying that _"a capital expenditure (capex) and higher than expected operating expenditure (opex) result, will be watched closely by the committee"_ is a  guarded comment by the committee. 

It's clearly concerned, as many have a right to be given Labor's general budgetry outcomes when compared to original prediction.


----------



## sptrawler

Well trainspotter, Conroy will have something to say to the ACCC about this, he will be spitting chips. Someone will get a spray. LOL

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-wireless-battle/story-e6frgaif-1226218587235

Telstra shareholders should take a bit of joy from that. 
It is going to be interesting to see how Thodey has positioned Telstra, at the moment he seems to be ticking the right boxes.


----------



## Smurf1976

NBNMyths said:


> The project itself was assessed by KPMG-McKinsey...



If there's one thing I learnt about government through working in the public service it was about consultants.

Government tells the consultant the required outcome and hands them the money. And hey presto! Back comes a report which just happens to recommend doing exactly what the government wants to do.

Been there, seen that game and I resent the spending of even one cent of my taxes on any form of management consultants for this very reason.


----------



## Smurf1976

NBNMyths said:


> and fibre rollout contracts (on budget, I might add) have been signed for every state and territory



How does the cost of these contracts compared to that of NBN Co simply building the network itself?

I'd just like to know how much of my taxes will be building the actual NBN versus how much will be consumed in unnecessary overheads etc which are inherent in the outsourced system.

For a project of this size, I would have thought that a substantial in-house work crew supplemented by contractors would have been a cheaper option than using contractors for the majority of the work. It would also save a fortune through avoiding the inadequate compaction and poorly executed drill shots which always seem to happen when total control is given to contractors rolling out a power / gas / comms network.


----------



## sptrawler

Smurf1976 said:


> How does the cost of these contracts compared to that of NBN Co simply building the network itself?
> 
> I'd just like to know how much of my taxes will be building the actual NBN versus how much will be consumed in unnecessary overheads etc which are inherent in the outsourced system.
> 
> For a project of this size, I would have thought that a substantial in-house work crew supplemented by contractors would have been a cheaper option than using contractors for the majority of the work. It would also save a fortune through avoiding the inadequate compaction and poorly executed drill shots which always seem to happen when total control is given to contractors rolling out a power / gas / comms network.




Well smurph, that's why the first tender fell on its @#$e, the government wanted fixed price, got stupid quotes, rejected them all and re tendered.
Second time around went with the tried and proven tendering process of cost +.
That would be the cost plus whatever you can scam us for. LOL
NBN can't build it themselves, they are just a government dept shopfront, designed to stuff Telstra, the outcome will be very interesting.
IMO they would have been better off buying Telstra back(at half the price they sold it for)then seperated it and re floated it.
Instead they have taken the high risk ,high cost option and are left holding the can.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Well trainspotter, Conroy will have something to say to the ACCC about this, he will be spitting chips. Someone will get a spray. LOL
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-wireless-battle/story-e6frgaif-1226218587235
> 
> Telstra shareholders should take a bit of joy from that.
> It is going to be interesting to see how Thodey has positioned Telstra, at the moment he seems to be ticking the right boxes.




That won't bother the NBN, because the alternative "Telstra can't mislead consumers" is what they really needed from the deal anyway.

Just look at Telstra's 4G pricing.....15GB at (maybe) 10Mbps for $100 per month. On the NBN, that $100 would get you 1000GB at 100Mbps. 67x the data and 10x the speed for the same price. Clearly it would be impossible for Telstra to claim the two are comparable without being misleading.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Well smurph, that's why the first tender fell on its @#$e, the government wanted fixed price, got stupid quotes, rejected them all and re tendered.
> Second time around went with the tried and proven tendering process of cost +.
> That would be the cost plus whatever you can scam us for. LOL
> NBN can't build it themselves, they are just a government dept shopfront, designed to stuff Telstra, the outcome will be very interesting.
> IMO they would have been better off buying Telstra back(at half the price they sold it for)then seperated it and re floated it.
> Instead they have taken the high risk ,high cost option and are left holding the can.




The 2nd round of tenders is not _cost+_ at all.

The primary differences between the two are:

Each tenderer got a large chunk of the country for a minimum 2 year period, with option for another 2. This reduced their risk in investments on tech and human resources.

Another was that they shifted the risk of duct remediation from the contractor to Telstra. The original tender went out before Telstra negotiations started, so cost risk of upgrading pit and pipe was on the contractor. By the time the second round came along, remediation was part of the Telstra deal, so that cost risk was removed.

If they'd just bought Telstra back, how would that have improved any infrastructure? They'd just be left owning the same obsolete network that the NBN is tasked with replacing.


----------



## NBNMyths

Smurf1976 said:


> How does the cost of these contracts compared to that of NBN Co simply building the network itself?
> 
> I'd just like to know how much of my taxes will be building the actual NBN versus how much will be consumed in unnecessary overheads etc which are inherent in the outsourced system.
> 
> For a project of this size, I would have thought that a substantial in-house work crew supplemented by contractors would have been a cheaper option than using contractors for the majority of the work. It would also save a fortune through avoiding the inadequate compaction and poorly executed drill shots which always seem to happen when total control is given to contractors rolling out a power / gas / comms network.




I have no idea. But given the vocal complaints about the level of Govt involvement in the NBN now, I can only imagine the howling that would result from excluding the allmighty private sector from the rollout completely!

As for taxes.....Assuming all goes reasonably to plan, none of your taxes will be used on the NBN at all. The net is funded by debt through issue of bonds. The bonds (inc interest) are repaid from network revenue, not from consolidated revenue/tax dollars.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> If they'd just bought Telstra back, how would that have improved any infrastructure? They'd just be left owning the same obsolete network that the NBN is tasked with replacing.




If they had bought Telstra back(nationalised it) at say $3.50-$3.80/share, which would have been 30% above market price at the time. There would have been an instant ongoing income stream which would have funded the upgrade.
When the upgrade was complete the government could re float any or all of it. Also if it went the same as last time they would double their money again $7.40/share.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> As for taxes.....Assuming all goes reasonably to plan, none of your taxes will be used on the NBN at all. The net is funded by debt through issue of bonds. The bonds (inc interest) are repaid from network revenue, not from consolidated revenue/tax dollars.




Well lets be honest, that's the theory. Time will be the judge of the accuracy of that plan. 
Like your first statement said" Assuming all goes reasonably to plan" any chance of providing an example of anything this government has done that has gone to plan.


----------



## Smurf1976

NBNMyths said:


> Each tenderer got a large chunk of the country for a minimum 2 year period, with option for another 2. This reduced their risk in investments on tech and human resources.
> 
> Another was that they shifted the risk of duct remediation from the contractor to Telstra. The original tender went out before Telstra negotiations started, so cost risk of upgrading pit and pipe was on the contractor. By the time the second round came along, remediation was part of the Telstra deal, so that cost risk was removed.



My main point is that if you let contractors loose with conduit work then it has a habit of being poorly done. Not enough glue on the joins (where rigid lengths are used), not buried to depth, inadequate compaction (and consequent quite legitimate local govt demands for rectification in a "quick as possible, cost is not a consideration" manner) and so on. 

Telstra's network is absolutely full of asbestos by the way. During the NBN roll-out would be the quickest and cheapest time to deal with it. Cost I really don't know, but I'm thinking (based on practical experience with comparable work and a very rough guess of how much they have to deal with) that for the pits at least $2 billion should be allowed for actual costs if done as cheaply as possible without profit. Make that $5 billion if they simply hand the job over to someone to take care of (auditing this would be virtually impossible).

They also have a lot of asbestos in the conduit itself. I really don't know how much they have but I know that they do have it. Pulling in new cable will certainly result in some fibre disturbance - I'm guessing that they'll just conveniently ignore this but from a safety perspective it's not a smart move to end up with new cable contaminated with dust plus a pile of loose fibres at the bottom of every pit.

If cost were the objective then they should have been removing it during other (eg council) civil works over the past 10+ years. You can take a pit out and replace it for a few $ hundred all inclusive if someone else has nearby works. Double it and put a zero on the end if you have to come back later and rip up (and replace) new concrete etc. Telstra has left a lot of old asbestos pits surrounded by nice new concrete, pavers and faux brick that councils have installed - this isn't going to be cheap. They chould have removed them cheaply when the councils were doing work etc at those locations but chose to leave them.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Well lets be honest, that's the theory. Time will be the judge of the accuracy of that plan.
> Like your first statement said" Assuming all goes reasonably to plan" any chance of providing an example of anything this government has done that has gone to plan.




Yes, you're right. Until it's totally completed, we can't be sure. But then, you could say that about anything. _Your_ current plan is probably to pay off your mortgage and retire one day. Until you turn ~60, you'll never know if that will actually happen. Of course, you have indications. You can see what your income is, and how much your repayments are. You can see how much super you have. Based on this info, you can make a reasonable estimate as to your future. And so it is with the NBN.

I'd suggest that the BER went largely to plan. As did the move to a national school curriculum. The stimulus package kept us out of recession, so I imagine that went to plan too, unless the plan was for us to go into recession of course 

Plain packaging of ciggies went to plan. The elimination of workchoices went to plan. Subject to negs with the indies, I'd say the MRRT went pretty-much to plan too.

On the flipside, the insulation scheme was run with incredible naivety, the NSW and VIC state Labor govts stuffed up their share of the BER by overspending and the boat people situation is a fiasco (not that I can see any easy/workable solution from anyone on that topic).

But, overall I'd have to say I'm quite happy. Things are getting done, and not through the sale of "the geese that lay the golden eggs", which was principally how the last Govt remained in the black. I wonder what Governments will do when there's nothing left to sell? Find themselves in Barry O'Farrell's position, perhaps?


----------



## NBNMyths

Smurf1976 said:


> Telstra's network is absolutely full of asbestos by the way. During the NBN roll-out would be the quickest and cheapest time to deal with it. Cost I really don't know, but I'm thinking (based on practical experience with comparable work and a very rough guess of how much they have to deal with) that for the pits at least $2 billion should be allowed for actual costs if done as cheaply as possible without profit. Make that $5 billion if they simply hand the job over to someone to take care of (auditing this would be virtually impossible).
> 
> They also have a lot of asbestos in the conduit itself. I really don't know how much they have but I know that they do have it. Pulling in new cable will certainly result in some fibre disturbance - I'm guessing that they'll just conveniently ignore this but from a safety perspective it's not a smart move to end up with new cable contaminated with dust plus a pile of loose fibres at the bottom of every pit.
> 
> If cost were the objective then they should have been removing it during other (eg council) civil works over the past 10+ years. You can take a pit out and replace it for a few $ hundred all inclusive if someone else has nearby works. Double it and put a zero on the end if you have to come back later and rip up (and replace) new concrete etc. Telstra has left a lot of old asbestos pits surrounded by nice new concrete, pavers and faux brick that councils have installed - this isn't going to be cheap. They chould have removed them cheaply when the councils were doing work etc at those locations but chose to leave them.




Funny you should say that, because that's exactly what is happening. Part of the Telstra deal is that they must deal with the remediation/repair/improvement of their duct systems so it can be used by the NBN (ie, it is deemed by NBN as being "fit for purpose". I believe (no link on me) that Telstra told their shareholders the cost would indeed be about $2bn.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths mate,

The NBN is a dog.

A political dog.

It defies sense, has a poor uptake and will be overcome by superior technology within 12-18 months.

Spruik as you will.

A dog is a dog.

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> NBNMyths mate,
> 
> The NBN is a dog.
> 
> A political dog.
> 
> It defies sense, has a poor uptake and will be overcome by superior technology within 12-18 months.
> 
> Spruik as you will.
> 
> A dog is a dog.
> 
> gg




Never quite sure when you're being serious, and when you're just sprouting rubbish to get a bite. Either way, I always enjoy a nice bite. 

_It defies sense: _It was recommended by the people that assessed the original (failed) FTTN plan, as the best option to go forward, and has very strong support from everyone who's anyone in the telco and IT industries. If that defies sense, then you must have a strange definition.

_It has a poor uptake: _ Actually, the uptake is well above expectations. That beatup in the News Ltd press from a few weeks back lamented the "11% uptake as at mid October". Let's put that into perspective. The mainland NBN was only available for 2 weeks at the time those stats were current. _2 weeks._ Optus and Telstra (the two largest ISPs) weren't even offering connections at that stage. That means that 60% of potential customers couldn't connect by then without paying contract-break fees for their ADSL. Telstra customers (50% of the market) are still in that position.

_will be overcome by superior technology within 12-18 months: _ That, beyond a shadow of a doubt, illustrates your absolute lack of knowledge on the subject. There is nothing known to man (even in experimental physics labs) that can make optical fibre obsolete. To the contrary, fibre gets faster every day, and those advances in optical fibre tech can be implemented over the NBN when such speeds are required in the future. So to claim that something will be invented, tested and commercialised within 12-18 months is an epic-fail on the level of the Alan Jones laserbeam network. The NBN will offer 1Gbps speeds from next year, with an upgrade to 10Gbps pencilled for 2016, and 100Gbps on the roadmap for 2025. All using the same NBN cables that are being laid today.

The GPON fibre system being rolled out for the NBN is world-best standard for networking, and is the same tech as being rolled out in Singapore, Japan, South Korea, the US, UK, NZ and a hundred other countries.

The bottom line is that no-one in Telco agrees with your statement. Sorry.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> Never quite sure when you're being serious, and when you're just sprouting rubbish to get a bite. Either way, I always enjoy a nice bite.
> 
> _It defies sense: _It was recommended by the people that assessed the original (failed) FTTN plan, as the best option to go forward, and has very strong support from everyone whose anyone in the telco and IT industries. If that defies sense, then you must have a strange definition.
> 
> _It has a poor uptake: _ Actually, the uptake is well above expectations. That beatup in the News Ltd press from a few weeks back lamented the "11% uptake as at mid October". Let's put that into perspective. The mainland NBN was only available for 2 weeks at the time those stats were current. _2 weeks._ Optus and Telstra (the two largest ISPs) weren't even offering connections at that stage. That means that 60% of potential customers couldn't connect by then without paying contract-break fees for their ADSL. Telstra customers (50% of the market) are still in that position.
> 
> _will be overcome by superior technology within 12-18 months: _ That, beyond a shadow of a doubt, illustrates your absolute lack of knowledge on the subject. There is nothing known to man (even in experimental physics labs) that can make optical fibre obsolete. To the contrary, fibre gets faster every day, and those advances in optical fibre tech can be implemented over the NBN when such speeds are required in the future. So to claim that something will be invented, tested and commercialised within 12-18 months is an epic-fail on the level of the Alan Jones laserbeam network. The NBN will offer 1Gbps speeds from next year, with an upgrade to 10Gbps pencilled for 2016, and 100Gbps on the roadmap for 2025. All using the same NBN cables that are being laid today.
> 
> The GPON fibre system being rolled out for the NBN is world-best standard for networking, and is the same tech as being rolled out in Singapore, Japan, South Korea, the US, UK, NZ and a hundred other countries.
> 
> The bottom line is that no-one in Telco agrees with your statement. Sorry.




That is not what I am hearing or reading.

It is a dog, and a sick one at that.

gg


----------



## So_Cynical

Garpal Gumnut said:


> NBNMyths mate,
> 
> The NBN is a dog.
> 
> A political dog.
> 
> It defies sense, has a poor uptake and will be overcome by superior technology within 12-18 months.
> 
> Spruik as you will.
> 
> A dog is a dog.
> 
> gg




lol coming from the man whp boldly said the below. 



Garpal Gumnut said:


> (5th-February-2011) I have it on good opinion from one of my Queensland ALP contacts , that the NBN is to be "modified".
> 
> This will free up money for the Flood and Cyclone Reconstruction.
> 
> The word "scrapped" will not be used.
> 
> "Modified" is the buzzword.
> 
> One can imagine a Dalek saying it...."Modified, modified, modified"
> 
> gg




Sounding like a bit of a Dalek yourself GG...with about as much credibility.


----------



## bellenuit

NBNMyths said:


> That won't bother the NBN, because the alternative "Telstra can't mislead consumers" is what they really needed from the deal anyway.




No, what they needed from the deal was to stifle competition. It is already illegal for companies to mislead customers. Witness Harvey Norman's recent $1.5m fine for doing just that.


----------



## todster

Give GG a break he has been in the Ross Island Hotel for ever.


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> That is not what I am hearing or reading.
> 
> It is a dog, and a sick one at that.
> 
> gg




Just to ad to what So Cynical has posted, I think your cred on the issue leaves something to be desired, given the plethora of incorrect predictions you've been giving since this thread began. Have you actually got any of them right?  

And now, you apparently have the inside running on some magic technology that will make optical fibre obsolete in 12 months, which that no-one in the telco sector has ever heard of. You'd better quickly tell them about it, lest they keep investing in their own fibre infrastructure and waste their shareholders money 

Tell you what. I'll bookmark this post, and in "12-18 months" we'll see if you were right. I wouldn't bet your house on it.


----------



## Struzball

NBNMyths said:


> 67x the data and 10x the speed for the same price. Clearly it would be impossible for Telstra to claim the two are comparable without being misleading.




Not technically the same price, one is a viable business product, the other is a 42 billion dollar black hole.


----------



## So_Cynical

todster said:


> Give GG a break he has been in the Ross Island Hotel for ever.




Perhaps he's peeved that they don't have wi-fi. :dunno:


----------



## sptrawler

Well Turnbull may be getting traction.

http://www.theage.com.au/national/nbn-co-review-agitates-conroy-20111213-1ot7r.html

Loved this quote

'Tragically they don't seem to have noticed what's actually been happening for the last 15 years in the telecommunications sector … 90 per cent of profits in this sector went to one company. Ninety per cent. Does that suggest that maybe perfect competition isn't working?''

Funny he didn't mention they owned 98% of the infrastructure and 100% of keeping it running.
Why didn't he say the competition 'cherry picked' for 15 years and installed minimal competing infrastructure despite being large multinational companies.
The government is quick to tax multinational minning companies that spend huge amounts on infrastructure.
Yet pander to multinational telecommunication companies, that want to piggy back on mum and dad supported Australian companies. 
Jeez have they lost the plot, poor old Vodaphone, massive overseas company can't afford to supply reliable service even in capital cities. Shame on you Telstra.
Singtel Optus, on sell the limited infrastructure available, so speeds are crap. Shame on you Telstra. 
Why can't these mum and dad investors, who payed $7.40 a share put their hands in their pockets to help out the Singapore Government and Europes leading telecommunication company.
Not to worry Conroy to the rescue. LOL
Best of luck.
NBNmyths don't tell me, that is why the NBN is happening, were paying for that too.LOL


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Well Turnbull may be getting traction.
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/national/nbn-co-review-agitates-conroy-20111213-1ot7r.html
> 
> Loved this quote
> 
> 'Tragically they don't seem to have noticed what's actually been happening for the last 15 years in the telecommunications sector … 90 per cent of profits in this sector went to one company. Ninety per cent. Does that suggest that maybe perfect competition isn't working?''
> 
> Funny he didn't mention they owned 98% of the infrastructure and 100% of keeping it running.
> Why didn't he say the competition 'cherry picked' for 15 years and installed minimal competing infrastructure despite being large multinational companies.
> The government is quick to tax multinational minning companies that spend huge amounts on infrastructure.
> Yet pander to multinational telecommunication companies, that want to piggy back on mum and dad supported Australian companies.
> Jeez have they lost the plot, poor old Vodaphone, massive overseas company can't afford to supply reliable service even in capital cities. Shame on you Telstra.
> Singtel Optus, on sell the limited infrastructure available, so speeds are crap. Shame on you Telstra.
> Why can't these mum and dad investors, who payed $7.40 a share put their hands in their pockets to help out the Singapore Government and Europes leading telecommunication company.
> Not to worry Conroy to the rescue. LOL
> Best of luck.
> NBNmyths don't tell me, that is why the NBN is happening, were paying for that too.LOL




Don't know how you interpret that as Turnbull gaining traction, I'd have said that it's the first time Conry has done a decent job of articulating why the NBN is so much better than Turnbull's "alternative".

Anyway, you're right in that the problems quoted are one of the reasons the NBN is being built.

And it all stems from the way in which Telstra was privatised. Telstra should never have been sold as a vertical monopoly. At the very least, it should have been split into infrastructure and retail companies before being sold, but I think it would have been far better for the Govt to have retained the fixed infrastructure, turning it into a wholesale-only open access utility, and only sold off the mobile and retail side of the business. 

That would have achieved far better outcomes in the way of infrastructure improvements and retail competition. The big problem of course, is that it wouldn't have realised anywhere near as much money in the sale.


----------



## Smurf1976

Did any of the infrastructure privatisations and de-regulations really work? I mean really?

Looked at your power bill lately? Or noted the government bailouts of rail and the problems there? Or that you're still paying a fortune in rego and petrol tax despite the toll roads? 

Noted that we're actually less competitive than we were before all of this (at least that's the case with electricity)?

I'm not socialist, but this privatisation of infrastructure nonsense has been nothing other than one big con thus far.


----------



## NBNMyths

Smurf1976 said:


> Did any of the infrastructure privatisations and de-regulations really work? I mean really?
> 
> Looked at your power bill lately? Or noted the government bailouts of rail and the problems there? Or that you're still paying a fortune in rego and petrol tax despite the toll roads?
> 
> Noted that we're actually less competitive than we were before all of this (at least that's the case with electricity)?
> 
> I'm not socialist, but this privatisation of infrastructure nonsense has been nothing other than one big con thus far.




Yep, it's just a way to make treasurers look good because they can say "Look I've delivered surpluses".

Not too much thought seems to go into what happens when there's nothing left to sell.


----------



## prawn_86

Smurf1976 said:


> I'm not socialist, but this privatisation of infrastructure nonsense has been nothing other than one big con thus far.




Totally agree. I haven't being paying taxes for long but i thought my taxes were supposed to go towards infrastructure and utilities. Health, education, roads, public transport, power, water all the basic things that are required to run a country/town/economy and keep its populace in a basic standard of living.

In fact, i would happily pay more tax if we could nominate where it went. At least 50% of our tax we should be able to nominate where the funds go. As if that's going to happen


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

This NBN is an even bigger waste of money than I thought.

From the SMH, usually friendly to the Federal ALP Government.



> Federal Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has again slammed the government's $36 billion national broadband network (NBN) project as a waste of money after it was revealed only 4000 households had been connected to the network so far.
> Of those 4000 just 2315 premises have begun using the NBN's fibre optic cables for communications.
> The connection figures, released this week by the government-owned company set up to deliver the network, are well down on NBN Co's earlier projection of 35,000 connections in 2011.
> 
> That projection also contrasts with its roll-out numbers, with 18,200 homes and businesses lying along the fibre optic cable infrastructure laid down so far at a cost of $1 billion.
> "The billion dollars that they have spent so far on the rollout works out at $250,000 per connection," Mr Abbott told Fairfax Radio today.
> "So by any means this is a monumental rip-off."
> 
> 
> 
> Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...ed-by-31000-20120103-1pj8b.html#ixzz1iO7224vV




If I could have laid four connections I'd be a millionaire.

gg


----------



## todster

Garpal Gumnut said:


> This NBN is an even bigger waste of money than I thought.
> 
> From the SMH, usually friendly to the Federal ALP Government.
> 
> 
> 
> If I could have laid four connections I'd be a millionaire.
> 
> gg




Any actual news on the scrapping Sherlock


----------



## So_Cynical

todster said:


> Any actual news on the scrapping Sherlock




LOL this thread will haunt him forever.


----------



## sptrawler

I have been critical of the N.B.N for several reasons. 
However I do believe a constantly improving telecommunication network is essential. The scope and magnitude of what the government has bitten off is frightening. 
I doubt that it won't end in tears


----------



## DB008

If you want a laugh, head over to Whirlpool.net.au - go to the NBN forum.

The NBN/Labor fanboi attitude is hilarious. It's like a left camp over there. The tech-heads are so devoted to the NBN. l'm guessing because they sit around on the net all day downloading pr0n and playing games. One wrong comment, and you get torn to shreds by the "NBN fanboi army". 


Direct quote - 







> You mean the currently best economy in the world, run by the highest rated finance minister in the world?


----------



## So_Cynical

DB008 said:


> If you want a laugh, head over to Whirlpool.net.au - go to the NBN forum.
> 
> The NBN/Labor fanboi attitude is hilarious. It's like a left camp over there. The tech-heads are so devoted to the NBN. l'm guessing because they sit around on the net all day downloading pr0n and playing games. One wrong comment, and you get torn to shreds by the "NBN fanboi army".
> 
> 
> Direct quote -




LOL danny...so anyone supporting the NBN is a Govt fanboi.  the tech heads are a lot like the tree hugging green lobby in that they have been waiting the best part of 2 decades for something positive to happen.

What should be abundantly clear to all is that conservative Govt's are hopeless at getting anything done, the Howard Decade was a lost decade for the greens and the tech heads, a decade of total neglect has resulted in the Labor Govt having to play catch up with the rest of the world and as a result we have had to over spend to compensate for the Liberals zero spend.

The tech heads are not necessarily Labor fanbois..they are however NBN fanbois because its a technical revolution that's long over due...thanks totally to the Liberals/Nationals wanting to do absolutely nothing, the NBN is political because the Liberals made it so... chronic under investment has its inevitable consequences.


----------



## Bill M

So_Cynical said:


> The tech heads are not necessarily Labor fanbois..they are however NBN fanbois because its a technical revolution that's long over due...thanks totally to the Liberals/Nationals wanting to do absolutely nothing, the NBN is political because the Liberals made it so... chronic under investment has its inevitable consequences.




Excellent post, agree 100%. Our "new suburb" was built 12 years ago and for some reason the Governments of the day did not make the developers put in any form of broadband. Now we have an overloaded exchange with no ADSL ports available for the 1,000's of dwellings. We are on a pair gain cable and simply can not get ADSL in any form. All we have is wireless, a bit expensive and when it rains the service goes down. The previous government did nothing about this, thankfully the NBN is coming to the Central Coast soon. I applaud the Government for building the NBN, it's about time we joined the 1st. world and got reliable broadband.


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> This NBN is an even bigger waste of money than I thought.
> 
> From the SMH, usually friendly to the Federal ALP Government.
> Federal Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has again slammed the government's $36 billion national broadband network (NBN) project as a waste of money after it was revealed only 4000 households had been connected to the network so far.
> Of those 4000 just 2315 premises have begun using the NBN's fibre optic cables for communications.
> The connection figures, released this week by the government-owned company set up to deliver the network, are well down on NBN Co's earlier projection of 35,000 connections in 2011.
> 
> That projection also contrasts with its roll-out numbers, with 18,200 homes and businesses lying along the fibre optic cable infrastructure laid down so far at a cost of $1 billion.
> "The billion dollars that they have spent so far on the rollout works out at $250,000 per connection," Mr Abbott told Fairfax Radio today.
> "So by any means this is a monumental rip-off."
> 
> 
> 
> If I could have laid four connections I'd be a millionaire.
> 
> gg




Surely, no-one could really be so breathtakingly stupid as to take the cost of a project in startup phase, and use that cost extrapolate the cost across the whole thing?

No, GG. I don't think either you or the Mad Monk are that silly. But it's no better to create disingenuous arguments based on such a ridiculous premise.

What if you did the same thing to a gold mine? How much would it have cost from inception through to extracting the first ounce of gold? Would you then declare the mine unviable, because that first ounce cost thousands of times its value to get out of the ground? 



The NBN is no different. Before a *single* customer can be connected, they must employ a management team, network designers, construction crews. They must purchase infrastructure, equipment, real estate, radio spectrum and sign numerous contracts. They must build a transit network to connect the NBN to the internet, contract or build data centres, create billing and operational support software systems... The list goes on and on. In all likelihood, they probably spent half a billion before just one customer was active, never mind 4,000.

As for the numbers, allow me to present this table from the 2010 NBN Corporate plan, to show just how ridiculous Abbott's claim is:
http://nbnmyths.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/nbnforecast-connections.png

As you can see, the claim about 35,000 connections is BS. Every single one of those connections was supposed to be a Greenfield Build-Operate-Transfer connection. ie, it means it was to be built by the private sector (eg Opticomm), operated by them until the transit network is built, and then eventually transferred to the NBN sometime in the future.

These connections still took place, but not under a BOT agreement because NBN Co cancelled the Greenfield panel, presumably because the greenfield builders tried to charge them more that they were willing to pay. Instead, NBN Co signed Fujitsu in May 2011 to build greenfields for NBN Co directly, instead of under a BOT arrangement.

NBN Co itself wasn't supposed to have a single active customer as at 30/6/11, although they had about 800 at that stage.


----------



## Chasero

All the billions invested into the NBN should be reinvested into...


.....


..............


CITY -FAIL

I mean rail


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> Surely, no-one could really be so breathtakingly stupid as to take the cost of a project in startup phase, and use that cost extrapolate the cost across the whole thing?
> 
> No, GG. I don't think either you or the Mad Monk are that silly. But it's no better to create disingenuous arguments based on such a ridiculous premise.
> 
> What if you did the same thing to a gold mine? How much would it have cost from inception through to extracting the first ounce of gold? Would you then declare the mine unviable, because that first ounce cost thousands of times its value to get out of the ground?
> 
> 
> 
> The NBN is no different. Before a *single* customer can be connected, they must employ a management team, network designers, construction crews. They must purchase infrastructure, equipment, real estate, radio spectrum and sign numerous contracts. They must build a transit network to connect the NBN to the internet, contract or build data centres, create billing and operational support software systems... The list goes on and on. In all likelihood, they probably spent half a billion before just one customer was active, never mind 4,000.
> 
> As for the numbers, allow me to present this table from the 2010 NBN Corporate plan, to show just how ridiculous Abbott's claim is:
> http://nbnmyths.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/nbnforecast-connections.png
> 
> As you can see, the claim about 35,000 connections is BS. Every single one of those connections was supposed to be a Greenfield Build-Operate-Transfer connection. ie, it means it was to be built by the private sector (eg Opticomm), operated by them until the transit network is built, and then eventually transferred to the NBN sometime in the future.
> 
> These connections still took place, but not under a BOT agreement because NBN Co cancelled the Greenfield panel, presumably because the greenfield builders tried to charge them more that they were willing to pay. Instead, NBN Co signed Fujitsu in May 2011 to build greenfields for NBN Co directly, instead of under a BOT arrangement.
> 
> NBN Co itself wasn't supposed to have a single active customer as at 30/6/11, although they had about 800 at that stage.






Who pays you mate to pop up every time some other disaster for NBN appears, oozing like a living putrid liquid, from the tap of public money wasted. ( The disaster that is , not you, I would never accuse you of being an oozing person, putrid or otherwise).

I may not agree with the smell of the project you protect, Sir or Madam, but I protect your right to project a protected projection on a putrid smell from a protected putrid project.

gg


----------



## So_Cynical

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Who pays you mate to pop up every time some other disaster for NBN appears, oozing like a living putrid liquid, from the tap of public money wasted. ( The disaster that is , not you, I would never accuse you of being an oozing person, putrid or otherwise).
> 
> I may not agree with the smell of the project you protect, Sir or Madam, but I protect your right to project a protected projection on a putrid smell from a protected putrid project.
> 
> gg




Now how about answering the guts of NBNMyths post.



NBNMyths said:


> Surely, no-one could really be so breathtakingly stupid as to take the cost of a project in startup phase, and use that cost extrapolate the cost across the whole thing?
> 
> No, GG. I don't think either you or the Mad Monk are that silly. But it's no better to create disingenuous arguments based on such a ridiculous premise.
> 
> What if you did the same thing to a gold mine? How much would it have cost from inception through to extracting the first ounce of gold? Would you then declare the mine unviable, because that first ounce cost thousands of times its value to get out of the ground?




Its a valid argument that really addresses the credibility of your post/s and the credibility of you...a bit of pot stirring is ok, constant (one trick pony) pot stirring becomes annoying very quickly even when done with wit and intelligence.


----------



## moXJO

So_Cynical said:


> Now how about answering the guts of NBNMyths post.
> 
> 
> 
> Its a valid argument that really addresses the credibility of your post/s and the credibility of you...a bit of pot stirring is ok, constant (one trick pony) pot stirring becomes annoying very quickly even when done with wit and intelligence.




Said the pot to the kettle.

I'm for an NBN as I believe it will drive business in the future, but there are concerns over a range of issues. Just close my eyes and hope for the best.


----------



## sptrawler

moXJO said:


> Said the pot to the kettle.
> 
> I'm for an NBN as I believe it will drive business in the future, but there are concerns over a range of issues. Just close my eyes and hope for the best.




I'm with you on this, it is like writing an open ended cheque. You know what it will cost today but if the completion date is 8 years time, jeez that's frightening.
It is a bit like owning a 6 unit site and the developer saying trust me it won't cost much.
If technology changes(and I do know optical is the best there is) there will be no get out clause for the government.
As I have stated on many occassions the best outcome for the government would have been to re bought Telstra, do what needed to be done and refloated the end product.
The way this is being carried out is a hotch potch that will end in tears.


----------



## Julia

moXJO said:


> Said the pot to the kettle.



Exactly what I was thinking on reading SC's post.   As usual.


----------



## So_Cynical

moXJO said:


> Said the pot to the kettle.






Julia said:


> Exactly what I was thinking on reading SC's post.   As usual.




Ill just have to assume its some sort of right wing conspiratorial code :dunno: cos ive got no idea.


----------



## todster

So_Cynical said:


> Ill just have to assume its some sort of right wing conspiratorial code :dunno: cos ive got no idea.




Old people heat water on the stove.
Before electricity


----------



## sptrawler

todster said:


> Old people heat water on the stove.
> Before electricity




Yes it cost them a piece of wood.


----------



## moXJO

todster said:


> Old people heat water on the stove.
> Before electricity




Because 36 is the new old


----------



## joea

sptrawler said:


> I have been critical of the N.B.N for several reasons.
> However I do believe a constantly improving telecommunication network is essential. The scope and magnitude of what the government has bitten off is frightening.
> I doubt that it won't end in tears




This post is to the point. Reminds me of a Quote::

" A Government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have ".
Gerald Ford.

In the case of the NBN it will be just another slug to the taxpayer, until some sanity is restored to the Federal Government!!
joea


----------



## NBNMyths

joea said:


> This post is to the point. Reminds me of a Quote::
> 
> In the case of the NBN it will be just another slug to the taxpayer, until some sanity is restored to the Federal Government!!
> joea




Since the NBN is funded from bonds, repaid from network revenue (ie, not from consolidated revenue/"taxpayer"), could you explain where the "slug" is?


----------



## joea

NBNMyths said:


> Since the NBN is funded from bonds, repaid from network revenue (ie, not from consolidated revenue/"taxpayer"), could you explain where the "slug" is?




Not yet has it been paid by network revenue.
The slug is as followed;;; comments of a network engineer.

"....Even Telstra would struggle to build something of this scale. Yet we are made to believe that the same people who can't build school halls or install insulation without being ripped off are going to do it???
Here at Telstra, we are laughing our heads off!! Because when it all comes crumbling down, after they have spent $60 bullion and the network is no more than half complete, it will be up to Telstra to pick up the pieces!!"

A statement by Gillard " we will connect 93% of the houses with optical fibre across Australia." Well I reckon its going to be a pretty big 7% that are not connected in this manner.
joea p.s. I would be pretty confident in saying that Conroy is not capable of controlling this experiment. I am not game to say a "business".
Maybe they will bring in Mr. Fix it( Combet)  to lend a hand.


----------



## todster

moXJO said:


> Because 36 is the new old




Go to a nite club


----------



## NBNMyths

joea said:


> Not yet has it been paid by network revenue.
> The slug is as followed;;; comments of a network engineer.
> 
> "....Even Telstra would struggle to build something of this scale. Yet we are made to believe that the same people who can't build school halls or install insulation without being ripped off are going to do it???
> Here at Telstra, we are laughing our heads off!! Because when it all comes crumbling down, after they have spent $60 bullion and the network is no more than half complete, it will be up to Telstra to pick up the pieces!!"
> 
> A statement by Gillard " we will connect 93% of the houses with optical fibre across Australia." Well I reckon its going to be a pretty big 7% that are not connected in this manner.
> joea





Ah, yes. The good old "anonymous Telstra engineer email from 2010". Allow me to fix that for you:

Comments of Abraham Lincoln:
_"The biggest problem I see with the internet, is that you never know if the quotes are accurate"_​
Your statements are from the same BS email where that "engineer" claimed that _optical fibre only lasts 25 years in conduit (and much less in more stressful environments)_! Now, if the guy can't even get basic information about OF lifetime right, can you tell me again why we should believe anything else contained in an anonymous email from who knows where, containing demonstrably false information? 

I should also add, that OF is the standard for pretty much all networks around the World. FTTP, HFC and FTTN (which all use OF) is being rolled out by govt and private in pretty much every developed nation in the World. Even the Coalition's policy is FTTP in greenfield estates, and FTTN in brownfield areas. So if fibre is so useless, that "Telstra engineer" had better tell his boss. Not to mention every other Telco in the World. 

FYI:
From Corning (One of the NBN fibre suppliers):

*Q:	*How long do optical fibers and cable last in practice? 
*A:*	Optical fiber cable has been in commercial use for almost 30 years. There has been no endemic replacement or decommissioning of cables installed in the early years of the industry. In fact, transmission equipment on cables installed in the 1980’s by network operators around the world is routinely replaced with newer gear running data rates of 10 Gb/s or more using SONET/SDH and Ethernet technologies – line rates and protocols not dreamed of when the cables were manufactured. It is common for customers to report to Corning that trial cables installed in the late 1970’s or early 1980’s are still in use.​
ie: Far from degrading, optical fibre cables are getting faster as time goes on. The 13-year-old Southern Cross cable to the US is 10x faster now than when it was laid, and there are another few big speed upgrades planned for the future. What started as 240Gbps in 1999 will soon be 4.8Tbps, with ~12Tbps available once the required technology goes commercial.


----------



## joea

NBNMyths.
You know if there was a cost benefit analysis implemented, and both sides of politics
were involved in a consensus on NBN, then there would be 20 million Australians behind the upgrade of communications for the future.
At this point in time I AM SURE the voter got "screwed".
over and out.
joea


----------



## NBNMyths

joea said:


> NBNMyths.
> You know if there was a cost benefit analysis implemented, and both sides of politics
> were involved in a consensus on NBN, then there would be 20 million Australians behind the upgrade of communications for the future.
> At this point in time I AM SURE the voter got "screwed".
> over and out.
> joea




Despite the impression you may get from the vocal minority of naysayers, the NBN has extremely strong public support. There hasn't been a single survey conducted that has shown less than majority support.

As for a CBA, can you tell me how one would be accurate?

eg: If you did a CBA for the phone network in the 1950s, how could it have envisaged the internet? Or even fax machines and security systems? Fire alarms? Phone banking? ATMs? EFTPOS?

None of these things were invented, so how could their value/benefits be assessed? A CBA for phones in the 1950s could only have valued the making of telephone calls. Do you think such a CBA would have recommended the network be built, at a per-capita cost that was higher than the NBN is today? All so people could make phone calls?

How about electricity? When the rollout of electricity grid began, there would have been no refrigeration. No air conditioning. No TV, radio or computers. A CBA could only have valued the use that actually existed: Lights.

A CBA for the NBN would have to assume that everything that such a network could be used for is already in existence, and therefore make an assessment of the best technology (eg: FTTN/FTTP) on those known demands. Surely, nobody is so backward to think that every possible use for broadband has already been invented?

Lucky for us the world wasn't populated by selfish whingers when our forefathers were investing in the infrastructure we now take for granted.


----------



## moXJO

todster said:


> Go to a nite club




You got me there.


----------



## joea

NBNMyths said:


> Despite the impression you may get from the vocal minority of naysayers, the NBN has extremely strong public support. There hasn't been a single survey conducted that has shown less than majority support.
> 
> As for a CBA, can you tell me how one would be accurate.




http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-new...t-analysis-sought-for-nbn-20111208-1olml.html

Well these people think it should be done.

There is a fair chance that none of the people that are being bypassed by NBN WILL NOW GIVE THAT SUPPORT.
Oh. That' rights Conroy neglected to tell the public that they cannot splice for less than 1000 subscribers. 
Must have got rubbed off the white board.

joea


----------



## NBNMyths

joea said:


> http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-new...t-analysis-sought-for-nbn-20111208-1olml.html
> 
> Well these people think it should be done.
> 
> There is a fair chance that none of the people that are being bypassed by NBN WILL NOW GIVE THAT SUPPORT.
> Oh. That' rights Conroy neglected to tell the public that they cannot splice for less than 1000 subscribers.
> Must have got rubbed off the white board.
> 
> joea




Oh, well if they think it, then make it so. Heaven forbid the Govt not listen to every unqualified lobby group, and instead base their decisions on the advice of industry experts. You haven't answered my question though. How would you assess the benefits of uses not yet envisaged? Or do you think there will be no new uses for broadband?


The NBN doesn't "bypass" anyone. 93% get fibre, 4% get wireless and 3% get satellite. That's no secret, and never has been. The fibre coverage was actually increased from an original target of 90% to 93% on the recommendation of KPMG-McKinsey. I always think it's funny that the same people who complain that the NBN isn't needed and that it already costs too much, are the ones who complain that we aren't spending another $100-odd Billion covering the most remote 7% of the population with fibre.

If you'd like to see the maps and town coverage lists, you can find them on NBN Co's website. A bit more modern that a whiteboard, I know. But I'm sure you can manage.

And if you think it's been some big secret until recently that not everyone gets fibre, I'd point you to the original NBN press release from Conroy in April 2009, which is crystal clear:

_This new National Broadband Network will:

• Connect 90 percent of all Australian homes, schools and workplaces with broadband services with speeds up to 100 megabits per second
• Connect all other premises in Australia with next generation wireless and satellite technologies that will deliver broadband speeds of 12 megabits per second​_
Since then of course, the fibre coverage has been increased to 93%, and the maximum speed has been increased to 1000Mbps (1Gbps).


Any more myths I can debunk for you?


----------



## Knobby22

NBN myths, the contracts have been signed and the workforce should be going at it full bore after these holidays. Do you need how much % of Australia will be done this year?


----------



## Bill M

NBNMyths said:


> Any more myths I can debunk for you?




NBNMyths, I have a question that I ask myself time and time again and I hope you can answer it.

Around Australia there are suburbs and towns where broadband is generally not available to everyone. By that I mean the exchanges are full (no ports available) and they must use an unreliable wireless service. Some of these suburbs and towns have thousands of residents all complaining about the same issue.

My question is, why is the NBN rollout taking so long? And knowing where the problems really lie (as above) why aren't they getting those places online first? Wouldn't it make sense to get those communities online before areas that already have decent broadband services?


----------



## NBNMyths

Knobby22 said:


> NBN myths, the contracts have been signed and the workforce should be going at it full bore after these holidays. Do you need how much % of Australia will be done this year?




I doubt they'll be "full bore" this year. 2012 is just the start of the volume rollout, and I suspect it will be ramping up for a while yet. The contractors will need to start hiring, training and buying equipment for the install before it's running flat out. The Corp Plan says the construction will peak in the years 2013-2018.

They will be commencing construction to 500,000 brownfield premises in 2012, plus whatever is required for greenfield estates. At a guess, maybe another 100,000 there.


----------



## NBNMyths

Bill M said:


> NBNMyths, I have a question that I ask myself time and time again and I hope you can answer it.
> 
> Around Australia there are suburbs and towns where broadband is generally not available to everyone. By that I mean the exchanges are full (no ports available) and they must use an unreliable wireless service. Some of these suburbs and towns have thousands of residents all complaining about the same issue.
> 
> My question is, why is the NBN rollout taking so long? And knowing where the problems really lie (as above) why aren't they getting those places online first? Wouldn't it make sense to get those communities online before areas that already have decent broadband services?




The reason it will take so long it simply a matter of workload. Making 13-odd million connections is a big job. The start of volume rollout has been delayed by the time it took to get the Telstra deal sorted, because until that was done they couldn't access Telstra's pits, pipes, exchanges etc. There was also a delay and added complexity after the ACCC changed the PoI layout. NBN Co wanted 14 points (basically 2 in every capital city), but the ACCC forced them to have 121. That meant a more complex transit network had to be designed and built, and more negotiations with Telstra for exchange space to house the PoIs. But all that is finally sorted, and volume rollout starts this year.

I agree that (in theory) it would be great if the areas that need it most, get it first. I don't pretend to understand the intricacies of network design and construction, but I would imagine that the plan must be done in the most efficient manner which would mean starting at a PoI and building out from there. Each module of the NBN (called a FAN) is about 3,000 services, so I do know that they try to do a whole FAN at a time. If you look at the first and second release sites, they have generally started at a PoI and moved outwards in each case.

Unfortunately, many of the pockets with poor services are spread far-and-wide. There are probably thousands of places across the country. I have a cousin in Gosford who is on satellite internet, even though they're only 2mins from the CBD. No ADSL in their street as they're on a pair-gain system. But their street is only 30 homes, while the rest of the area is OK.

My guess is that it's not economical to do hundreds of tiny areas all over the place, then have to keep coming back to the same relative areas to finish it later. Just an unfortunate fact of life, I think.

(BTW, a PoI is a Point of Interconnect. It's where the NBN leaves off, and your ISP/RSP takes over.)


----------



## Bill M

NBNMyths said:


> I have a cousin in Gosford who is on satellite internet, even though they're only 2mins from the CBD. No ADSL in their street as they're on a pair-gain system. But their street is only 30 homes, while the rest of the area is OK.




Sounds just like my suburb but with many more homes without. Thank you very much for the detailed response. Can this massive project be derailed or closed down if the wreckers in any other political party get in? I would hate to see everything that has been agreed upon and done thus far to be shut down? Thanks again for your response.


----------



## NBNMyths

Bill M said:


> Sounds just like my suburb but with many more homes without. Thank you very much for the detailed response. Can this massive project be derailed or closed down if the wreckers in any other political party get in? I would hate to see everything that has been agreed upon and done thus far to be shut down? Thanks again for your response.




Sorry, this one's a bit longwinded.....

I don't know if it can be stopped or not. I suspect that if the ALP get in in 2013, then it will be well beyond the point of no return by the subsequent election.

But, if the Coalition get in in 2013 (which is a big chance), then it will be interesting.

While physically the NBN _could_ be stopped then, it might not be worth it..... 

*Barriers to scrapping the NBN in 2013:*

*Penalties:*
By 2013, options for the current 2yr construction contracts would be signed. That would mean construction signed until 2015 unless they are happy to cancel it and pay the penalty fees, which would be substantial I'd think.​
*Delays and costs:*
It took two years to plan and legislate the NBN, and negotiate a deal with Telstra. It would take at least that long to start it all again from scratch, and imagine the cost of the work wasted, and the work required to redesign from scratch.​
*Viability:*
By 2013, we'll have the NBN fibre in a few metro areas, and a heap of small cities and rural towns. Selling off such a network would come at a massive loss because many of the areas first rolled out are not going to be profitable. The network needs to be complete with the metro-rural cross subsidy running to make the required return.​
*Legislation:*
The NBN is supported by several pieces of legislation. The coalition won't have power in the Senate, and both the ALP, indies and greens support the NBN. That will make repealing the legislation difficult.​
*Politics:*
The NBN Co are going to announce a 3yr rough schedule next month. That will be updated every 12 months, so by the time of the election there will be a schedule out until 2016. Can you imagine being a candidate trying to tell voters that you're planning to cancel the NBN they're on the list to get shortly, especially since the speed and pricing will have gone past the FUD stage by then.

Then there is the disparity problem. The coalition's alternative is basically FTTN, with a min. speed of 12Mbps in 2yrs, and 24Mbps in 4yrs. Can you imagine explaining to voters that Armidale, Darwin, Tasmania etc... _-Probably close to 2 million premises by the end of 2013-_ will have access to 1Gbps broadband, while Sydney/Melbourne CBDs and most suburbs will be stuck at ~24Mbps, with pricing undoubtedly more expensive than the rural towns are paying for the NBN?​

That all adds up to me hoping it will be too hard to cancel. However, even if it is cancelled, I think the Coalition's plan has been constantly improving over time. In 2007, they called the 12Mbps FTTN NBN a massive waste. By 2010, they had a 12Mbps FTTN policy of their own. Lately, Turnbull has been talking 25, 50 and 80Mbps FTTN, although no official change to the policy. I suspect that we'll be getting most of the capability either way now. My biggest concern is that under the coalition, we'll be paying much more to access it, given their push for the private sector to do it at commercial return rates. All that means is we'll get lower capability, or higher monthly prices. 

No private company could match the NBN's capability at pricing that low.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Bill M said:


> Sounds just like my suburb but with many more homes without. Thank you very much for the detailed response. Can this massive project be derailed or closed down if the wreckers in any other political party get in? I would hate to see everything that has been agreed upon and done thus far to be shut down? Thanks again for your response.




My contacts tell me it will be mothballed. Not shut done, just pink-batted.

gg


----------



## sptrawler

Bill M said:


> Sounds just like my suburb but with many more homes without. Thank you very much for the detailed response. Can this massive project be derailed or closed down if the wreckers in any other political party get in? I would hate to see everything that has been agreed upon and done thus far to be shut down? Thanks again for your response.




My guess, for what it is worth, is that fibre to the node would be the worst outcome. Which would make your internet speed heaps better than adsl anyway.
Now for my pet hate(long suffering Telstra owner) read NBNmyths viabilty qoute. It is dependant on the metro -rural cross subsidy. That is metro paying $24 so that the $100 rural connection can be subsidised.
This is what Telstra couldn't get. Singapore(Optus) Europe(Vodaphone, Virgin) only had to pay Telstra $7 for City blood sucking and guess what Telstra had to charge them $100 if they wanted country customers. Funnily they weren't that interested in country customers.
Jeez it makes me sick to see how the government can s#@ft a company they sold and ripped off the customer(shareholder). Anyone else would have been in court for fraud.Or at the least there would be a class action as to why cross subsidy is o.k now for the N.B.N and wasn't o.k for the company they sold off.
If this was due to the floating of the company while it was vertically intergrated, then that was deception and the prospectus was flawed and the shareholders should have been reimbursed. Not systematically destroyed by legislation, that strips the value the legislator has already been payed for.
The only thing this government has done right is put Conroy in charge of the $#!t heap exactly where he belongs I.M.O.
However aside from the above rant. Thanks N.B.Nmyths for concise accurate information without prejudice. It has been a real asset to the thread.
P.S I still think it will be a blowout of mamoth proportions.


----------



## Bill M

sptrawler said:


> However aside from the above rant. Thanks N.B.Nmyths for concise accurate information without prejudice. It has been a real asset to the thread.




Agree, thanks again NBNMyths, much appreciated.


----------



## Wysiwyg

NBNMyths said:


> *Viability:*
> By 2013, we'll have the NBN fibre in a few metro areas, and a heap of small cities and rural towns. Selling off such a network would come at a massive loss because many of the areas first rolled out are not going to be profitable. The network needs to be complete with the metro-rural cross subsidy running to make the required return.​



Gee whiz they state on their website that 85000 Qld. premises will be noded over a 12 month period. At that rate of connection it will take them a very, very long time to do all the cities and towns listed. Must be a nice earner for the contractors.


----------



## sptrawler

Wysiwyg said:


> Gee whiz they state on their website that 85000 Qld. premises will be noded over a 12 month period. At that rate of connection it will take them a very, very long time to do all the cities and towns listed. Must be a nice earner for the contractors.




Well that's a lot better than what was going to happen before. The Telstra shareholders that lost half their money(at least) were expected to pay for it.
While all the poxy oversea companies were allowed to cherry pick.
At least that part will be corrected a shame the government in its infinite wisdom didn't decide to do the right thing by the shareholders they ripped off.
Both sides of government are equally at fault in it, so don't give me the crap about who floated what. They inherit the income, if they don't want to rectify the problem in a honourable way, they also inherit the wrath.
Also the behavior of Conroy shows the depth of contempt they have for the electorate they presumably represent. My opinion only (also only a small share holder, christ knows what major shareholders think, I shudder to think)LOL. They must be spewing. 
Second rant for the night.


----------



## todster

Garpal Gumnut said:


> My contacts tell me it will be mothballed. Not shut done, just pink-batted.
> 
> gg




Your contacts need to leave  the hotel earlier.


----------



## So_Cynical

NBNMyths said:


> *Legislation:*
> The NBN is supported by several pieces of legislation. The coalition won't have power in the Senate, and both the ALP, indies and greens support the NBN. That will make repealing the legislation difficult.​




That's the key...the green senators are mostly newly elected so sitting for 8 year terms...so the question is how many senators will Labor have left after the election, anyway the Senate terms are fixed so (has a quick google) expire on June 30 2014  the NBN is as safe as for at least the next 2 and a half years. 

http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/senators/sen_exp.htm

Then we have troubles, 16 Labor senators vulnerable but i would reckon Bob Brown and the other 2 green Senators would be safe....surely the Australian electorate would not be stupid enough to hand the coalition the senate as well...look at what happened last time.
~


----------



## joea

NBNMyths said:


> Oh, well if they think it, then make it so. Heaven forbid the Govt not listen to every unqualified lobby group, and instead base their decisions on the advice of industry experts. You haven't answered my question though. How would you assess the benefits of uses not yet envisaged? Or do you think there will be no new uses for broadband?
> 
> 
> The NBN doesn't "bypass" anyone. 93% get fibre, 4% get wireless and 3% get satellite. That's no secret, and never has been. The fibre coverage was actually increased from an original target of 90% to 93% on the recommendation of KPMG-McKinsey.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-05/population-policy-sees-nbn-bypass-outback-town/2826088

joea


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> Then we have troubles, 16 Labor senators vulnerable but i would reckon Bob Brown and the other 2 green Senators would be safe....surely the Australian electorate would not be stupid enough to hand the coalition the senate as well...look at what happened last time.
> ~




You don't have to look back at all. Just look at the disater currently happening with Bob having control of both houses.


----------



## noco

sptrawler said:


> You don't have to look back at all. Just look at the disater currently happening with Bob having control of both houses.




If the Greens reject Coalition legislation twice or three times, a double dissolution would soon fix that problem and put the Greens out on their ear.

I believe the Greens have reached their peak as more people begin to understand what they really stand for with their ideology.


----------



## NBNMyths

joea said:


> _"The NBN doesn't "bypass" anyone. 93% get fibre, 4% get wireless and 3% get satellite. That's no secret, and never has been. The fibre coverage was actually increased from an original target of 90% to 93% on the recommendation of KPMG-McKinsey."_
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-05/population-policy-sees-nbn-bypass-outback-town/2826088
> 
> joea




I'm not sure what your point is. The NBN's target is 93% fibre. To acheive that, they must connect every town with >1000 premises, plus every town >500 premises _IF it's located along the transit route._

The article is technically wrong. The NBN has never promised to cover "93% of the country" with fibre, they promise "93% of the population". They are two different things. Secondly, that town will still get the NBN, but it will be via wireless or satellite. Again, this is exactly what has been promised.

Giving fibre to every tiny town would cause the NBN budget to explode. eg, the incremental cost of taking Julia Creek from wireless to fibre was assessed at $1.14M. Now multiply that by 5,000 towns. BTW, Julia Creek's population is 368, Wudinna's is 513.

How much would you like the NBN to cost?


----------



## Calliope

To date the *NBN Co. has 4000 clients and 900 employees* of whom 862 work mainly in corporate offices in Sydney and Melbourne.  

*The average wage cost per employee is $163,000 a year.*

*The $1 billion they have spent so far on rollout, works out at $250,000 per connection.*

NBNMyths asks "How much would you like the NBN to cost?" I'm afraid that pink bats, overpriced schools and solar panels have taught the government nothing about waste and mismanagement.

Why should we pay a hugely excessive price  "to give us something most people don't want, don't need and don't want to pay more for?" Abbott said.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...t-another-fiasco/story-e6frg7ko-1226238498787


----------



## joea

NBNMyths said:


> I'm not sure what your point is.
> 
> The article is technically wrong. The NBN has never promised to cover "93% of the country" with fibre, they promise "93% of the population".




http://www.minister.dbcde.gov.au/media/media_releases/2009/022

This is the original statement! Then it was upgraded.
I do not see population.
It was following this that Gillard made some sort of statement about  taking the fibre cable to the homes.
And I think it was her statement that resulted in debates about what She said and what the NBN statement said.
I now give up!!
joea


----------



## NBNMyths

joea said:


> http://www.minister.dbcde.gov.au/media/media_releases/2009/022
> 
> This is the original statement! Then it was upgraded.
> I do not see population.
> It was following this that Gillard made some sort of statement about  taking the fibre cable to the homes.
> And I think it was her statement that resulted in debates about what She said and what the NBN statement said.
> I now give up!!
> joea




The statement you linked to says:

*"Connect 90 percent of all Australian homes, schools and workplaces...[with fibre]"*

That's exactly what the NBN is doing (although now 93%)

That's not the same as "90% of the landmass of the country".

If you can't work out the difference, then it is I who give up.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> To date the *NBN Co. has 4000 clients and 900 employees* of whom 862 work mainly in corporate offices in Sydney and Melbourne.
> 
> *The average wage cost per employee is $163,000 a year.*
> 
> *The $1 billion they have spent so far on rollout, works out at $250,000 per connection.*
> 
> NBNMyths asks "How much would you like the NBN to cost?" I'm afraid that pink bats, overpriced schools and solar panels have taught the government nothing about waste and mismanagement.
> 
> Why should we pay a hugely excessive price  "to give us something most people don't want, don't need and don't want to pay more for?" Abbott said.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...t-another-fiasco/story-e6frg7ko-1226238498787




Most of that rubbish is covered in a previous reply:
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=678641#post678641

As for the second bit.... 

1. The cost of the NBN is in line with similar projects overseas, so the price isn't "inflated". 

2. As demonstrated in every survey ever conducted about the NBN, most Australians *do* want it. 

3. It doesn't matter if we don't want to "pay more for it", since it's cheaper than current phone+ADSL2 services anyway, and far, far cheaper than current comparable services (eg private fibre rollouts).


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> If you can't work out the difference, then it is I who give up.




Can you give up though? I assume you are on the NBN Co. payroll. You wouldn't be propagating NBN Myths just out of admiration for Conroy. Would you?


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Can you give up though? I assume you are on the NBN Co. payroll. You wouldn't be propagating NBN Myths just out of admiration for Conroy. Would you?




We've already been through this. No, I'm not on NBN Co's payroll, and I don't have a huge amount of admiration for Conroy. I do have a lot of admiration for the NBN though.


----------



## todster

I love the way you shoot down Howard's Heroes everytime good info without the crap thanks.


----------



## Smurf1976

Calliope said:


> To date the *NBN Co. has 4000 clients and 900 employees* of whom 862 work mainly in corporate offices in Sydney and Melbourne.
> 
> *The average wage cost per employee is $163,000 a year.*
> 
> *The $1 billion they have spent so far on rollout, works out at $250,000 per connection.*
> 
> NBNMyths asks "How much would you like the NBN to cost?" I'm afraid that pink bats, overpriced schools and solar panels have taught the government nothing about waste and mismanagement.



Create a proper Commission charged with responsibility for maximising the benefits of this technology for Australia.

That would largely fix the problem since, under this arrangement, government has no direct say in day to day operations, other than by means of replacing the Commissioner. That said, if the Commissioner is replaced, then it would be the Deputy Commissioner who automatically gets the job, not someone who the government simply appoints so there is still a reasonable limitation on government meddling.

That's how we built the electricity system, water, many roads, gas, railways etc and it produced relatively few real problems.


----------



## IFocus

todster said:


> I love the way you shoot down Howard's Heroes everytime good info without the crap thanks.





+ 1 .............


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> I do have a lot of admiration for the NBN though.



I don't think anyone would argue that.

What is your background in relation to the NBN ?

It's something to which you devote a lot of time.


----------



## Wysiwyg

> To date the NBN Co. has 4000 clients and 900 employees of whom 862 work mainly in corporate offices in Sydney and Melbourne.



 Gee if that is true then there are 38 employees laying cable. 163k for the keyboard tappers and tongue waggers sounds about right.   Contractors sssshhhh. 



sptrawler said:


> My opinion only (also only a small share holder, christ knows what major shareholders think, I shudder to think)LOL. They must be spewing.
> Second rant for the night.



One of the old mans friends swears by Telstra and their divies. Won't say how much his parcel of shares has declined in value. :


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> What is your background in relation to the NBN ?
> 
> It's something to which you devote a lot of time.




Like say the way you devote a lot of time to trashing Gillard and the Labor Govt..are you on the Lib payroll Doc?


----------



## Logique

I have perfectly good broadband access, the NBN does nothing for me. Unfortunately any criticism of the delivery of the NBN seems to be taken as a personal insult by the 'hang the expense' crowd. Taxpayers are personally insulted at being ripped off. Again.



> Of the 4000 households so far connected to the NBN, just 2315 premises have begun using it, at $250,000 per connection. This is well down on NBN Co's earlier projection of 35,000 connections in 2011. http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/governm...#ixzz1iO7224vV




Perhaps the rights to the NBN could be awarded to the ABC in perpetuity.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

drsmith said:


> I don't think anyone would argue that.
> 
> What is your background in relation to the NBN ?
> 
> It's something to which you devote a lot of time.




Doc,

As long as none of my taxes are going to paying NBNMyths for his appearances on ASF whenever any PR drama in relation to this disastrous "rollout"unfolds, I couldn't give a monkeys.

If he being paid, he should declare it. If not, on with the discussion as far as I'm concerned.

gg


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> As demonstrated in every survey ever conducted about the NBN, most Australians *do* want it.




The NBN myth propagators keep rabbiting on that most Australians want it. As anyone the question whether the want a product delivered to their door faster, and of course they will say yes. Unless of course they happen to be voters with a little more savvy. 

From the Myth spreaders survey:



> There is overwhelming majority support from Labor and Greens voters but Liberal/National voters were split 36% favour and 49% oppose.




Incidentally the survey you linked to was conducted by by EMC, whose proud boast is;



> We know our approach works because when organisations work with EMC they win:
> 
> With the ACTU we drove the Howard Government out of power with the Your Rights at Work campaign
> With the AEU we secured billions of dollars in federal funding




http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/what-we-do/

Your affiliations are becoming much clearer now.


----------



## McLovin

Logique said:


> I have perfectly good broadband access, the NBN does nothing for me.




I don't. I'd like significantly faster and cheaper broadband. I want to be able to watch streaming TV and video. If I could get a decent broadband package then I'd probably buy a Slingbox so I could watch TV from Europe and the US.

That being said, given how quickly data speeds and volume are increasing I do wonder whether building an underground cable network is really the answer. Over the air seems to be able to do 90% of what cable does at 1/10th of the cost.


----------



## todster

McLovin said:


> I don't. I'd like significantly faster and cheaper broadband. I want to be able to watch streaming TV and video. If I could get a decent broadband package then I'd probably buy a Slingbox so I could watch TV from Europe and the US.
> 
> That being said, given how quickly data speeds and volume are increasing I do wonder whether building an underground cable network is really the answer. Over the air seems to be able to do 90% of what cable does at 1/10th of the cost.




Until it gets busy or rains.


----------



## todster

How would you feel about a lazy 16b on some dodgy war planes.
Now theres some value for your tax payer dollar.
The Libs get back in we will be ready to invade another country this time.


----------



## McLovin

todster said:


> Until it gets busy or rains.




AFAIK, WiMax is not overly affected by rain as say satellite TV is. And we do live on the driest continent on Earth so I wouldn't be too concerned about loss of signal. You do realise that cable isn't unlimited bandwidth so will slow down when it gets busy, which was the point I was making; what happens in 10/15/20 years when the cable needs to be dug up and upgraded?


----------



## Logique

T, I have never believed that internet rollout is a zero sum game between optical cable and wireless. Australia needs more access for more people, no question. I come from a value per GB viewpoint.

On the subject of Defence spending, certainly not notable for their parsimony. Collins Class subs a case in point. _Beazley praises completion of last Collins Class sub, March 29, 2003_: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2003-03-29/beazley-praises-completion-of-last-collins-class/1825990


----------



## boofhead

McLovin: Optical fibres generally have a much longer lifespan and upgradable than you suggest. Telecommunications over optical fibres generally only need the terminating equipment to be upgraded and not the actual cable. I'm not sure where you got any other impression.

Also the individual customer fibre is not shared. You seem to be mixing things up with coaxial cable as used by Bigpond, Optus, and other companies overseas.

Some of the information in this thread reads like it has been delivered by Tony Abbott or Alan Jones. That is without any fact checking.

As for various forms of wireless - as customer densities increase so do the tower densities. Local councils etc. have started to show more resistance to them. Typically they use fibre to connect to the telcos. Some ISPs in Australia have some experience with WiMax.


----------



## Smurf1976

McLovin said:


> what happens in 10/15/20 years when the cable needs to be dug up and upgraded?



Just replace the electronics at each end and there's your upgrade. F/O cable itself hasn't really changed much over the years and there's not much you could really do to it anyway beyond installing more fibres on key trunk routes.


----------



## So_Cynical

McLovin said:


> AFAIK, WiMax is not overly affected by rain as say satellite TV is. And we do live on the driest continent on Earth so I wouldn't be too concerned about loss of signal. You do realise that cable isn't unlimited bandwidth so will slow down when it gets busy,




This has been addressed ad nauseum back between pages 0 to 20 ~ wireless has limitations that fibre doesn't.



McLovin said:


> which was the point I was making; what happens in 10/15/20 years when the cable needs to be dug up and upgraded?




Same as a sewer pipe...it will re replaced as and when necessary with what ever is appropriate at the time...all the myths and misinformation are covered here http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/ please read it.


----------



## sptrawler

I just hope 2012 sees some goals kicked and some big scores posted for the N.B.N. 
If it doesn't there really will be some big issues.
By the way I hope it works, Telstra shareholders couldn't take this size a project onboard. Also Singapore optus, Virgin U.K, Vodaphone Europe didn't want to put money in.
I just really hope the Australian taxpayer can fund it.
The Labor party are banking on it coming in on time, under budget. I personaly wouldn't be putting money on that. 
What am I saying it's my money funding it.
But realy I do hope it works out.


----------



## todster

Logique said:


> T, I have never believed that internet rollout is a zero sum game between optical cable and wireless. Australia needs more access for more people, no question. I come from a value per GB viewpoint.
> 
> On the subject of Defence spending, certainly not notable for their parsimony. Collins Class subs a case in point. _Beazley praises completion of last Collins Class sub, March 29, 2003_: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2003-03-29/beazley-praises-completion-of-last-collins-class/1825990




As bad as the Collins class debacle was/is it kept a lot of pointy head south aussies employed through some ordinary times unlike jets built o/s


----------



## Bill M

McLovin said:


> AFAIK, WiMax is not overly affected by rain as say satellite TV is. And we do live on the driest continent on Earth so I wouldn't be too concerned about loss of signal.




I live in an area with a high population and we can not get WiMax, ADSL or any other form of broadband except for G3 or less. I have been with Telstras G3 service for over 2 years now, it has nothing on ADSL for speed and quality. It is terrible when it rains (we get heaps) and drops out frequently. Wireless is not the solution for a permanent broadband connection for homes. The best plan I can get is 12 Gig a Month, I can use that in 2 weeks and then I am slowed to 64 kps which is so hard to use that it is better to turn off the computer, this is Australia.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> From the Myth spreaders survey:
> 
> Incidentally the survey you linked to was conducted by by EMC, whose proud boast is;
> We know our approach works because when organisations work with EMC they win:
> 
> With the ACTU we drove the Howard Government out of power with the Your Rights at Work campaign
> With the AEU we secured billions of dollars in federal funding
> 
> http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/what-we-do/
> 
> Your affiliations are becoming much clearer now.




Nice cherry pick. I see you ignored all their other campaigns listed on the same page. However, whether Essential has worked for the ACTU doesn't seem particularly relevant to me (Find a polling agency that hasn't worked for a lobby group or party), but if you'd prefer, here's one from Swinburne University:
http://cci.edu.au/sites/default/files/sewing/CCi Digital Futures 2010 1.pdf

Also, if you'd like to provide some opposing evidence, I'll be only too happy to eat my words. So, feel free to find a survey (as opposed to an online poll) that has found majority opposition to the NBN. Good luck with that.






McLovin said:


> That being said, given how quickly data speeds and volume are increasing I do wonder whether building an underground cable network is really the answer. Over the air seems to be able to do 90% of what cable does at 1/10th of the cost.




Except it's not like that. If we look at current NBN v current 4G wireless, it's actually wireless providing 1/10th of NBN capability and 1/67th of NBN volume for the same monthly cost.



McLovin said:


> AFAIK, WiMax is not overly affected by rain as say satellite TV is. And we do live on the driest continent on Earth so I wouldn't be too concerned about loss of signal. You do realise that cable isn't unlimited bandwidth so will slow down when it gets busy, which was the point I was making; what happens in 10/15/20 years when the cable needs to be dug up and upgraded?




Pretty much any wireless system is adversely affected by the weather, topography and other obstructions. The degree varies based on the frequency in use and the power outputs more than the type of technology. The problem is that every chunk of radio spectrum can only serve a limited number of users. Widening the available spectrum into higher bands makes the problem worse, because higher frequencies generally have poorer penetration.

As others have written, there's no need to dig up the NBN fibre to increase speeds. Just as is regularly done with our submarine fibre cables, you just upgrade the transceiving equipment at the cable ends to increase the speed. The NBN cable being laid to each premises today offers 100Mbps. Next year they'll start offering 1Gbps over the same cable (with no equipment upgrade). There is a roadmap to 10Gbps in about 5yrs, and 100Gbps in ~15 years, although these upgrades will probably require upgrade of in=-premises equipment, like when we changed from ADSL to ADSL2.




drsmith said:


> I don't think anyone would argue that.
> 
> What is your background in relation to the NBN ?
> 
> It's something to which you devote a lot of time.




No background with the NBN. It's just one of my pet obsessions. Not paid by NBN, don't work for them in any way, don't know anyone who is. Don't work or know anyone who works for/has any financial interest etc with any related company etc.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> Also, if you'd like to provide some opposing evidence, I'll be only too happy to eat my words. So, feel free to find a survey (as opposed to an online poll) that has found majority opposition to the NBN. Good luck with that.




You gullibility surprises me. Do a survey and ask whether your respondent would prefer to have a BMW or a Holden in his garage. Then ask which one they would buy. Ask your mates at EMC to do the survey. Good luck with that.



> No background with the NBN. It's just one of my pet obsessions. Not paid by NBN, don't work for them in any way, don't know anyone who is. Don't work or know anyone who works for/has any financial interest etc with any related company etc




Yes, you are obviously obsessed. It is a political obsession.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> You gullibility surprises me. Do a survey and ask whether your respondent would prefer to have a BMW or a Holden in his garage. Then ask which one they would buy. Ask your mates at EMC to do the survey. Good luck with that.
> 
> Yes, you are obviously obsessed. It is a political obsession.




If you note my original statement, it was "every public survey has shown a majority of Australians do want the NBN".

I've provided you with three surveys, two by Essential and one by Swinburne Uni. You apparently disagree, but have provided zero evidence to support your position, other than attacking the messengers. Until you do so, I'm sure any reasonable person would say you must concede the point. I believe _Put Up or Shut Up_ is the colloquial term.

Actually, I don't have a particularly strong political obsession. I do usually vote ALP state/federal, but not always. I never vote ALP in local elections. During the last NSW State election I voted for the Libs, because the ALP was long past their use-by date..... However, given their rather disappointing more-of-the-same performance, I won't vote for them in 2014.

As I've written before, I am supportive of the NBN, not necessarily the parties who back it. 

More specifically, I actually support _building a communications network that provides world-class infrastructure to all Australians at a universal, affordable monthly price. _Since the NBN is the only policy on the table that delivers on those objectives, I support the NBN. Now if the Coalition were to move into the 21st century and announce a viable alternative to the NBN, then I'd be only too happy to consider it.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> More specifically, I actually support _building a communications network that provides world-class infrastructure to all Australians at a universal, affordable monthly price._




Gillard couldn't have said it better. However you left out "for working Australians" and "going forward."

Unlike you, I am not obsessive about an NBN. In fact, I couldn't give a fig about the NBN. My service provides me with all I need. However my Scottish heritage programs me to abhor wastage of the money that is poured into NBN Co. and goes down the gurgler, without any checks and balances. "It's like deja-vu, all over again."


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Gillard couldn't have said it better. However you left out "for working Australians" and "going forward."
> 
> Unlike you, I am not obsessive about an NBN. In fact, I couldn't give a fig about the NBN. My service provides me with all I need. However my Scottish heritage programs me to abhor wastage of the money that is poured into NBN Co. and goes down the gurgler, without any checks and balances. "It's like deja-vu, all over again."




Nice to know that the _I'm alright Jack_ principle is alive and well.

The *fact* is that Australia's broadband capabilities lag far behind most countries in the OECD. We fall further behind our trading partners and competitors every year.
The *fact* is that Australians living outside the small footprints of competitive ADSL2 networks and the even smaller footprints of the HFC networks pay far more for broadband than the lucky ones who live in a few cities and their suburbs.
The *fact* is that many Australians in metro areas can't even get ADSL at any price.

Don't you agree that all Australians should have access to decent broadband at similar pricing? Just as the vast majority of us have access to power, water, telephone etc at similar pricing, why should broadband be any different? Especially as more and more of our lives depend on it.


This is the situation that 11 years of Coalition communications policy gave us. This is the situation of "leaving it to the market" gave us. Not exactly a good example of success.


Exactly how is money invested in NBN Co going "down the gurgler", and how many checks and balances do you want? NBN Co has more scrutiny applied to it than pretty much any other GBE.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> NBN Co has more scrutiny applied to it than pretty much any other GBE.




Not by the Fairfax Press or the ABC. And Conroy, predictably, wants to muzzle News Ltd.


----------



## awg

So_Cynical said:


> ...all the myths and misinformation are covered here http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/ please read it.




Thx for the reference, so I did. Excerpt quoted below

**********

4. Noone else in the world is installing such a system

False

Fibre-To-The-Premises or Home (FTTP/H) is currently being rolled out in *hundreds* of countries around the World, including the UK,

***************

This is mathematically impossible, as the total number of countries in the entire world is <197  http://www.worldatlas.com/nations.htm

What I do know for sure, is the NBN will have an army of overpaid seat-shiners.

Is that an official NBN site?


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Not by the Fairfax Press or the ABC. And Conroy, predictably, wants to muzzle News Ltd.




Perhaps you're confusing "scrutiny" with "making stuff up"?

http://www.presscouncil.org.au/docu...torGroupID=662&LocatorFormID=677&FromSearch=1


----------



## NBNMyths

awg said:


> Thx for the reference, so I did. Excerpt quoted below
> 
> **********
> 
> 4. Noone else in the world is installing such a system
> 
> False
> 
> Fibre-To-The-Premises or Home (FTTP/H) is currently being rolled out in *hundreds* of countries around the World, including the UK,
> 
> ***************
> 
> This is mathematically impossible, as the total number of countries in the entire world is <197  http://www.worldatlas.com/nations.htm
> 
> What I do know for sure, is the NBN will have an army of overpaid seat-shiners.
> 
> Is that an official NBN site?




Here, fixed that for you. It now says:

_Fibre-To-The-Premises or Home (FTTP/H) is currently being rolled out in over fifty countries around the World, including New Zealand, Canada, the USA, the UK, Germany, Norway, France, Sweden, Kenya, Qatar, Japan, Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong and China._

I actually found 58 countries with current FTTH programs, and a few more than have announced plans. I'd say there are likely to be over 100 either underway or planning, but I'll leave it like that until I do more research.

I assume by "overpaid seat shiners" you mean electrical and telecommunication engineers, network designers for fibre, wireless and satellite networks etc. You know, the sort of people you need when you're designing and building (from scratch) a nationwide communications network with 13 million-odd connections, 2000 wireless towers, 2 satellites....?

No, it's not an official NBN site.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> Perhaps you're confusing "scrutiny" with "making stuff up"?




You have wisely recognised  that you admiration of NBN Co. is an obsession. It took me a while to cotton on to what other posters to this thread already know, and that is, you cannot debate with an obsessive. An obsessive is impervious to logic, reason or common sense, when they become fixated on the object of their obsession.

All the best.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> You have wisely recognised  that you admiration of NBN Co. is an obsession. It took me a while to cotton on to what other posters to this thread already know, and that is, you cannot debate with an obsessive. An obsessive is impervious to logic, reason or common sense, when they become fixated on the object of their obsession.
> 
> All the best.




Again with the ad-hom arguments. And a bit of straw-manning too. I'm not obsessed with NBN Co. I don't care who builds the NBN. So long as it complies with the previously stated outcomes: _World-class broadband for everyone, at reasonable prices for everyone._ Surely it's not a hard concept to grasp.

I'm also quite happy to have a factual debate on the NBN. Unfortunately -as you so aptly demonstrate- the anti-NBN crowd are pretty short on facts, making mistruths, vague idealogical arguments and personal attacks the only options available to them.


----------



## bellenuit

*Internet providers holding back on commercial agreements with NBN*

BY: MITCHELL BINGEMANN From: The Australian January 09, 2012 6:06PM

_LESS than half the internet providers trialling the government's National Broadband Network have signed commercial agreements with the builder of the new $36 billion fibre optic network.

Those underwhelming sign-on numbers come just days before interim trial agreements between the NBN Co and internet providers expire. Once the trial agreements expire at the end of this week, NBN Co will no longer allow internet providers to sign up new customers unless a legally-binding commercial contract, known as a wholesale broadband agreement, is signed.

Of the 30 internet providers to sign trial agreements which allow the providers to test NBN services, 22 are ready to offer services in first release sites and new developments.

However of that group of 30, only 12 internet providers have signed its final and executable wholesale broadband agreement the commercial contract that outlines the conditions and prices internet providers pay to access the network.

Some of the nation's largest internet providers, including Telstra, Optus, iiNet and Macquarie Telecom, have refused to sign the formal contracts with NBN Co, citing concerns the network builder is trying to skirt regulatory oversight and liability for faulty service.

more here..............
_
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/aus...eements-with-nbn/story-e6frgakx-1226240178333


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> I'm not obsessed with NBN Co




Sorry. Your obsession is with the NBN. And yet you have gone to extraordinary lengths to defend the NBN Co's actions.



> No background with the NBN. It's just one of my pet obsessions.


----------



## Smurf1976

Calliope said:


> you cannot debate with an obsessive. An obsessive is impervious to logic, reason or common sense, when they become fixated on the object of their obsession.



Too true.


----------



## So_Cynical

todster said:


> I love the way you (NBNMyths) shoot down Howard's Heroes everytime good info without the crap thanks.






Calliope said:


> You have wisely recognised  that you admiration of NBN Co. is an obsession. It took me a while to cotton on to what other posters to this thread already know, and that is, you cannot debate with an obsessive. An obsessive is impervious to logic, reason or common sense, when they become fixated on the object of their obsession.
> 
> *All the best.*




Yep another one gone.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> Like say the way you devote a lot of time to trashing Gillard and the Labor Govt.



I give this government what it deserves and it's nothing compared to what it will cop at the next election.

As for the Liberal payroll, if that's what you want to believe, well, that's your prerogative.


----------



## joea

Hi.
In the Queensland Country Life 5th. Jan. it appears that Julia Creek with only 500 people is in the NBN void. The council has been told to cough up $1.14 million and they can have NBN.
However the town of 1770 with 80 people and 30 other small towns with less than 1000 people  also qualify(names not supplied in QCL) to allow the connection.

So is this a conspiracy, or is Labor up to something once again?
Suggestions that I have thought of... Help compile some money by blackmailing small towns. Or, towns with the wrong connection to politics will be bypassed.
Incidently they say the cable is so close (if it was a black snake) it would bite them.
Well if they cough up $1.14 million, then they have surely been bitten.
joea


----------



## boofhead

Do you have maps of where the towns that will get it, won't get it and where the fibre backbone is being laid?


----------



## Calliope

So_Cynical said:


> Yep another one gone.




He'll be back. An obsession is not easily abandoned.


----------



## joea

Calliope said:


> He'll be back. An obsession is not easily abandoned.




LOL yeah I am back. I have been out picking KP mango's. Bloody hot up here in Dimbulah.
Beer - o - clock will be at 3pm today.

Yes i have seen the backbone layout, but also realise how many small towns there are in Australia.

The point is, any town under 1000 subscribers did not get a splice. Or so I thought.
But from the QCL this does not appear to be so, for some towns.
Oh. yeah if you cough up $1.14 million its ok.

Going to take some time out from this thread, it has me loosing sleep.
Have an opportunity to get a report internally on what the true story is on the NBN.
Will attempt to get that and be back to see if anybody believes it.
joea


----------



## NBNMyths

joea said:


> Hi.
> In the Queensland Country Life 5th. Jan. it appears that Julia Creek with only 500 people is in the NBN void. The council has been told to cough up $1.14 million and they can have NBN.
> However the town of 1770 with 80 people and 30 other small towns with less than 1000 people  also qualify(names not supplied in QCL) to allow the connection.
> 
> So is this a conspiracy, or is Labor up to something once again?
> Suggestions that I have thought of... Help compile some money by blackmailing small towns. Or, towns with the wrong connection to politics will be bypassed.
> Incidently they say the cable is so close (if it was a black snake) it would bite them.
> Well if they cough up $1.14 million, then they have surely been bitten.
> joea




There seems to be a lot of confusion about who gets what and why.

The simply story is:

100% of premises in Australia will have access to the NBN. 93% via optical fibre, 4% via fixed wireless (LTE), 3% via satellite.

Where fibre is installed, the copper network will be switched off. ie, replaced by optical fibre. Where the NBN is via wireless or sat, the copper will remain until at least 2022 when its need to remain will be reassessed.

• Every town with >1000 premises gets optical fibre (OF).
• Every town with >500 premises gets optical fibre *IF* it is located along the NBN transit network route (ie, the backbone OF link runs through town anyway).

It's all in the NBN Corporate Plan (page 63).

As for Julia Ck etc....

The $1.14M estimate to upgrade Julia Creek from Satellite NBN to Fibre NBN was provided by NBN Co at the request of Qld Liberal Senator Ian MacDonald. It followed NBN Co advising communities outside the fibre footprint that the optical fibre could be extended if that community paid the _difference in cost_ between wireless/sat and fibre. In a Senate Estimates hearing last year, Sen MacDonald asked the boss of NBN Co to provide an estimate for Julia Creek. It is up to the local council/community if they want to take that offer up. If they don't, then Julia Ck will get sat NBN as originally planned.

It is *not true* that the Town of 1770 are getting optical fibre NBN. The preliminary list of towns for QLD that get OF or wireless are available on the NBN website. There may well be 30 towns with <1000 premises who get OF, for the reason I gave above. Depending on the most cost efficient, it's possible that there will be some smaller towns that get OF too but I wouldn't count on it.


----------



## NBNMyths

boofhead said:


> Do you have maps of where the towns that will get it, won't get it and where the fibre backbone is being laid?




It's all on the NBN website. There are indicative maps and lists of towns/cities. 

http://www.nbnco.com.au/our-network/maps.html


----------



## awg

NBNMyths said:


> Here, fixed that for you. It now says:
> 
> I assume by "overpaid seat shiners" you mean electrical and telecommunication engineers, network designers for fibre, wireless and satellite networks etc. You know, the sort of people you need when you're designing and building (from scratch) a nationwide communications network
> 
> No, it's not an official NBN site.




Thx, didnt realize you had control of the site. I respect your contributions.

If these highly paid individuals and their contract-issuing sidekicks are not deployed in a timely and efficient manner, then yes, and it would surprise me if any quasi-govt body was able to do that as cost effectivly as private capital.

Having been involved briefly in telco subcontracting world, that is really saying something.

I think I do support the NBN, but I suspect there will be cost and timeline blowouts.

I heard Newcastle is very well down the list, which seems surprising given its economic output, Oz 6 or 7th largest city and proximity to Sydney


----------



## adamim1

awg said:


> Thx, didnt realize you had control of the site. I respect your contributions.
> 
> If these highly paid individuals and their contract-issuing sidekicks are not deployed in a timely and efficient manner, then yes, and it would surprise me if any quasi-govt body was able to do that as cost effectivly as private capital.
> 
> Having been involved briefly in telco subcontracting world, that is really saying something.
> 
> I think I do support the NBN, but I suspect there will be cost and timeline blowouts.
> 
> I heard Newcastle is very well down the list, which seems surprising given its economic output, Oz 6 or 7th largest city and proximity to Sydney





Newcastle is thrown to the side on everything.

The hunter is the backbone of the coal industry in australia and exports minerals from its port, yet newcastle itself gets nothing. Our roads are extremely poor! Yet I go to Wollongong and their roads are immaculate!


----------



## joea

NBNMyths said:


> There seems to be a lot of confusion about who gets what and why.
> 
> The simply story is:
> 
> 100% of premises in Australia will have access to the NBN. 93% via optical fibre, 4% via fixed wireless (LTE), 3% via satellite.
> 
> Where fibre is installed, the copper network will be switched off. ie, replaced by optical fibre. Where the NBN is via wireless or sat, the copper will remain until at least 2022 when its need to remain will be reassessed.
> 
> • Every town with >1000 premises gets optical fibre (OF).
> • Every town with >500 premises gets optical fibre *IF* it is located along the NBN transit network route (ie, the backbone OF link runs through town anyway).
> 
> It's all in the NBN Corporate Plan (page 63).
> 
> As for Julia Ck etc....
> 
> The $1.14M estimate to upgrade Julia Creek from Satellite NBN to Fibre NBN was provided by NBN Co at the request of Qld Liberal Senator Ian MacDonald. It followed NBN Co advising communities outside the fibre footprint that the optical fibre could be extended if that community paid the _difference in cost_ between wireless/sat and fibre. In a Senate Estimates hearing last year, Sen MacDonald asked the boss of NBN Co to provide an estimate for Julia Creek. It is up to the local council/community if they want to take that offer up. If they don't, then Julia Ck will get sat NBN as originally planned.
> 
> It is *not true* that the Town of 1770 are getting optical fibre NBN. The preliminary list of towns for QLD that get OF or wireless are available on the NBN website. There may well be 30 towns with <1000 premises who get OF, for the reason I gave above. Depending on the most cost efficient, it's possible that there will be some smaller towns that get OF too but I wouldn't count on it.




You are living in some world that cannot comprehend reality.
I will get back with a report that has the truth.
joea p.s. you have the same virus that Gillard and Swan have got.
two thirds of Australia will be covered by wireless and satellite.
joea


----------



## awg

adamim1 said:


> Newcastle is thrown to the side on everything.
> 
> The hunter is the backbone of the coal industry in australia and exports minerals from its port, yet newcastle itself gets nothing. Our roads are extremely poor! Yet I go to Wollongong and their roads are immaculate!




I've said it before, all politicians spit in the face of most of our local electorates.

Try living in what *was* the 2nd safest seat in the whole country 

Except he got thrown out with the worst swing ever recorded.

I got my baseball bat waiting for whoever dont deliver, NBN or whatever.

I was told Newcastle is not on the horizon in the next 18months, and I am stuffed if I can work that out from a technical, logistical or financial basis, as was my knowlegable informant.

I have absolutely no idea how "the system" propose to generate sufficient technicians to complete the grunt work, I will make further enquiries


----------



## NBNMyths

awg said:


> I heard Newcastle is very well down the list, which seems surprising given its economic output, Oz 6 or 7th largest city and proximity to Sydney




I don't think anyone publicly knows "the list" other than the next 12 months, because that's all that has been announced. Next month they are supposed to release a 3 year schedule, which will be updated every year.


----------



## NBNMyths

joea said:


> You are living in some world that cannot comprehend reality.
> I will get back with a report that has the truth.
> joea p.s. you have the same virus that Gillard and Swan have got.
> two thirds of Australia will be covered by wireless and satellite.
> joea




I don't know exactly what you're disputing. I have given you links to the official rollout maps for the company doing the rollout and the methodology for working out who gets what. Did you actually read the lists of towns, and look at the maps? I look forward to reading your "truthful" report though.

As for _"2/3 of the country will get wireless/sat"_. It may well be true that 2/3 of the _*land area*_ of Australia will be covered by wireless/sat. But area is not relevant if nobody is living in massive swaths of it. The NBN is based on the number of premises covered by each technology, not the land area of each footprint. The fact is that 93% of all *premises* will get the NBN via OF. 4% of all *premises* will get wireless, and 3% of all *premises* will get sat. Most people live in cities and towns, and (as per specs above), cities and towns generally get OF. Hence the people living there get OF.


----------



## So_Cynical

boofhead said:


> Do you have maps of where the towns that will get it, won't get it and where the fibre backbone is being laid?




Back bone map below ... i edited it to show the approximate position of Julia creek, the cable will run through the town by the looks of it.
~


----------



## todster

joea said:


> You are living in some world that cannot comprehend reality.
> I will get back with a report that has the truth.
> joea p.s. you have the same virus that Gillard and Swan have got.
> two thirds of Australia will be covered by wireless and satellite.
> joea




Gee beeroclock must have been huge


----------



## Calliope

These guys get well paid to do what NBNMyth does for love on these pages.



> NBN Co told estimates that its chief communications officer, Kieren Cooney, had 27 staff reporting to him -- either directly or indirectly -- covering media relations, liaising with government, "issues management", staffing demonstration facilities and "community engagement".






> Opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull said that the NBN "can't be such a compelling proposition" if it needed a lot of PR staff to sell it.



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-in-10-nbn-staff/story-e6frgaif-1226242132345


----------



## Knobby22

_"Opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull said that the NBN "can't be such a compelling proposition" if it needed a lot of PR staff to sell it." _

I don't know about that. It has the less than unbiased Newscorp papers against it as well the opposition.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> These guys get well paid to do what NBNMyth does for love on these pages.
> 
> NBN Co told estimates that its chief communications officer, Kieren Cooney, had 27 staff reporting to him -- either directly or indirectly -- covering media relations, liaising with government, "issues management", staffing demonstration facilities and "community engagement".
> 
> Opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull said that the NBN "can't be such a compelling proposition" if it needed a lot of PR staff to sell it.
> 
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-in-10-nbn-staff/story-e6frgaif-1226242132345




Maybe they'll give me a job! 

Seriously though, what is Turnbull smoking? On the basis of his argument nothing that's any good needs to be promoted. I suppose we'd better tell Telstra to stop advertising their new 4G wireless, and Mercedes and BMW may as well stop advertising their cars. After all, if they're so compelling there's no need to promote them.

While we're at it, I guess the Coalition won't be doing any campaign advertising next election. To do so would be an admission that their case for forming Government isn't very compelling!


----------



## todster

NBNMyths said:


> Maybe they'll give me a job!
> 
> Seriously though, what is Turnbull smoking? On the basis of his argument nothing that's any good needs to be promoted. I suppose we'd better tell Telstra to stop advertising their new 4G wireless, and Mercedes and BMW may as well stop advertising their cars. After all, if they're so compelling there's no need to promote them.
> 
> While we're at it, I guess the Coalition won't be doing any campaign advertising next election. To do so would be an admission that their case for forming Government isn't very compelling!




The usual suspects quote newspapers so much there is no need to buy one


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> While we're at it, I guess the Coalition won't be doing any campaign advertising next election. To do so would be an admission that their case for forming Government isn't very compelling!



I'd be more worried about how long Malcolm Turnbull has been holding his breath. There's insufficient oxygen and too much CO2 in the blood flowing through his brain.

The sad reality is that the Coalition won't need advertising. The case for re-electing a morally bankrupt Labor and their idiological Green partners is even less compelling.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> I'd be more worried about how long Malcolm Turnbull has been holding his breath. There's insufficient oxygen and too much CO2 in the blood flowing through his brain.
> 
> The sad reality is that the Coalition won't need advertising. The case for re-electing a morally bankrupt Labor and their idiological Green partners is even less compelling.




Even you doc would have to admit that with hindsight its was mostly the NBN that swayed the independents to Labor and thus handed Govt to them...if we could turn the clock back and Tony was able to match Labor's NBN commitment then Tony would in all likelihood be PM now....IMO.

-------------------------

Funny cos he would be a PM that couldn't actually pass any legislation cos the senate would block everything except the NBN... except that maybe he would be appealing to Labor to back his off shore asylum seeker solutions.  the very solution he is now blocking.


----------



## IFocus

drsmith said:


> I'd be more worried about how long Malcolm Turnbull has been holding his breath. There's insufficient oxygen and too much CO2 in the blood flowing through his brain.
> 
> The sad reality is that the Coalition won't need advertising. The case for re-electing a morally bankrupt Labor and their idiological Green partners is even less compelling.





Plenty of time for Abbott to blow up one day he will have to face the cameras without a script.


----------



## NBNMyths

IFocus said:


> Plenty of time for Abbott to blow up one day he will have to face the cameras without a script.




Yep, **** happens


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> Yep, **** happens






> Actually, I don't have a particularly strong political obsession



.

Somewhere between your yes-men, IFocus, Todster and So_Cynical I would say.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> .
> 
> Somewhere between your yes-men, IFocus, Todster and So_Cynical I would say.




Oh come on, surely you though the whole Abbott/SH thing last year was funny?!


----------



## awg

a brief summary after chatting to my contacts

*They all want to be NBN direct employees, as they pay 1/3 more, lol
( not having to make a profit margin sufficient to satisfy shareholders must be helpful)

*my question about lack of grunters and time & problem to connect each individual premises is most relevant, ie Armidale is overtime

* They estimate 2.5 to 3 years for Newcastle region to be fully online, based upon required timelines.

I hope/suppose there would be some improvements in efficiency along the way, it will have to just all work out, thing is the entire industry is geared for it, there no going back imo.

On the few occasions I have seen Mal Turnbull on the subject, he seemed very limp on unwinding


----------



## todster

Calliope said:


> .
> 
> Somewhere between your yes-men, IFocus, Todster and So_Cynical I would say.




I'm nodding like Tony Abbott minus the wall


----------



## Calliope

Knobby22 said:


> _"Opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull said that the NBN "can't be such a compelling proposition" if it needed a lot of PR staff to sell it." _
> 
> I don't know about that. It has the less than unbiased Newscorp papers against it as well the opposition.




THE publicity machine charged with spruiking the National Broadband Network employs 27 people. This certainly simplifies the jobs for you and NBNMyths to sing their praises. NBN sceptics on the other hand have only The Australian with its war on waste to get the unbiased version. Turnbull is only a voice in the wilderness.

Toadster..







> ."I'm nodding like Tony Abbott minus the wall"




That's what yes-men do


----------



## Knobby22

Calliope said:


> THE publicity machine charged with spruiking the National Broadband Network employs 27 people. This certainly simplifies the jobs for you and NBNMyths to sing their praises. NBN sceptics on the other hand have only The Australian with its war on waste to get the unbiased version. Turnbull is only a voice in the wilderness.




If the Age, SMH or the TV stations got some information on wastage they would publish it. The attacked Victorian Labor long and hard over police corruption and the pathetic salt to freshwater plant.

They have been critical on the government in the past regarding the NBN. 

But the lies and distortions the Australian trots out help nobody. When you are hit with propaganda then you have to respond.

I don't like seeing spindoctors employed but it is basic common sense. If someone spins it one way, you need someone else to supply the facts and spin it back.  Modern information theory


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> NBN sceptics on the other hand have only The Australian with its war on waste to get the unbiased version.





Sorry but I am only allowed to put 6 laughing emoticons in this post, which is nowhere near enough to express the volume of the laughter I got when I read that sentence.

While the Oz is usually _reasonably accurate_ in their NBN stories, there's a big difference between reporting the _truth_ and the _whole truth_. They regualrly put a sprinkling of weasel words into their NBN stories to give a negative slant, while they simply don't report almost every piece of information that supports the NBN. Meanwhile, other media outlets (Fairfax, ABC, the general tech media) report the whole thing.

You don't have to look back far for an example. Remember a few days ago when the Oz reported that NBN Co had only signed 12 of the 22 active ISPs to their wholesale agreement? That story was also reported by Fairfax and the tech media. But then, a couple of days later when NBN Co announced that they had signed another 9 ISPs taking the total to 21 before the deadline expired, the Australian ignored the story completely, while everyone else reported it.

If you think the Oz is providing totally objective reporting on the NBN, you're sadly mistaken. Perhaps it explains your opinion though. The Oz are reporting the side of the story that suits their agenda. Nothing more.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> Perhaps it explains your opinion though. The Oz are reporting the side of the story that suits their agenda. Nothing more.




Ditto the 27 spin doctors and the Fairfax press and the ABC and your opinion.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Ditto the 27 spin doctors and the Fairfax press and the ABC and your opinion.




The difference is that I can back my claims with verifiable facts, and likewise show evidence of the Australian's (and the rest of News Ltd's) selective and misleading reporting on the NBN.

The tech media have certainly woken up to it: http://www.zdnet.com.au/advance-australian-fair-339306784.htm

Can you do the same?


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> The difference is that I can back my claims with verifiable facts, and likewise show evidence of the Australian's (and the rest of News Ltd's) selective and misleading reporting on the NBN.
> 
> The tech media have certainly woken up to it: http://www.zdnet.com.au/advance-australian-fair-339306784.htm
> 
> Can you do the same?




I suppose I could if I were an obsessive, but the NBN is not that important to me except for the waste of public moneys. My main interest here was pricking inflated egos. As an obsessive you will naturally want the last word. Go for it.


----------



## NBNMyths

NBNMyths said:


> The difference is that *I can back my claims* with verifiable facts, and likewise show evidence of the Australian's (and the rest of News Ltd's) selective and misleading reporting on the NBN.
> 
> *Can you do the same?*






Calliope said:


> I suppose I could if I were an obsessive, but the NBN is not that important to me except for the waste of public moneys. My main interest here was pricking inflated egos. As an obsessive you will naturally want the last word. Go for it.




I'll take that as a _*no*_ then.


----------



## todster

Calliope said:


> I suppose I could if I were an obsessive, but the NBN is not that important to me except for the waste of public moneys. My main interest here was pricking inflated egos. As an obsessive you will naturally want the last word. Go for it.




The amount of time your here i would be suprised if you payed any tax


----------



## Macquack

Calliope said:


> I suppose I could if I were an obsessive, but the NBN is not that important to me except for the waste of public moneys. *My main interest here was pricking inflated egos*. As an obsessive you will naturally want the last word. Go for it.




Good work NBNMyths, you have pricked the biggest ego of them all.

By the way, I am intrigued as to what Calliope did in his working days. I am guessing a school teacher?


----------



## Calliope

Macquack said:


> Good work NBNMyths, you have pricked the biggest ego of them all.
> 
> By the way, I am intrigued as to what Calliope did in his working days. I am guessing a school teacher?




Join the conga line  of brown nosers Macquack.


----------



## Macquack

What did you do for a job? You bag just about everybody so spill the beans.


----------



## todster

Macquack said:


> What did you do for a job? You bag just about everybody so spill the beans.




Tested lemons for bitterness at the lemon factory on the sunshine coast


----------



## Logique

This thread has run it's course, time for it to be closed down.


----------



## Knobby22

The NBN is a long way from finished.
No rush, I get quite a lot of enjoyment from reading this thread.


----------



## Calliope

Logique said:


> This thread has run it's course, time for it to be closed down.




Yes , the Conroy supporters have run out of argument and have resorted to invective.


----------



## boofhead

Conroy supporters? Some of us live in parts of the world where we see ourselves falling behind more and more. If Telstra isn't going to do anything then we know we won't get it. It isn't about Conroy. It's about infrastructure that will changes things, not some token crap that makes no difference.


----------



## drsmith

Logique said:


> This thread has run it's course, time for it to be closed down.



No, no.

Plan B has many, many years to run, most likely over budget or behind schedule, or both.


----------



## Smurf1976

todster said:


> Tested lemons for bitterness at the lemon factory on the sunshine coast



That made me laugh 

And since when were lemons made in a factory? I always thought they grew on trees!


----------



## sptrawler

We can't shut this thread down, it is the only one with credible posts, that supports the only government  policy that hasn't imploded.
I see that Optus want a queens counsel to go through Telstras seperation proposal, to ensure they, the parasite, can use the doner untill the next doner(N.B.N) is born.IMO

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...aration-proposal/story-fn91v9q3-1226243989622

The way it is going the parasites will still be blocking the proposal untill the next election. Yeh 

And by the way Todster, you don't get lips like that by sucking lemons.LOL


----------



## So_Cynical

Slightly off topic but i spent the weekend enjoying the Elvis festival at Parkes  for those that don't know Parkes is a town of about 10000 people, that is approximately 360 KM west of Sydney...on the train trip from Sydney everybody's mobile service would drop out every time we were 3 or 4 minutes out of what ever town we had just passed, Bathurst, Orange etc.

And this is just out the back of Sydney, the bush has sub standard communication services....even a text sent from my mum standing next to me (in Parkes) took 14 minutes to arrive, the NBN will go along way toward levelling the (quality of life) playing field for all Australians wherever they live.


----------



## bellenuit

*NBN to revise Optus no-criticism demand*

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/aus...criticism-demand/story-fn4iyzsr-1226257717323


----------



## joea

I just want to explain a couple of things. I had satellite, but now have ADSL.

If you have to have broadband, then satellite is  a poor mans version.

With my satellite plan, its lopsided.e.g. (1G paid/6G free and this increases at same ratio.)... "TAKE WHAT YOU GET".

To improve my plan, I had to apply for (satellite/NBN), but on receiving approval would be given 7 satellite operators to choose from.
To get approval I had to apply to NBN, who then told me I had to ring two telco's to confirm why I could not get broadband, and record the information and pass it on them.
Well I rang telstra and explained my call, and explained, that both houses on either side of me had copper broadband. The answer was "you are too far from the exchange, and you have no wireless coverage"?
I have a phone with AAPT(now iiNet). So I also explained the above to them which they basically confirmed, BUT said, "why don't we apply for a connection."?

NBN sent me the paper work that confirmed my application for a new plan( which incidentally is to replace my 1200mm fibreglass dish, and  ipstar modem with all costs going to taxpayer).AGAIN!!!

In the mean time, iiNet processed the application, kept me up to date, sent a BobLITE 4 socket, wireless modem, fired me up on broadband, all in 14 days.

I have not had time yet to cancel the application to NBN yet, as I am busy cleaning up the empty HAHN Super Dry 3.5 bottles near my patio from the celebrations.

I have joined the happy family of iiNET, who incidentally have just absorbed Internode.

So there is another happy chappy from the Daintree area.
p.s. this is not a joke, but the facts.
cheers joea


----------



## todster

joea said:


> I just want to explain a couple of things. I had satellite, but now have ADSL.
> 
> If you have to have broadband, then satellite is  a poor mans version.
> 
> With my satellite plan, its lopsided.e.g. (1G paid/6G free and this increases at same ratio.)... "TAKE WHAT YOU GET".
> 
> To improve my plan, I had to apply for (satellite/NBN), but on receiving approval would be given 7 satellite operators to choose from.
> To get approval I had to apply to NBN, who then told me I had to ring two telco's to confirm why I could not get broadband, and record the information and pass it on them.
> Well I rang telstra and explained my call, and explained, that both houses on either side of me had copper broadband. The answer was "you are too far from the exchange, and you have no wireless coverage"?
> I have a phone with AAPT(now iiNet). So I also explained the above to them which they basically confirmed, BUT said, "why don't we apply for a connection."?
> 
> NBN sent me the paper work that confirmed my application for a new plan( which incidentally is to replace my 1200mm fibreglass dish, and  ipstar modem with all costs going to taxpayer).AGAIN!!!
> 
> In the mean time, iiNet processed the application, kept me up to date, sent a BobLITE 4 socket, wireless modem, fired me up on broadband, all in 14 days.
> 
> I have not had time yet to cancel the application to NBN yet, as I am busy cleaning up the empty HAHN Super Dry 3.5 bottles near my patio from the celebrations.
> 
> I have joined the happy family of iiNET, who incidentally have just absorbed Internode.
> 
> So there is another happy chappy from the Daintree area.
> p.s. this is not a joke, but the facts.
> cheers joea




I coudn't put my finger on it but now it comes clear you drink mid strength


----------



## joea

todster said:


> I coudn't put my finger on it but now it comes clear you drink mid strength




you are not wrong about that. 3 cans of VB and the chair has 3 legs.
But I have  a reputation to be compatible across all brands.
joe


----------



## NBNMyths

joea said:


> I just want to explain a couple of things. I had satellite, but now have ADSL.
> 
> If you have to have broadband, then satellite is  a poor mans version.
> 
> With my satellite plan, its lopsided.e.g. (1G paid/6G free and this increases at same ratio.)... "TAKE WHAT YOU GET".
> 
> To improve my plan, I had to apply for (satellite/NBN), but on receiving approval would be given 7 satellite operators to choose from.
> To get approval I had to apply to NBN, who then told me I had to ring two telco's to confirm why I could not get broadband, and record the information and pass it on them.
> Well I rang telstra and explained my call, and explained, that both houses on either side of me had copper broadband. The answer was "you are too far from the exchange, and you have no wireless coverage"?
> I have a phone with AAPT(now iiNet). So I also explained the above to them which they basically confirmed, BUT said, "why don't we apply for a connection."?
> 
> NBN sent me the paper work that confirmed my application for a new plan( which incidentally is to replace my 1200mm fibreglass dish, and  ipstar modem with all costs going to taxpayer).AGAIN!!!
> 
> In the mean time, iiNet processed the application, kept me up to date, sent a BobLITE 4 socket, wireless modem, fired me up on broadband, all in 14 days.
> 
> I have not had time yet to cancel the application to NBN yet, as I am busy cleaning up the empty HAHN Super Dry 3.5 bottles near my patio from the celebrations.
> 
> I have joined the happy family of iiNET, who incidentally have just absorbed Internode.
> 
> So there is another happy chappy from the Daintree area.
> p.s. this is not a joke, but the facts.
> cheers joea




I don't doubt the above, and I'll give you some explanations on some of the points:

Yes, satellite is a "last resort" broadband technology. The major issues are latency and reliability. That's why the NBN is only 3% satellite.

Yes, iiNet are great. I'm currently with them for my phone and ADSL (with a BoB2), and they have always been helpful.

The current NBN satellite service is only interim, and has a limited capacity. It's really just a replacement for the old Aust Broadband Guarantee. That's why they make you jump through hoops to get it. They only want to offer it to people who really don't have any other option until the new high capacity satellites are launched.

Once the proper NBN satellite service comes online in ~2015, the process of being connected will be essentially the same as connecting any other form of NBN service, which is essentially the same as what you went through getting ADSL through iiNet. It will also have the same pricing as a 12/1 NBN service provided over either wireless or fibre. No need to go through multiple people, you'll just contact your ISP and request a connection.

Distance is the enemy of ADSL. The Telstra operator would just have a guide in front of them that would say "in your location, ADSL doesn't work". There is (as you discovered) a way for them to test/override that guideline if you're close to the cutoff limit. I'd be pretty sure that while your ADSL may be better than satellite in some ways, at the distance you must be from the exchange you will be getting a very slow ADSL service, and the upcoming NBN wireless or sat will almost certainly be faster (although in the case of sat have a longer lag time). 

For curiosity sake, go to http://www.speedtest.net and post your result.


----------



## bellenuit

NBNMyths said:


> For curiosity sake, go to http://www.speedtest.net and post your result.




I would try a few different servers at Speedtest to see which gives the best results. About 8 months ago I used Speedtest to check my Telstra cable speed and was completely p***** off when I never got more than 2 or 3 Mbps, when tested many times over several weeks at different times during the day. I think the rated speed is 30 Mbps, although that isn't fixed for cable. I was using a Perth server, assuming that would be the best since I am in Perth. I almost switched to iinet adsl when someone suggested using a different server. Using Sydney and sometimes Melbourne, I was able to get up to 22 Mbps, which put me in the top 2 or 3% Australia wide.

Incidentally, Perth has given me 27.28Mbps just now, so there must have been some upgrades to local servers. 

I must say I am happy getting that speed on 100Gb download limit all for $15pm (negotiated)


----------



## joea

NBNMyths said:


> For curiosity sake, go to http://www.speedtest.net and post your result.




NBNMyths.
Thanks for that.
I do not think people who have not experienced Satellite would fully understand.

The best way I could sum it up is, if my satellite provider was in charge of putting something on the moon, we would see a picture of it from a tourist landing on Ayeres Rock, with the transmission coming(from those in control) the next day. On the good side it was weather compensated. i.e. if it was on, and  with rain at one inch an hour no problems.

Speed test, been there, done that but that is not the answer.
They send up a satellite, and as it is loaded up everything starts to deteriorate.
Then they rehash email and you ask them what happened.? "Nothing mate , must be your computer". Then next time they rehash emai,l they send you a message.

A geek knows he never compiles code incorrectly. (hello where do bugs come from? not the garden!!!)

I spent an hour convincing a geek, that he had the controls on two vessels in parallel,
back to front. Even after he switched them he was not really convinced. So I put one on manual and shut it to 10%. He then agreed.

I will never use satellite again.

joea


----------



## noco

bellenuit said:


> I was reading an article today, I can't recall if it was the Fin Review or The Weekend Australian as I read both, that made the claim the Julia will scrap the NBN by the end of next week, with the Queensland disasters as the excuse. No source given. It said that Julia is gradually dumping all the commitments made during Kevin's reign




According to the article written by Piers Akerman, this socialist left wing Labor/Green Government are about spend more taxpayers funds on artistic promotions on this WHITE ELEPHANT NBN.


http://blogs.news.com.au/dailyteleg...elegraph/comments/labors_artistic_propaganda/


----------



## NBNMyths

noco said:


> According to the article written by Piers Akerman, this socialist left wing Labor/Green Government are about spend more taxpayers funds on artistic promotions on this WHITE ELEPHANT NBN.
> 
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/dailyteleg...elegraph/comments/labors_artistic_propaganda/




 "Piers Akerman _article_". I think that's an oxymoron isn't it?

I would have though _"Piers Akerman's anti-anything-not-ultra-conservative rant of the day"_ would be a more accurate description 

On a more serious note, it's pretty standard practise in industry and Government to fund projects for innovation based around new products/technologies/methods etc. Some of the most successful tech companies in the World (eg Google) fund and encourage similar projects on a permanent basis. That's one reason why they are so successful.

The NBN is no different. There are similar incentives and projects underway for scientific, medical, education etc uses for the NBN's high speed broadband too.


----------



## NBNMyths

*Breaking News! *

Following his strong criticism of the new NBN Satellite contract, Malcolm Turnbull has released a graphic of the Coalition's alternative policy for remote broadband delivery:


----------



## NBNMyths

*Aussies support NBN by two to one*

AUSTRALIANS supporting the high speed national broadband network (NBN) exceed opponents by more than two to one, a new survey shows.

The Essential Research survey released today showed 56 per cent of 1042 respondents were in favour of the NBN, up from 54 per cent when the question was previously asked in April 2011.

As well, support for the $35.9 billion project has risen by eight percentage points from 48 per cent in February last year.

Some 25 per cent of those surveyed opposed the NBN, down from 31 per cent in February 2011.

The biggest supporters of the NBN were Labor voters at 80 per cent, with Greens voters on 77 per cent.

While 42 per cent of Coalition voters were in favour of the network, 43 per cent were not.

The government-owned enterprise, NBN Co, is in charge of rolling out fibre-optic cable to deliver high-speed broadband services to 93 per cent of Australia's 13 million homes, schools and businesses by 2021.

Fixed wireless technology will provide high-speed internet to four per cent of premises, and the remaining three per cent will be supplied by two satellites to areas outside the reach of the cable and wireless networks.

The online survey was conducted between February 15 and 19, 2012.


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/br...-two-to-one-poll/story-e6frf7ko-1226276321440

http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/opinion-of-nbn-3/


----------



## Bill M

*Re: Aussies support NBN by two to one*



NBNMyths said:


> The online survey was conducted between February 15 and 19, 2012.
> 
> 
> http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/br...-two-to-one-poll/story-e6frf7ko-1226276321440
> 
> http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/opinion-of-nbn-3/




And to add to that current online polling on the smh.com.au site is showing 74% in favour and 24% against.

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/broadband-wins-converts-20120220-1tjqf.html


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

The NBN is getting like the pink batts scandal.

A mate lives in Mundingburra, a Townsville suburb full of ABC listeners and Labor luvvies. With the recent storms and weather they lost power. They said to themselves at least we still have the internet, as we are on the NBN, being first movers for the privilege and good ALP voters.

Problem was the NBN wires are not underground, they go with the power and were knocked out with the power.

Mate said, he would be fine as the NBN spruiker assured him the battery would last for days.

The battery carked it after 11 hours.

What a joke. He now has no internet.

All those promises, and all that infrastructure, and they put it overground in a cyclone/storm area.

My mate is now going to vote for the Katter Party. He had a fair few knocks at footy as a kid, but I am told is a good financial planner. He cannot now contact his clients, which may or may not advantage them.

gg


----------



## So_Cynical

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Problem was the NBN wires are not underground, they go with the power and were knocked out with the power. All those promises, and all that infrastructure, and they put it overground in a cyclone/storm area.




So are you suggesting that the fed Govt should increase the NBN spend by placing ALL cabling underground? and perhaps spending an extra 4 or 5 billion.

Seriously 

This thread is a nightmare for you GG...and it seems the nightmare continues.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Garpal Gumnut said:


> The NBN is getting like the pink batts scandal.
> 
> A mate lives in Mundingburra, a Townsville suburb full of ABC listeners and Labor luvvies. With the recent storms and weather they lost power. They said to themselves at least we still have the internet, as we are on the NBN, being first movers for the privilege and good ALP voters.
> 
> Problem was the NBN wires are not underground, they go with the power and were knocked out with the power.
> 
> Mate said, he would be fine as the NBN spruiker assured him the battery would last for days.
> 
> The battery carked it after 11 hours.
> 
> What a joke. He now has no internet.
> 
> All those promises, and all that infrastructure, and they put it overground in a cyclone/storm area.
> 
> My mate is now going to vote for the Katter Party. He had a fair few knocks at footy as a kid, but I am told is a good financial planner. He cannot now contact his clients, which may or may not advantage them.
> 
> gg






So_Cynical said:


> So are you suggesting that the fed Govt should increase the NBN spend by placing ALL cabling underground? and perhaps spending an extra 4 or 5 billion.
> 
> Seriously
> 
> This thread is a nightmare for you GG...and it seems the nightmare continues.




I would suggest mate, that the NBN spend is a total waste of money.

If the ALP leaning, upper class of Mundingburra are dissatisfied with the NBN, the NBN is in strife.

And big strife, mate.

It does not deliver, is the message. It does not deliver.

It is an Ex-Parrot.

gg


----------



## nulla nulla

NBNMyths said:


> *Breaking News! *
> 
> Following his strong criticism of the new NBN Satellite contract, Malcolm Turnbull has released a graphic of the Coalition's alternative policy for remote broadband delivery:




I wonder if the "ebay seller" lists his address as Nigeria?


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> The NBN is getting like the pink batts scandal.
> 
> A mate lives in Mundingburra, a Townsville suburb full of ABC listeners and Labor luvvies. With the recent storms and weather they lost power. They said to themselves at least we still have the internet, as we are on the NBN, being first movers for the privilege and good ALP voters.
> 
> Problem was the NBN wires are not underground, they go with the power and were knocked out with the power.
> 
> Mate said, he would be fine as the NBN spruiker assured him the battery would last for days.
> 
> The battery carked it after 11 hours.
> 
> What a joke. He now has no internet.
> 
> All those promises, and all that infrastructure, and they put it overground in a cyclone/storm area.
> 
> My mate is now going to vote for the Katter Party. He had a fair few knocks at footy as a kid, but I am told is a good financial planner. He cannot now contact his clients, which may or may not advantage them.
> 
> gg




Oh gg, you really don't understand much about the whole project, do you?

About 75% of the NBN will be underground and 25% overhead. Basically, wherever the Telstra lines are overhead, the NBN will be too. Wherever Telstra lines are underground, that's where the NBN will be. The Townsville trial site is the overhead trial site and was constructed before the NBN got access to Telstra's underground duct network.

It's not that the NBN wires in Townville were "knocked out", it's that the power was knocked out. This should be obvious since the NBN was _"working for 11 hours"_. Since fibre doesn't carry power, any fibre network needs power at both ends, hence the supply of the NBN backup battery. The battery has always been advertised as lasting for 4-5 hours (so 11 hours is quite spectacular), and it has never been advertised as "lasting for days". I should also point out that the backup battery only provides power to the NBN voice port, not the data ports. Either way, whether the lines were above or below ground in this case is a moot point. 

All that aside, there is no network that works without power. While the current copper network works for phone calls without power (as the backup batteries are located at the exchange), it doesn't work for internet since both ADSL and dialup modems require power to operate. Mobile broadband requires backup batteries at the tower which only last for a few hours, and of course the user dongle requires power from the laptop it's plugged in to. The coalition's FTTN proposal requires power at the street cabinet located about 500m apart along every street, and at the house to power the VDSL modem.

Perhaps you'd like to tell everyone about the power-less alternative which you advocate? 

Oh, and does your mate realise that Katter is one of the strongest supporters of the NBN?




Garpal Gumnut said:


> I would suggest mate, that the NBN spend is a total waste of money.
> 
> If the ALP leaning, upper class of Mundingburra are dissatisfied with the NBN, the NBN is in strife.
> 
> And big strife, mate.
> 
> It does not deliver, is the message. It does not deliver.
> 
> It is an Ex-Parrot.
> 
> gg




It's popularity is only growing. Sorry gg that your prophecies from this thread continue to be proven laughably inaccurate:   

People are actually moving to Kiama and Willunga just to get the NBN. Hitting 26 and 29% takeup respectively after 5 months,it is dwarfing ADSL which only hit 3% after 18 months when it first became available.

http://southern-times-messenger.whereilive.com.au/news/story/nbn-brings-people-to-willunga/

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2012/s3454550.htm


----------



## DB008

*Chinese company shut out from NBN tendering*

*Chinese company shut out from NBN tendering *



> A Chinese technology company has been shut out from tendering for National Broadband Network contracts because of national security concerns.
> 
> Huawei operates in more than 100 countries and has been in Australia since 2004.
> 
> The Federal Government says it made its decision because it has a responsibility to protect the integrity of the NBN and the information carried on it.
> 
> Prime Minister Julia Gillard defended the decision, saying the Government was acting in the best interests of the network.



More on link above.


I'm sure that NBNMyths can give us some more info on this?
Will Cisco now be the major supplier?


----------



## NBNMyths

*Re: Chinese company shut out from NBN tendering*



DB008 said:


> *Chinese company shut out from NBN tendering *
> 
> 
> More on link above.
> 
> 
> I'm sure that NBNMyths can give us some more info on this?
> Will Cisco now be the major supplier?




First I heard about it was the news this week.

Most of the NBN's major equipment contracts have already been let to Alcatel, Cisco, Nokia-Siemens etc. Not sure what would be left for Huawei anyway. Maybe they were  hoping NBN Co would make them a secondary supplier or something.

Other reports today are saying that the decision to exclude them was based on advice from ASIO.


----------



## DB008

Yes, there seems to be a fair amount of 'Chinese Government sponsored' hacking that has made the headlines.

Google pulled out of China.
RIO/BHP/FMG all got compromised recently.

Is it surprising? Not really. 

Can the parts be made to spec and thus eliminating so called security threats?


----------



## Knobby22

DB008 said:


> Yes, there seems to be a fair amount of 'Chinese Government sponsored' hacking that has made the headlines.
> 
> Google pulled out of China.
> RIO/BHP/FMG all got compromised recently.
> 
> Is it surprising? Not really.
> 
> Can the parts be made to spec and thus eliminating so called security threats?




I don't really care, if they want to win Australian contracts then they should stop putting our citizens in jail.


----------



## DB008

Knobby22 said:


> I don't really care, if they want to win Australian contracts then they should stop putting our citizens in jail.




That doesn't make sense at all.
Do a crime in another country, but come home to do the time? 

(Sounds familiar - maybe l should smuggle drugs in Asia, and come back here to do the time, instead of the death penalty????)

Your probably talking about the Rio exec who is doing time in China?


----------



## bellenuit

*Re: Chinese company shut out from NBN tendering*



DB008 said:


> *Chinese company shut out from NBN tendering *
> 
> 
> More on link above.
> 
> 
> I'm sure that NBNMyths can give us some more info on this?
> Will Cisco now be the major supplier?




This is one issue I support Gillard on. The Chinese do not play by the rules and letting them in on a contract so sensitive as this is just asking for trouble. I think Downer ought to be ashamed for his statements claiming that the only reason they are being excluded is because they are Chinese. When it comes to national security, all sides of politics should pull together, even ex politicians.


----------



## DB008

I agree bellenuit.
This is one issue where Gillard has to be given a thumbs up.

National security, if we stuff it up now, imagine how much it will cost to fix and the implications it might have???


----------



## Knobby22

DB008 said:


> That doesn't make sense at all.
> Do a crime in another country, but come home to do the time?
> 
> (Sounds familiar - maybe l should smuggle drugs in Asia, and come back here to do the time, instead of the death penalty????)
> 
> Your probably talking about the Rio exec who is doing time in China?




And Mathew Ng among others. They don't get a fair trial. One guy was told hand over your business or we will jail you. If they want good relations in our business world they should give us due process in theirs.


----------



## DB008

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/national-broadband-network-at-risk-from-spies-and-hackers/story-fn59niix-1225981280336



> In 2008, The Australian revealed that Australian intelligence agencies were investigating Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei, in the wake of international concerns about its alleged links with the Chinese military and government.
> 
> Huawei, which is seeking to be a major player in the NBN, has strongly denied any such links and has enlisted former foreign minister Alexander Downer's lobbying firm Bespoke Approach to help it open doors for it in Australia.
> 
> The federal government believes China is the nation that poses the most serious cyber threat to Australia because of the scale and sophistication of its hacking capabilities.
> 
> China denies it employs cyber spies to glean national security information from Australia.





U.S. government to investigate Huawei, ZTE for security threats
http://www.mobileburn.com/17604/news/us-government-to-investigate-huawei-zte-for-security-threats

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203363504577187502201577054.html

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203363504577187502201577054.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Aurora


----------



## Glen48

Wouldn't the feds have anti every thing encoded to stop hacking etc regardless of who installs the system????


----------



## DB008

CNBC Code Wars



> Much of the computer hardware and software used to power networks in the U.S. are made in countries that spy on us relentlessly in cyberspace. These components could be infecting the manufacturing line with invisible, anonymous Trojan horses. It’s espionage for a new generation.




http://www.cnbc.com/id/42210831



I have no idea how reliable the story is, still interesting.


----------



## bellenuit

Is this one of the most stupid statements ever? From Huawei’s local chairman, John Lord:

_“Huawei is not a security risk to Australia,” he told The Australian Financial Review. “That’s why I am the chairman and why Mr [John] Brumby and Mr [Alexander] Downer are on the board.”_

http://www.afr.com/p/national/huawei_we_re_no_security_risk_zisPkK3nBAZBaduA1UGrQJ

Putting those three on the board was to facilitate access to the Australian Government to make it easier for Huawei to get selected for Australian contracts. None of the three have a technical background in communications as far as I can tell, so they would be completely unfamiliar with espionage methods. 

If I, as a company, were to try and gain access to a foreign government's infrastructure so as to be in a position to undertake nefarious activities, the first thing I would do is to try and gain the confidence of that government. That is one of the reasons they are on the board.

IMO all three are acting treasonously by implying the government's actions are xenophobic, when none of them are privy to the information that ASIO has.


----------



## McLovin

bellenuit said:


> Is this one of the most stupid statements ever? From Huawei’s local chairman, John Lord:
> 
> _“Huawei is not a security risk to Australia,” he told The Australian Financial Review. “That’s why I am the chairman and why Mr [John] Brumby and Mr [Alexander] Downer are on the board.”_
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/national/huawei_we_re_no_security_risk_zisPkK3nBAZBaduA1UGrQJ
> 
> Putting those three on the board was to facilitate access to the Australian Government to make it easier for Huawei to get selected for Australian contracts. None of the three have a technical background in communications as far as I can tell, so they would be completely unfamiliar with espionage methods.




I agree.

I'm actually surprised Downer and Brumby are on the board of this company. Considering the number of cyber attacks that eminate from China against Western governments and corporations, it seems somewhat myopic on their part to want to be associated with the biggest telecoms manufacturer in China.



			
				bellenuit said:
			
		

> IMO all three are acting treasonously by implying the government's actions are xenophobic, when none of them are privy to the information that ASIO has.




It's not even close to being treason.


----------



## DB008

*Huawei fears spread to New Zealand*

http://www.zdnet.com.au/huawei-fears-spread-to-new-zealand-339334731.htm

*Huawei fears spread to New Zealand 
*


> The Australian Government's decision to ban Huawei from tendering for the National Broadband Network (NBN) has sent ripples across the Tasman, with the New Zealand Labour Party calling on its government to explain Huawei's involvement with New Zealand's ultra-fast broadband roll-out.
> 
> The government banned Chinese-owned network vendor Huawei from competing for contracts with the NBN because of security fears. Huawei has long been under scrutiny because of alleged links with the People's Liberation Army. The office of the attorney-general said that it had the responsibility to protect the integrity of the network and the information carried on it, and Prime Minister Julia Gillard said the decision was "prudent".
> 
> Huawei has picked up a number of contracts for rolling out fibre across New Zealand as part of the government's NZ$1.5 billion ultra-fast broadband project. The open-access fibre network will cover 75 per cent of the country and will be able to offer Kiwis download speeds of up to 100 megabits per second (Mbps) and upload speeds of 50Mbps. As with Australia's NBN, the roll-out is expected to take 10 years.


----------



## moXJO

*Re: Huawei fears spread to New Zealand*



DB008 said:


> http://www.zdnet.com.au/huawei-fears-spread-to-new-zealand-339334731.htm
> 
> *Huawei fears spread to New Zealand
> *




God knows why NZ cares if anyone is spying on them. Are they worried their supposed record sheep numbers will be found out to be fake or something.


----------



## Julia

*Re: Huawei fears spread to New Zealand*



moXJO said:


> God knows why NZ cares if anyone is spying on them. Are they worried their supposed record sheep numbers will be found out to be fake or something.



 Well, for that matter, what would they want to be spying on Australia for?


----------



## moXJO

*Re: Huawei fears spread to New Zealand*



Julia said:


> Well, for that matter, what would they want to be spying on Australia for?




America trying to get a foothold over here for their pacific capabilities


----------



## McLovin

*Re: Huawei fears spread to New Zealand*



Julia said:


> Well, for that matter, what would they want to be spying on Australia for?




Australia and Japan are probably the two closest US allies in the Asian region. In terms of bilateral trade, Australia is the 6th largest trading partner with China. I'd say those are two fairly significant factors.


----------



## DB008




----------



## DB008

*Probe in UK led to Huawei NBN ban*

*Probe in UK led to Huawei NBN ban *



> BRITAIN'S intelligence services were forced to erect a costly, resource-intensive auditing structure to ensure Huawei did not steal secrets after the Chinese telco was allowed to take part in a British broadband project.
> 
> As Foreign Minister Bob Carr moved to soothe tensions with Beijing, encouraging Huawei to expand its commercial operations in Australia in lieu of lucrative National Broadband Network contracts, the country's top signals intelligence expert, Des Ball, said yesterday there was "no doubt" Huawei partnered with China's espionage services.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/in-depth/probe-in-uk-led-to-huawei-nbn-ban/story-e6frgaif-1226312911964


----------



## DB008

ABC Morning Radio

Tech review with Peter Marks: HUAWEI NBN  

On Monday, we reported that Chinese technology giant Huawei had been banned from tendering for contracts to supply the National Broadband Network.

Huawei has been operating in Australia since 2004 and is headed by a former People's Liberation Army engineer.

So how real are the security risks implied by ASIO?

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/tech-review-with-peter-marks-huawei-nbn/3916908


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

The NBN is an ALP/Green waste of money.

People are turning to ipads and cellphones.

This is a huge impost on the workers of Australia.

http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...huge-saving-says-turnbull-20120417-1x5nt.html

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> The NBN is an ALP/Green waste of money.
> 
> People are turning to ipads and cellphones.
> 
> This is a huge impost on the workers of Australia.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...huge-saving-says-turnbull-20120417-1x5nt.html
> 
> gg




Come on GG, I was pretty kind not posting stories about the start of the volume rollout, considering how embarrassing it must be following a few of your "imminent demise of the NBN" posts in this thread.

But now you go and post rubbish from Turnbull, extrapolating it even further than his own disingenuous comments.

Let me throw some facts in the way of your "good story":

The vast majority of data downloaded over tablets and smartphones is actually served by the fixed network over WiFi, not the mobile broadband network. In fact, it is not permitted to download movies or large apps from iTunes over the mobile network. You must use WiFi. A US report states that 91.9% of all data delivered to iPads comes via the fixed line network.
http://macdailynews.com/2011/06/23/...ible-for-89-of-worldwide-tablet-data-traffic/

The US FCC and assorted other groups claim that wireless networks will soon collapse unless even more traffic can be moved off mobile networks, and on to WiFi attached to the fixed network.
http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/21/technology/spectrum_crunch/index.htm
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...spectrum-biggest-peril-to-mobile-wireless.ars
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/29/AR2010112904854.html

According to the ABS, fixed lines are not being replaced by mobile broadband connections. To the contrary, even though ADSL is at near-saturation point, connections are still growing at double the rate of new dwellings.
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/8153.0Chapter3Dec 2011

Again, according to the ABS, mobile broadband accounts for just 7% of data volume in Australia, down from 8% a year ago. Fixed lines (DSL, cable and fibre) account for 93% (up from 92%).
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/8153.0Chapter7Dec 2011


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> Come on GG, I was pretty kind not posting stories about the start of the volume rollout, considering how embarrassing it must be following a few of your "imminent demise of the NBN" posts in this thread.
> 
> But now you go and post rubbish from Turnbull, extrapolating it even further than his own disingenuous comments.
> 
> Let me throw some facts in the way of your "good story":
> 
> The vast majority of data downloaded over tablets and smartphones is actually served by the fixed network over WiFi, not the mobile broadband network. In fact, it is not permitted to download movies or large apps from iTunes over the mobile network. You must use WiFi. A US report states that 91.9% of all data delivered to iPads comes via the fixed line network.
> http://macdailynews.com/2011/06/23/...ible-for-89-of-worldwide-tablet-data-traffic/
> 
> The US FCC and assorted other groups claim that wireless networks will soon collapse unless even more traffic can be moved off mobile networks, and on to WiFi attached to the fixed network.
> http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/21/technology/spectrum_crunch/index.htm
> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...spectrum-biggest-peril-to-mobile-wireless.ars
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/29/AR2010112904854.html
> 
> According to the ABS, fixed lines are not being replaced by mobile broadband connections. To the contrary, even though ADSL is at near-saturation point, connections are still growing at double the rate of new dwellings.
> http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/8153.0Chapter3Dec 2011
> 
> Again, according to the ABS, mobile broadband accounts for just 7% of data volume in Australia, down from 8% a year ago. Fixed lines (DSL, cable and fibre) account for 93% (up from 92%).
> http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/8153.0Chapter7Dec 2011




I actually just posted this to flush you out mate.

Its all being sorted.

The ALP/Green agenda is deeper than most folk realise.

Enjoy NBNMyths, while you can.

gg


----------



## So_Cynical

Garpal Gumnut said:


> The NBN is an ALP/Green waste of money.
> 
> People are turning to ipads and cellphones.
> 
> This is a huge impost on the workers of Australia.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...huge-saving-says-turnbull-20120417-1x5nt.html
> 
> gg




LOL GG you you even bother to actually read what you post links to? 



www.smh.com.au]
Mr Turnbull will say the Coalition favours a cheaper [B]fibre-to-the-node[/B] (FTTN) model said:


> I actually just posted this to flush you out mate.
> 
> *Its all being sorted.*
> 
> The ALP/Green agenda is deeper than most folk realise.
> 
> *Enjoy NBNMyths, while you can*.
> 
> gg








So_Cynical said:


> That's the key...the green senators are mostly newly elected so sitting for 8 year terms...so the question is how many senators will Labor have left after the election, anyway *the Senate terms are fixed so (has a quick google) expire on June 30 2014*  the NBN is as safe as for at least the next 2 and a half years.
> 
> http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/senators/sen_exp.htm
> 
> Then we have troubles, 16 Labor senators vulnerable but i would reckon Bob Brown and the other 2 green Senators would be safe....surely the Australian electorate would not be stupid enough to hand the coalition the senate as well...look at what happened last time.
> ~




Safe as unleveraged Aussie real estate


----------



## sails

So_Cynical said:


> That's the key...the green senators are mostly newly elected so sitting for 8 year terms...so the question is how many senators will Labor have left after the election, anyway the Senate terms are fixed so (has a quick google) expire on June 30 2014  the NBN is as safe as for at least the next 2 and a half years.
> 
> http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/senators/sen_exp.htm
> 
> Then we have troubles, 16 Labor senators vulnerable but i would reckon Bob Brown and the other 2 green Senators would be safe....surely the Australian electorate would not be stupid enough to hand the coalition the senate as well...look at what happened last time.
> ~




If Gillard had kept her promise on carbon tax and simply took it to the people at the next election, your statements above would probably be right.

Voters do NOT like being lied to.  Anna Bligh did the same sort of deception as Gillard has done - except Gillard's is worse, imo.  77 seats to the LNP - 7 to ALP (and likely Bligh's seat will go to LNP).

It is entirely possible that Aussies will indeed throw the lot out that have diddled them and give the coalition both houses so they can clean  up the messes left behind by labor.  This time it's not just debt - there is tangled legislation and  possibly poisoned wells that will need legislation passed by both houses with some urgency.

However, the new senators would not take up their positions until 2014 and if the greens prevent carbon tax being repealed, my guess is a double dissolution with a resulting massive majority in both houses so the coalition can get the job done asap.

Not so sure that your NBN is as safe as you think for another couple of years.


----------



## So_Cynical

sails said:


> However, the new senators would not take up their positions until 2014 and if the greens prevent carbon tax being repealed, my guess is a double dissolution with a resulting massive majority in both houses so the coalition can get the job done asap.
> 
> Not so sure that your NBN is as safe as you think for another couple of years.




Sails seriously. 

http://www.nbnco.com.au/rollout/about-the-rollout.html



			
				www.nbnco.com.au/rollout said:
			
		

> We have released the three year rollout plan for the National Broadband Network with work planned to commence in over 1500 communities and *3.5 million premises throughout Australia through to 30th June 2015*.
> 
> The three year rollout plan includes those areas where the network is active, where construction is currently underway and where work will commence within the next three years




The senate change over will be June 30 2014 so we will be 15 or 20 billion into the rollout with maybe 2 million homes connected...and 1 vote Tonys gona pull the plug. LOL like there wont be any political fall out over that.  

Tony going on TV telling the poeple of Rockhampton they wont be getting the NBN like Mackay did just 1 hour down the road.  snowball in hell.


----------



## sails

SC, it's unlikely that the libs would scrap NBN entirely and can't see them digging up what's already been done.  However, they are likely to look for a more effecient solution.  It's what the libs have been trained to do over the years  to fix up labor's messes.


----------



## So_Cynical

sails said:


> SC, it's unlikely that the libs would scrap NBN entirely and can't see them digging up what's already been done.  However, they are likely to look for a more effecient solution.  It's what the libs have been trained to do over the years  to fix up labor's messes.




The chances of the citizens of Top Ryde getting the NBN (to the home) and the Citizens of West Ryde not getting it to the home is zero....simply will not happen.

Political survival 101...blame the other guy, now with Tony pulling the plug its gona be awfully hard to blame someone else...unless of course Tony goes to the election promising to do so.  deprive the citizens of West Ryde, Tamworth, Broken Hill, Mt Gravatt, etc, etc, etc, etc while 2 million people already have it.

That's just not gona fly.


----------



## joea

sails said:


> SC, it's unlikely that the libs would scrap NBN entirely and can't see them digging up what's already been done.  However, they are likely to look for a more effecient solution.  It's what the libs have been trained to do over the years  to fix up labor's messes.




Correct. 
I cannot find the article, but Abbott has said that they would most probably ensure fibre went to a district, but not necessarily to the home. Or something like that.
NBN is almost at the point of no return, so there should be no doubt that it will go ahead in some form.

joea


----------



## joea

So_Cynical said:


> deprive the citizens of West Ryde, Tamworth, Broken Hill, Mt Gravatt, etc, etc, etc, etc while 2 million people already have it.
> 
> That's just not gona fly.




I cannot see Tony Abbott making decisions on "who or where will get what".
He will be leaving it up to the MP's in charge of the NBN. No doubt the MP's will be then leaving it up to those companies involved in implementing the NBN.
Those companies would advise the government on the "brief" they were given by the government.
There has been no change of Government.!  So what's the problem.?
I see many people jumping at shadow's.

In our area the main communication link to our district was a fibre installation many years ago.
Julia Gillard did not invent Fibre Optic Cable!!!!!!

Less face it. The NBN costs are going to be considerably higher than that estimated by Labor. If there is a change in government, it would surely be responsible to rein in some of the costs while giving maximum exposure.
But that is what would be expected of the coalition!!
joea


----------



## Knobby22

Good point joea.
They will have to be very careful though. Their negativity on this issue lost them a lot of country votes in the last election. 
I think they will end up offering the last section be fibre. Maybe they will subsidize it by raising the Medicare levy. Seems to be the standard trick.


----------



## NBNMyths

sails said:


> SC, it's unlikely that the libs would scrap NBN entirely and can't see them digging up what's already been done.  However, they are likely to look for a more effecient solution.  It's what the libs have been trained to do over the years  to fix up labor's messes.




NBN Co are apparently negotiating contracts that get them through to 2015 for the fibre. They have already signed the contracts for wireless to 2015, and for the supply of 2 satellites in 2015.

Abbott and Turnbull have both stated in the last couple of weeks that they will honour all existing contracts.

So, either way, the FTTP/Wireless/sat NBN rollout is safe until 2015. By which time I'd be pretty certain that the vast majority of the $27bn Govt equity will have been injected. With 100% of sat and wireless, and at least 40% of fibre rollouts already paid for, there won't be much in the way of cost savings available.

As progression has been made, the coalition's position has evolved. They are no longer talking about cancelling it, turning it over to the private sector or tearing up contracts. Turnbull is now talking about renegotiating the Telstra deal so that NBN Co can use the copper to run FTTN.

I suspect that a worst-case outcome now is FTTP until 2015, then a change to VDSL2-based FTTN for the remainder of the rollout, with wireless and sat programs continuing unchanged.

Even that may prove a political challenge, with the FTTP rollout generally happening all over the place, so most Australians will be adjoining an FTTP area by 2015. It will be hard to convince them that they should only get a cheap version, especially if the rollout is running reasonably well.

This is a good analysis:
http://afr.com/p/technology/little_gain_in_halting_the_nbn_juggernaut_IKd4sbqA9MOsffCbIr4cKJ


----------



## So_Cynical

Knobby22 said:


> Good point joea.
> They will have to be very careful though. *Their negativity on this issue lost them a lot of country votes in the last election.*
> I think they will end up offering the last section be fibre. Maybe they will subsidize it by raising the Medicare levy. Seems to be the standard trick.




LOL dude it cost them Government...hello!

Oakeshott and Windsor wanted the NBN and 1 vote Tony wouldn't give it.


----------



## drsmith

Oakeshott and Windsor wanted a carbon tax and Tony wouldn't give it.

Good on him for that.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> Oakeshott and Windsor wanted a carbon tax and Tony wouldn't give it.
> 
> Good on him for that.




Yep 1 vote Tony and the coalition's brains trust at its very best...brilliant. 

Offered the chance of Govt and didn't want it enough...thanks but no thanks guys...we like opposition and the extended oppertunity to make an absoulute zero contribution, afterall its what we do best. :


----------



## drsmith

The price Labor will ultimately pay for office at any cost is much longer in opposition.


----------



## dutchie

Telstra has upset poor Stephen and it really is Tony's fault. He can't handle the truth.


From The Australian
Lanai Vasek

"Communications Minister Stephen Conroy lashes out at Telstra over the NBN

COMMUNICATIONS Minister Stephen Conroy has attacked Telstra over its praise for the Coalition's broadband model, saying the telco has been "holding Australia back" for years.

Senator Conroy said Telstra chief executive David Thodey's declaration ysterday that the Coalition's National Broadband Network model would be cheaper and faster to roll out than the government's $36 billion design was “no surprise”."


----------



## drsmith

How far is the NBN behind schedule ?

So-called critics say 15 months according to The Australian.



> NBN Co currently estimates it will take about 10 years to complete the government's broadband network, but the project has already been dogged by delays that critics estimate have put the project 15 months behind schedule.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...tra-over-the-nbn/story-e6frgaif-1226334207154


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

dutchie said:


> Telstra has upset poor Stephen and it really is Tony's fault. He can't handle the truth.
> 
> 
> From The Australian
> Lanai Vasek
> 
> "Communications Minister Stephen Conroy lashes out at Telstra over the NBN
> 
> COMMUNICATIONS Minister Stephen Conroy has attacked Telstra over its praise for the Coalition's broadband model, saying the telco has been "holding Australia back" for years.
> 
> Senator Conroy said Telstra chief executive David Thodey's declaration ysterday that the Coalition's National Broadband Network model would be cheaper and faster to roll out than the government's $36 billion design was “no surprise”."




Telstra shareholders are the biggest winners from the NBN , bar none, and if TLS are willing to say the NBN Rollout is a dud, a dud it is.

gg


----------



## tinhat

A very concise view of how we got the NBN we have and Telstra's role in the fairfax media today:

http://www.smh.com.au/business/telstra-connects-with-coalition-20120420-1xckm.html


----------



## Knobby22

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Telstra shareholders are the biggest winners from the NBN , bar none, and if TLS are willing to say the NBN Rollout is a dud, a dud it is.
> 
> gg




No, Telstra are smart.

If they can get te Coalition to break the deal they get:

(i) a huge windfall as the contract is broken and they get a variation. (money for jam)
(ii) control of much of the network as they will still own the final copper wires.
(iii) the valuable support of Garpel Gumnut
(iV) The support of theright wing shockjocks.  Maybe they won't have to pay them secretely anymore to say good things?


----------



## NBNMyths

joea said:


> Correct.
> I cannot find the article, but Abbott has said that they would most probably ensure fibre went to a district, but not necessarily to the home. Or something like that.
> 
> joea




Nice article on delimiter today about the state of the existing copper network. You know, the one that the Coalition want to re-use to bring their Fibre To The Node plan to fruition.
http://delimiter.com.au/2012/04/19/australias-copper-broadband-infrastructure-the-reality/

A few pics from the story:


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

No NBNMyths,

That is a picture of the drying room at the ALP Spaghetti Farm, where after the crop is picked from the trees, it is dried out for sale to gullible customers.

Just like the NBN has.

gg


----------



## So_Cynical

tinhat said:


> A very concise view of how we got the NBN we have and Telstra's role in the fairfax media today:
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/business/telstra-connects-with-coalition-20120420-1xckm.html






SMH]STEPHEN Conroy must be fuming at news that Telstra would happily work with a Coalition government to build a national fibre-to-the-node network.
That was his idea - but Telstra would not co-operate when the Labor government wanted to build it.
Instead said:


> No NBNMyths,
> 
> That is a picture of the drying room at the ALP Spaghetti Farm, where after the crop is picked from the trees, it is dried out for sale to gullible customers.
> 
> Just like the NBN has.
> 
> gg




Good to see you finally dropping all pretension to any balanced or realistic views on the NBN, i hope you carry it though to the other Labor bashing threads as well...i imagine its refreshing for you to come out of the "fair and balanced/i voted Labor once" closet?


----------



## drsmith

I wouldn't be mentioning Labor and closet in the same sentence as a defence.

One of Labor's closets may have just been nuked.


----------



## IFocus

My place is on the 1st year roll out list, contracts signed so if the coalition gain government and stop the rest of the NBN then they will have help increase the value of my property oh yea go Tony LOLRATF.

Even money bet they don't kill it in the cities or Liberal held seats.


----------



## rumpole

Interesting viewpoint on the NBN 

http://www.abc.net.au/technology/articles/2012/04/27/3490479.htm?WT.svl=featuredSitesScroller

But it was from the ABC so it's probably socialist rubbish


----------



## IFocus

rumpole said:


> Interesting viewpoint on the NBN
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/technology/articles/2012/04/27/3490479.htm?WT.svl=featuredSitesScroller
> 
> But it was from the ABC so it's probably socialist rubbish




Nick Ross has written a number of informative articles about the NBN but all you will here here is the ranting galahs


----------



## Gringotts Bank

This taken from Yahoo news, which is usually full of BS.  However, I wonder what you guys think of this.  Will wireless technology eclipse what the NBN fibre optics can provide in years to come?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A new wave of 4G wireless broadband networks will eclipse the speed of some fibre plans before the National Broadband Network even rolls through Perth streets.

Testing of Telstra's 4G long-term evolution network in Perth, which is limited to areas close to the CBD, clocked average download speeds exceeding most ADSL2+ connections - and treble the speed of the cheapest NBN plan in one location.

As Telstra plans to expand the network's reach beyond the central area, Optus is busily rolling out its competing network in Perth, which is scheduled to launch within two months.

The West Australian tested Telstra's 4G network using a USB modem plugged into a laptop.

Riding on the CAT bus through West Perth, the central city and East Perth, we clocked average download speeds of about 18Mbps. Upload speeds were a bit slower in most places, except West Perth where they averaged 21.14Mbps - double the "typical" maximum speed of 10Mbps Telstra has quoted in marketing material.

Next we took the modem to Victoria Park, where it achieved similar speeds to the CBD. The network extended up Albany Highway to the edges of East Victoria Park before dropping off to a 3G network.

Victoria Park will be one of the first suburbs to be connected to the NBN, which offers plans with speeds starting from 12Mbps and up to 100Mbps.

The northern end of Curtin University edged into the 4G coverage area, with a 7.91Mbps download speed, and the University of WA was well within limits, clocking 15.12Mbps.

Parked outside the Subiaco post office on Rokeby Road, speeds reached the highest for the day, with an average of 29.24Mbps. The single highest result was an eye-opening 36.36Mbps, likely because of the Telstra infrastructure spotted on top of the Australia Post building.
Given the network has only been in place since late last year and most Telstra customers do not have the technology to access it yet, it is possible The West was also the only user connecting to 4G in the area at that time. As more users sign up, congestion is likely to affect speeds.


----------



## boofhead

I wonder if it has been reported like that for political purposes or some kind of anti NBN fibre bias. Different technologies have different overlaps. NBN fibre plans go up to 100 megabit/s at the moment. I don't see how it matters that Telstra has a wireless network capable of being faster than the slowest fibre plans. How well will 4G handle peak periods with many customers? Telstra's 3G network has some issues in some regions now.

For a while I expect wireless to lag behind fibre for speeds. NBN have states they will over up to 1 gigabit/s in the future. The fibre itself is faster of much faster speeds. You can get some idea about upgradability by drawing parallels to how major fibre backbones are upgraded by changing the termination equipment.

BTW, Telstra 4G will be a different wireless network design to what NBN plans. Latency, distance etc. will be different.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

boofhead said:


> I wonder if it has been reported like that for political purposes or some kind of anti NBN fibre bias. Different technologies have different overlaps. NBN fibre plans go up to 100 megabit/s at the moment. I don't see how it matters that Telstra has a wireless network capable of being faster than the slowest fibre plans. How well will 4G handle peak periods with many customers? Telstra's 3G network has some issues in some regions now.
> 
> For a while I expect wireless to lag behind fibre for speeds. NBN have states they will over up to 1 gigabit/s in the future. The fibre itself is faster of much faster speeds. You can get some idea about upgradability by drawing parallels to how major fibre backbones are upgraded by changing the termination equipment.
> 
> BTW, Telstra 4G will be a different wireless network design to what NBN plans. Latency, distance etc. will be different.




Boof, wouldn't it make more sense to develop 4G, or 5G or 6G so that it can handle high loads and give wide Aus-wide coverage?  The extreme cost of NBN gives it a huge risk profile IMO, especially prone to new developments elsewhere.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Gringotts Bank said:


> Boof, wouldn't it make more sense to develop 4G, or 5G or 6G so that it can handle high loads and give wide Aus-wide coverage?  The extreme cost of NBN gives it a huge risk profile IMO, especially prone to new developments elsewhere.




This is an overwhelming argument against the NBN, and for scrapping it, before it sends the country bust.

The risks outweigh any benefit, given technological developments and innovation in G.

gg


----------



## DB008

I raised this new technology a while back, NBNMyths had a response.


----------



## boofhead

Gringotts Bank said:


> Boof, wouldn't it make more sense to develop 4G, or 5G or 6G so that it can handle high loads and give wide Aus-wide coverage?  The extreme cost of NBN gives it a huge risk profile IMO, especially prone to new developments elsewhere.




Telcos that understand how mobile phone networks will talk about limitations to a mobile wireless approach. Even Telstra has fell in to the complimentary line. Some ISPs in Australia have some experience with fixed position wireless too. Adding directionality (fixed wireless) allows greater distances. So far the wireless solutions have not bettered fibre solutions. Wireless solutions often need fibre themselves. Do you have details of 5G or 6G? Have you looked in to how many people can use a 4G tower at full speeds at the same time?


----------



## DB008

DB008 said:


> I raised this new technology a while back, NBNMyths had a response.




This quick video should help in explaining how the NBN will get upgraded in the future.

http://bcove.me/1cvx9mvb
To expand, just click on the button next to the volume (left of it)


----------



## IFocus

Gringotts Bank said:


> This taken from Yahoo news, which is usually full of BS.  However, I wonder what you guys think of this.  Will wireless technology eclipse what the NBN fibre optics can provide in years to come?
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Not unless you change the law of physics or there is some sort of major advancement thats not currently known.

Basic problem with wireless is more users less bandwidth pick any G you want same problem.


----------



## nulla nulla

IFocus said:


> Not unless you change the law of physics or there is some sort of major advancement thats not currently known.
> 
> Basic problem with wireless is more users less bandwidth pick any G you want same problem.




Plus security issues, plus dropouts, plus black holes, plus etc etc etc. Landlines/optic fibre will always be faster and more reliable. 

Only disadvantage of landlines is lack of mobility.


----------



## dutchie

nulla nulla said:


> Landlines/optic fibre will always be faster and more reliable.



They use to say that radio would always be the best way of entertaining and communicating to, the masses. (never say always)



nulla nulla said:


> Only disadvantage of landlines is lack of mobility.




Thats the crux - now and in the future - thats what people want (despite the *current* drawbacks) - mobility.


----------



## IFocus

nulla nulla said:


> Plus security issues, plus dropouts, plus black holes, plus etc etc etc. Landlines/optic fibre will always be faster and more reliable.
> 
> Only disadvantage of landlines is lack of mobility.




The issue in mobility is the increase in devices using it chewing up existing bandwidth and beyond now (I phone 10 anyone)even before you get to using wireless for higher rates of internet content used by PC's.

Been around this bush so many times


----------



## joea

http://www.afr.com/p/national/new_homes_dudded_over_nbn_says_turnbull_FK9xgOkNSYVqkJ8iLDcEJN

Just an update.
joea


----------



## NBNMyths

joea said:


> http://www.afr.com/p/national/new_homes_dudded_over_nbn_says_turnbull_FK9xgOkNSYVqkJ8iLDcEJN
> 
> Just an update.
> joea




1. As part of the transition to the NBN, Telstra retained the USO to connect all developments approved prior to 1/1/11. The vast, vast majority of the 35000 connections they performed in 2011 were related to those developments.

2. The contract for NBN Co to install fibre to new premises wasn’t even signed until May 2011.

3. NBN Co/Telstra are the providers of LAST resort for new estates. All developers can choose whoever they like to wire their new estates, and they can choose copper or fibre (although pit/pipe must be fibre-ready, and fibre must be installed in estates over 100 lots).

4. There are not “110000 premises on the NBN waiting list”. NBN Co has received notification of development of estates totalling 110,000 premises. Most of them aren’t built yet. There is no-one living there. They will be connected when the houses are complete and people move in.

5. Finally, it is the absolute height of hypocrisy that Turnbull complains about a paltry 35,000 premises temporarily having copper connections, when your policy is for about 10,000,000 Australian premises to use this obsolete infrastructure forever. Pathetic.


----------



## NBNMyths

Gringotts Bank said:


> This taken from Yahoo news, which is usually full of BS.  However, I wonder what you guys think of this.  Will wireless technology eclipse what the NBN fibre optics can provide in years to come?






Gringotts Bank said:


> Boof, wouldn't it make more sense to develop 4G, or 5G or 6G so that it can handle high loads and give wide Aus-wide coverage?  The extreme cost of NBN gives it a huge risk profile IMO, especially prone to new developments elsewhere.




_Sorry for the delay in replying to this. For some reason every time I tried to post I got a dropped connection error. back now...._



The problem with wireless isn't so much about technology as physics. Wireless uses air as a medium. Air is lossy. Wireless uses the radio spectrum, and the radio spectrum is narrow and finite. Each time you increase speeds or add users, the network requires more radio spectrum. Apart from the small total available, that spectrum is shared by other technologies (commercial radio, TV, CB radios, military, satellites, garage door openers etc etc).

The NBN uses optical fibre as a medium transmitting pulses of light. OF is not lossy, and the light spectrum is wider than the radio spectrum. Because it's contained within the OF, it's also not shared for any other use.

A single strand of OF can carry more data that the entire radio spectrum combined, let alone the small portion available for wireless broadband.

So it doesn't matter how many Gs you have, unless we rewrite the laws of physics relating to spectrum (and overcome numerous other physical barriers), no wireless/air technology can ever approach the capacity of light/fibre technology.

There isn't a single country or telco anywhere in the World proposing to replace their urban fixed networks with wireless ones.

Conversely, there are 60 countries currently rolling out assorted levels of Fibre To The Premises networks. The US, NZ, Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea, Japan (and many others in Asia), The UK, Germany, Iceland, Switzerland (and many others in Europe), Israel, Qatar..... the list goes on.


----------



## joea

NBNMyths said:


> 1. As part of the transition to the NBN, Telstra retained the USO to connect all developments approved prior to 1/1/11. The vast, vast majority of the 35000 connections they performed in 2011 were related to those developments.
> 
> 2. The contract for NBN Co to install fibre to new premises wasn’t even signed until May 2011.
> 
> 3. NBN Co/Telstra are the providers of LAST resort for new estates. All developers can choose whoever they like to wire their new estates, and they can choose copper or fibre (although pit/pipe must be fibre-ready, and fibre must be installed in estates over 100 lots).
> 
> 4. There are not “110000 premises on the NBN waiting list”. NBN Co has received notification of development of estates totalling 110,000 premises. Most of them aren’t built yet. There is no-one living there. They will be connected when the houses are complete and people move in.
> 
> 5. Finally, it is the absolute height of hypocrisy that Turnbull complains about a paltry 35,000 premises temporarily having copper connections, when your policy is for about 10,000,000 Australian premises to use this obsolete infrastructure forever. Pathetic.




Gee you are quick.! Obviously you have the alert system activated.
joea


----------



## NBNMyths

Some interesting info coming out of Senate Estimates last night. NBN Co have revealed the percentages of customers on each speed tier of the fibre network:

_12/1:_ 18%
_25/5 or 25/10:_ 35%
_50/20:_ 10%
_100/40:_ 37%

These numbers are far in excess of the forecast in the NBN Business case. eg The takeup of 100/40 was forecast to be 8% of connections, and 12/1 was forecast to be 52%. While it was expected that "early adopters" would lift high speeds initially, it was also revealed that the percentage taking the top speed is actually increasing as time goes on, with 50% of April connections choosing 100/40.







*Overall, the percentages mean that 82% of NBN customers so far have chosen speeds in excess of the speeds provided by the Coalition alternative policy (which is officially 12Mbps to 97%).*


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> Some interesting info coming out of Senate Estimates last night. NBN Co have revealed the percentages of customers on each speed tier of the fibre network:
> .[/b]




No amount of spin will detract from the fact that this is a pink batts writ large.

A monumental waste of money.

If you quoted the Estimates proceedings correctly you would be aware that it is an unmitigated waste, not being taken up, and not passing those who would take it up.

In other words a waste.

gg


----------



## bellenuit

NBNMyths said:


> Some interesting info coming out of Senate Estimates last night. NBN Co have revealed the percentages of customers on each speed tier of the fibre network:
> 
> _12/1:_ 18%
> _25/5 or 25/10:_ 35%
> _50/20:_ 10%
> _100/40:_ 37%
> 
> These numbers are far in excess of the forecast in the NBN Business case. eg The takeup of 100/40 was forecast to be 8% of connections, and 12/1 was forecast to be 52%. While it was expected that "early adopters" would lift high speeds initially, it was also revealed that the percentage taking the top speed is actually increasing as time goes on, with 50% of April connections choosing 100/40.
> 
> *Overall, the percentages mean that 82% of NBN customers so far have chosen speeds in excess of the speeds provided by the Coalition alternative policy (which is officially 12Mbps to 97%).*




I think working on percentages alone compared to estimates is quite dangerous without looking at actual installs compared to estimates. 

It is apparent that the number of installs to date compared to what was originally estimated is way under forecast (the delay in coming to an agreement with Telstra being the official excuse), but I also believe that the number of installs is also behind more recent forecasts (I read this recently but can't recall the source).

The fact that there is a greater take up of the higher speeds than forecast, but a lesser number of overall installs than forecast is possible proof of what many believed to begin with; that those who want higher speeds would be willing to pay for it, so selective rather than global rollout is more cost effective. While putting a fast high capacity backbone in place is essential, extending it to every home is just a waste. It is apparent that many are happy with their currents speeds at their current price point so are not willing to change to the more expensive NBN option. However, those that have the need for speed are willing to pay the extra.

I get about 20Mbps on a 100GB plan from Telstra for just $15 (specially negotiated). I do not want the NBN to be imposed on me where I will probably end up paying $80+ for the same or slightly better.


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> No amount of spin will detract from the fact that this is a pink batts writ large.
> 
> A monumental waste of money.
> 
> If you quoted the Estimates proceedings correctly you would be aware that it is an unmitigated waste, not being taken up, and not passing those who would take it up.
> 
> In other words a waste.
> 
> gg




Seems gg that your reporting of Estimates is about as accurate as your initial post in this thread.

The NBN is being taken up at a higher rate than predicted. The Kiama site has now hit an incredible 34% after 6 months of availability. No similar project anywhere in the World has such a huge takeup in such a short time. The Verizon FiOS network in the USA only has about 30% takeup now, and it's been running for 4 years!

Not only that, but the majority of people on the NBN are taking up the higher speed plans, making NBN Co's Average revenue Per User (ARPU) far, far higher than they predicted. As Mr Quigley said in Estimates, if this trend continues then NBN Co will have to lower their prices to comply with their SAU condition that they not make a profit exceeding 3.5% above the bond rate.

Yes, the rollout is certainly delayed. The 10 month delay in getting the Telstra deal signed was the cause, but that has now been done and the rollout is going full steam ahead. While annoying, if NBN Co had started without that deal in place, then the cost would have blown out because of the need to dig all their own trenches instead of having access to Telstra's. _That_ would have been a waste.

They also didn't sit around for the 10 months. Instead, they instigated the construction of the complete nationwide transit loop (back end) network, which didn't require the Telstra deal to proceed.

You may also have heard that Corning has finished the $40m upgrade of their Victorian fibre factory and added another 400 employees. They will now be producing 12-strand ribbon fibre for the NBN and mark the first time in Australia that this sort of fibre has been used. It will speed and cheapen the rollout because it's so much easier to join.


----------



## NBNMyths

bellenuit said:


> I get about 20Mbps on a 100GB plan from Telstra for just $15 (specially negotiated). I do not want the NBN to be imposed on me where I will probably end up paying $80+ for the same or slightly better.




I find that hard to believe. What else do you have to pay in order to get that $15 broadband? And what other services must you bundle? At the very least you must be paying for line rental ($32), taking your monthly total to around $47.

Continuing my assumption then, you're getting a 20/1Mbps service with 100GB of data for $47/month, plus phone calls.

On the NBN from Exetel you can get a 25/5Mbps service with 100GB of data, a VoIP phone (with number) and flat 10c national calls for $50/month. So an extra $3/month gets you 25% faster downloads, 500% faster uploads and 1/2 price phone calls. http://www.exetel.com.au/residential-fibre-pricing-mainland.php

Additionally, almost nobody can get 20Mbps ADSL2+ in Australia. The average is 8Mbps. You must live on top of the exchange to get 20.


----------



## So_Cynical

NBNMyths said:


> Seems gg that your reporting of Estimates is about *as accurate as your initial post in this thread*.




You mean this post? from 15 months ago.



Garpal Gumnut said:


> (5th-February-2011) *I have it on good opinion from one of my Queensland ALP contacts , that the NBN is to be "modified".*
> 
> This will free up money for the Flood and Cyclone Reconstruction.
> 
> The word *"scrapped"* will not be used.
> 
> "Modified" is the buzzword.
> 
> One can imagine a Dalek saying it...."Modified, modified, modified"
> 
> gg




There doesn't seem to be an appropriate (egg on face) smiley in the default collection.


----------



## Glen48

Once it is up and running the feds will be broke and need to sell it off at any cost.
So the tax payer will be left with the debt plus interest and no control over the service pricing.

Once it is up and running you need to ask yourself what does the taxpayer get in return does someone in Quiple who can down load Lady Gaga create an income other than sell burn copies Cd's to their mates.

At least you will be able to see how an economic hit men works the system online.


----------



## So_Cynical

Glen48 said:


> Once it is up and running the feds will be broke and need to sell it off at any cost.
> So the tax payer will be left with the debt plus interest and no control over the service pricing.
> 
> Once it is up and running you need to ask yourself what does the taxpayer get in return does someone in Quiple who can down load Lady Gaga create an income other than sell burn copies Cd's to their mates.
> 
> At least you will be able to see how an economic hit men works the system online.




Seriously Glen...i know Tanduay is cheap at less than 70 cents a bottle but please try and limit yourself to 1 bottle per day.


----------



## Glen48

Ok I had one last night so please explain the benefits to the taxpayer and how they will get a return on their loot plus interest.


----------



## NBNMyths

Glen48 said:


> Once it is up and running the feds will be broke and need to sell it off at any cost.
> So the tax payer will be left with the debt plus interest and no control over the service pricing.
> 
> Once it is up and running you need to ask yourself what does the taxpayer get in return does someone in Quiple who can down load Lady Gaga create an income other than sell burn copies Cd's to their mates.
> 
> At least you will be able to see how an economic hit men works the system online.




They do want to sell it, but I hope they don't.

If they do, then it would likely be through a float rather than a sale per se.

There will always be control over the service pricing, because it is required to be regulated by the ACCC through the Special Access Undertaking. The SAU (currently waiting for approval) covers a 30 year period and specifies that prices are not permitted to be increased at all for 5 years, and then for the next 25 years they cannot be increased by more than 0.5% of the cpi in any one year (and the permission cannot be held over). It also specifies that NBN Co cannot make a profit greater than bond-rate+3.5%. If they do, then they must lower their pricing to comply.

What does the country get in return? You can't think of any economic benefit for the business community in being able to access a decent broadband network? Well, you're probably right. This internet thing is probably just a passing fad anyway.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/1995/02/26/the-internet-bah.html


----------



## NBNMyths

Glen48 said:


> Ok I had one last night so please explain the benefits to the taxpayer and how they will get a return on their loot plus interest.




NBN charge users for access to the service. They charge enough to repay the Govt investment, plus the interest. Simple.


----------



## bellenuit

NBNMyths said:


> I find that hard to believe. What else do you have to pay in order to get that $15 broadband? And what other services must you bundle? At the very least you must be paying for line rental ($32), taking your monthly total to around $47.
> 
> Continuing my assumption then, you're getting a 20/1Mbps service with 100GB of data for $47/month, plus phone calls.
> 
> On the NBN from Exetel you can get a 25/5Mbps service with 100GB of data, a VoIP phone (with number) and flat 10c national calls for $50/month. So an extra $3/month gets you 25% faster downloads, 500% faster uploads and 1/2 price phone calls. http://www.exetel.com.au/residential-fibre-pricing-mainland.php
> 
> Additionally, almost nobody can get 20Mbps ADSL2+ in Australia. The average is 8Mbps. You must live on top of the exchange to get 20.




Firstly I am on cable, not ADSL, so my speed is not untypical. I have measured it several times at different times and that would be about the average I got. My $15 rate is based on the fact that I have several Telstra services bundled, but I also have an additional discount that was offered to me as a special to retain my custom.


----------



## NBNMyths

bellenuit said:


> Firstly I am on cable, not ADSL, so my speed is not untypical. I have measured it several times at different times and that would be about the average I got. My $15 rate is based on the fact that I have several Telstra services bundled, but I also have an additional discount that was offered to me as a special to retain my custom.




Right, so what makes you think that you won't get the same bundling discounts over the NBN? Currently, Telstra offer exactly the same bundle packages over ADSL, Cable and the NBN.


----------



## dutchie

NBNMyths said:


> NBN charge users for access to the service. They charge enough to repay the Govt investment, plus the interest. Simple.





Ha ha ha  - a Labor government making a profit on one of their enterprises - good one NBNMyths!


----------



## NBNMyths

dutchie said:


> Ha ha ha  - a Labor government making a profit on one of their enterprises - good one NBNMyths!




You know what they say about people who live in glass houses.....


----------



## dutchie

NBNMyths said:


> You know what they say about people who live in glass houses.....




Yes I do - their Labor party followers...


Keep up the good work NBNMyths - we need at least one believer.


----------



## moXJO

Do we have any data on take up rates?


----------



## joea

One would have thought that everybody in Australia would know a NBN is being built.
But going to Cairns today, (68klms) I heard it 3 times, that one is being built.
A government commercial.

Its a bit like having a  big sign on a FISH SHOP, then to have more signs to say "we sell fish and chips here".:headshake

joea


----------



## NBNMyths

moXJO said:


> Do we have any data on take up rates?




In senate estimates a couple of weeks ago, the takeup rate of Kiama was given as 34%, and Willunga as 30%. These sites went live in October 2011, so that's a ~6 month period, although Telstra (with 50% market share) only started offering services in March 2012.


Putting that into perspective:

The takeup rate of ADSL in Australia was 3% after 18 months

The takeup rate of ADSL/ADSL2+ in Tasmania now is ~44% after 11 years.

The takeup rate of Optus cable internet in the footprint is ~20% after 10 years

The takeup rate of Verizon FiOS fibre optic internet (in the USA) is about 30% after 5 years.


----------



## NBNMyths

joea said:


> One would have thought that everybody in Australia would know a NBN is being built.
> But going to Cairns today, (68klms) I heard it 3 times, that one is being built.
> A government commercial.
> 
> Its a bit like having a  big sign on a FISH SHOP, then to have more signs to say "we sell fish and chips here".:headshake
> 
> joea




The faster people take up the NBN, the sooner the Govt investment will be repaid from user revenue. That being the case, I would have though you'd be all for advertising to increase the speed of takeup?

Using your argument, I suppose Telstra shareholders should be berating them for advertising all of their services? After all, everybody in Australia knows that Telstra is a phone company. Therefore, any money they spend on advertising must surely be a waste.....


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

joea said:


> One would have thought that everybody in Australia would know a NBN is being built.
> But going to Cairns today, (68klms) I heard it 3 times, that one is being built.
> A government commercial.
> 
> Its a bit like having a  big sign on a FISH SHOP, then to have more signs to say "we sell fish and chips here".:headshake
> 
> joea




It is a shameful waste of money on a technology that will be redundant in five years time.

Designed on the back of an envelope, on a tax payer paid flight, in business class seats, by two Labor ministers who have never had a proper job in their lives.

It is welfare for nerds.

And nobody in N.Queensland has heard of it, witnessed it's benefits nor used it, except on tax payer funded advertisements.

gg


----------



## joea

Garpal Gumnut said:


> It is a shameful waste of money on a technology that will be redundant in five years time.
> 
> Designed on the back of an envelope, on a tax payer paid flight, in business class seats, by two Labor ministers who have never had a proper job in their lives.
> 
> It is welfare for nerds.
> 
> And nobody in N.Queensland has heard of it, witnessed it's benefits nor used it, except on tax payer funded advertisements.
> 
> gg




Exactly! We will not get it for 10 years so why advertise?
joea


----------



## boofhead

Garpal Gumnut said:


> It is a shameful waste of money on a technology that will be redundant in five years time.
> 
> gg




How will it be redundant in 5 years? If it were to be redundant in such a short period of time I doubt Telstra would have installed fibre around South Brisbane.


----------



## So_Cynical

Garpal Gumnut said:


> It is a shameful waste of money on a technology that will be redundant in five years time.
> 
> Designed on the back of an envelope, on a tax payer paid flight, in business class seats, by two Labor ministers who have never had a proper job in their lives.
> 
> It is welfare for nerds.
> 
> And nobody in N.Queensland has heard of it, witnessed it's benefits nor used it, except on tax payer funded advertisements.
> 
> gg




Bollocks, utter bollocks... seriously what's the point in posting politically motivated, well worded rubbish with a content value of nothing. :disgust: why not comment on today's GDP numbers? perhaps you can somehow spin it to make the Coalition look good. 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...n-on-bullish-gdp/story-e6frg916-1226386561291


----------



## Calliope

So_Cynical said:


> why not comment on today's GDP numbers? perhaps you can somehow spin it to make the Coalition look good.




They certainly make the mining industry investments look good.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

So_Cynical said:


> Bollocks, utter bollocks... seriously what's the point in posting politically motivated, well worded rubbish with a content value of nothing. :disgust: why not comment on today's GDP numbers? perhaps you can somehow spin it to make the Coalition look good.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...n-on-bullish-gdp/story-e6frg916-1226386561291




Post a new thread on it mate, and you may be surprised by my comments. This is an NBN Debacle thread.

gg


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> perhaps you can somehow spin it to make the Coalition look good.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...n-on-bullish-gdp/story-e6frg916-1226386561291




Fortunately nobody has to spin anything, even in Europe and the U,K(I've just got back) they are talking about how unpopular this labor govt is. I joke not. and they weren't Australians commenting. 
The goose is cooked.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

sptrawler said:


> Fortunately nobody has to spin anything, even in Europe and the U,K(I've just got back) they are talking about how unpopular this labor govt is. I joke not. and they weren't Australians commenting.
> The goose is cooked.




+1

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> It is a shameful waste of money on a technology that will be redundant in five years time.




Really? Can you tell us all what magical technology will be rolled out in the next 5 years that no-one in the telecommunications industry knows about? Before any more countries join the >50 that currently have fibre networks being installed, you'd better educate all those people as well. Oh, and those silly tech/telco companies like Intel, Microsoft, Google, Optus, Vodafone etc.... You'd better let their shareholders know that their execs and techies obviously have NFI and should be sacked immediately.

Given that the Coalition's policy is to spend $17bn on technology that's _already_ redundant, I'd also like to read your scathing assessment of their policy. :



> Designed on the back of an envelope, on a tax payer paid flight, in business class seats, by two Labor ministers who have never had a proper job in their lives.




Oh, silly me. I thought the FTTP NBN was borne following the extensive recommendations of people like Rod Tucker? You know, people who actually know what they're talking about when it comes to technology. I guess ol' Johnny thought Rod knew his stuff when he awarded him the Australia Prize (now the Prime Minister's Prize for Science) for his services to Telecommunications? Perhaps he's lost his marbles since then though. 



> And nobody in N.Queensland has heard of it, witnessed it's benefits nor used it, except on tax payer funded advertisements.
> gg




Gee, maybe I'm not good with maps, but I'm pretty sure Townsville is in North Queensland. 




Thanks gg. Nice to see the accuracy of your posts isn't getting any better.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

I'll sign off on your timesheet NBNMyths.

It should be worth time x 2.5 for such a late night post on behalf of the comrades on the ship of fools.

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I'll sign off on your timesheet NBNMyths.
> 
> It should be worth time x 2.5 for such a late night post on behalf of the comrades on the ship of fools.
> 
> gg




I wish. Currently sitting in my SOHO with my 3-week-old, while my wife gets some shuteye. Should be finishing off editing a video which is due next week, but I'm talking to one dummy, while inserting another, instead.


----------



## sptrawler

I must say NBNMyths, after my recent sojourn, one doesn't realise how much and how quickly we have become reliant on the internet.
Therefore I must confess, the govt may as well waste it on the internet, as on anything else. At least there is an ongoing benefit, as opposed to some of their other initiatives.
However I still doubt it will be done on time or under budget.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> I wish. Currently sitting in my SOHO with my 3-week-old, while my wife gets some shuteye. Should be finishing off editing a video which is due next week, but I'm talking to one dummy, while inserting another, instead.




lol, I will pay that one.

Congrats on being a man rich in your family happiness and productivity.

Nonetheless your good fortune I would guess was conceived of love and hope for the future, which sounds well founded.

The NBN however was founded upon the desperate scribblings of otherwise unemployable Labor hacks, unemployable in a fair market, politicians desperate to spend OPM in a dash for short term advantage.

gg


----------



## Calliope

Garpal Gumnut said:


> lol, I will pay that one.
> 
> Congrats on being a man rich in your family happiness and productivity.




Obviously NBNMyths is well paid by Conroy's department to spread his spin. He denies this of course, but he would, wouldn't he? The taxpayer has to bear the cost of his blatant propaganda. He has no other purpose on this forum.


----------



## Knobby22

Come on, if he was being paid surely he would choose a better name.

Calliope would be better for instance.


----------



## Calliope

Knobby22 said:


> Come on, if he was being paid surely he would choose a better name.
> 
> Calliope would be better for instance.




That one's already taken. OK, it's just a labour of love.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Obviously NBNMyths is well paid by Conroy's department to spread his spin. He denies this of course, but he would, wouldn't he? The taxpayer has to bear the cost of his blatant propaganda. He has no other purpose on this forum.




  

The only reason I'm on this forum at all is because someone linked to my nbnmyths blog somewhere near the start of this thread and it came up in the referrals list when I was checking my stats. 

If you're implying that I have no interest in share trading, then you're spot on. I've never owned any shares in my life, although I greatly regret not listening to my inner-geek in ~1997, which told me to buy a thousand Apple shares at US$7 each. 

It is funny that some people are so reality-limited that they think someone backing a project that has such profound implications for the future, and enjoys such a large amount of public support, must be on the payroll.


----------



## Calliope

Of course it has a "large amount of public support." If I were asked whether I would like a faster broadband service, the of course I would say :yes."


----------



## So_Cynical

NBNMyths said:


> The only reason I'm on this forum at all is because someone linked to my nbnmyths blog somewhere near the start of this thread and it came up in the referrals list when I was checking my stats.




Ill take the credit for that.  who knew i could randomly do something so helpful to this forum. :dunno:


----------



## moXJO

NBNMyths said:


> In senate estimates a couple of weeks ago, the takeup rate of Kiama was given as 34%, and Willunga as 30%. These sites went live in October 2011, so that's a ~6 month period, although Telstra (with 50% market share) only started offering services in March 2012.
> 
> 
> Putting that into perspective:
> 
> The takeup rate of ADSL in Australia was 3% after 18 months
> 
> The takeup rate of ADSL/ADSL2+ in Tasmania now is ~44% after 11 years.
> 
> The takeup rate of Optus cable internet in the footprint is ~20% after 10 years
> 
> The takeup rate of Verizon FiOS fibre optic internet (in the USA) is about 30% after 5 years.




Thanks NBN


----------



## bellenuit

*Take-up rate claims 'misleading'*

_THE take-up rate in the first part of Australia to get the National Broadband Network is flatlining, with just over 100 extra customers signing up over the past year.

New figures reveal the first Tasmanian towns to get the NBN -- Smithton, Scottsdale and Midway Point -- had 702 customers at April 6, of the 3987 premises that were passed by the network.

This compares with about 600 customers reported in mid-May last year. And the take-up rates have increased by a fraction in the time since mid-October.

At April 6, the take-up rates were 27 per cent for Midway Point, 13 per cent for Scottsdale and 14 per cent for Smithton.

This compares with 25 per cent for Midway Point in mid-October and 12 per cent for Scottsdale. The take-up rates at Smithton remain unchanged.

Opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull said the figures, revealed in written answers to a Senate committee, showed the NBN Co's claims that take-up was at the high end were misleading.

"The only reason more customers than expected are choosing high-speed plans is that early adopters are still the bulk of the NBN's customers," Mr Turnbull said. "It's early in the rollout, but these figures remind us that for most Australians Labor's $50 billion NBN is not a "must-have" -- which is why the government is propping up its finances by paying competing networks to close."

A spokesman for Communications Minister Stephen Conroy said the take-up rates in Tasmania were expected to increase as more internet providers entered the market.

A spokeswoman for NBN Co, Rhonda Griffin, said the take-up figures in Tasmania reflected the pilot nature of the project in the state and that the construction of the network in the Apple Isle remained on track for completion in 2015. "At 17 per cent overall, the Tasmanian take-up reflects the effect of early adopters in a pilot or pre-release site, where the full range of retail service providers is not offering services at the present time," she said.

The Tasmanian network was officially switched on in August 2010 as a pilot site. In May last year, the NBN Co identified seven other towns in Tasmania -- Deloraine, Kingston Beach, George Town, Sorell, South Hobart, St Helens and Triabunna -- to be connected to the fibre network this year. Of those seven new sites, Triabunna and Sorell are the only two to have been switched on so far._

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...laims-misleading/story-e6frgaif-1226383973431


----------



## bellenuit

What is meant by the take-up rate in relation to the NBN?

For example, does 30% mean that the fibre cable passed X amount of houses and 30% of those houses opted to have a connection from their house to the fibre cable. Or does it mean that the fibre cable was installed in X premises and 30% of those premises have taken out a broadband service on that connection?

For the former, is there a cost to the householder of connecting their house to the street fibre cable?


----------



## boofhead

During the building phase the fibre to the premises installation does not have a fee.

I'm sure plenty of the people in the regions have a Bigpond connection and Bigpond has only just made an announcement about NBN fibre customers in Tasmania. Telstra wouldn't connect customers in Tasmania because the customer termination equipment limited things to 100 Mbit.


----------



## bellenuit

boofhead said:


> During the building phase the fibre to the premises installation does not have a fee.
> 
> I'm sure plenty of the people in the regions have a Bigpond connection and Bigpond has only just made an announcement about NBN fibre customers in Tasmania. Telstra wouldn't connect customers in Tasmania because the customer termination equipment limited things to 100 Mbit.




So it costs the householder nothing to install the fibre connection to their premises, even if they never intend to use the service at all?

So is this what the take up-rate is referring to,  the number of households who have installed the fibre to their premises?  If so, why then the comparison with ADSL, ADSL2 and Cable, which presumably cost the consumer to install, whether it be for the service or modems or whatever?


----------



## NBNMyths

bellenuit said:


> What is meant by the take-up rate in relation to the NBN?
> 
> For example, does 30% mean that the fibre cable passed X amount of houses and 30% of those houses opted to have a connection from their house to the fibre cable. Or does it mean that the fibre cable was installed in X premises and 30% of those premises have taken out a broadband service on that connection?
> 
> For the former, is there a cost to the householder of connecting their house to the street fibre cable?




"30% takeup" means 30% of passed houses have connected _and_ taken up a monthly subscription. eg: If it passed 1000 people and 300 joined with an active connection.

There is no connection charge, just a monthly price (Although some ISPs charge a setup fee when you start your active service).



bellenuit said:


> So it costs the householder nothing to install the fibre connection to their premises, even if they never intend to use the service at all?




Correct. Hence, you're mad not to accept that connection.



> So is this what the take up-rate is referring to,  the number of households who have installed the fibre to their premises?  If so, why then the comparison with ADSL, ADSL2 and Cable, which presumably cost the consumer to install, whether it be for the service or modems or whatever?




No, that's not the takeup rate. Those who have chosen to receive a free connection to the house during the rollout is much higher. In Kiama, it was about 90% who accepted a connection IIRC, while the "takeup rate" for Kiama is 34% (ie those who _have_ a connection, and are _using_ it).

You don't _need_ a "modem" to connect to the NBN. if you only have one computer, for example, then you can just plug it straight into the NBN box with an ethernet cable. Alternatively (as most people would do), you would plug a router into the NBN box and connect your devices to that via ethernet or WiFi.


----------



## todster

Calliope said:


> Of course it has a "large amount of public support." If I were asked whether I would like a faster broadband service, the of course I would say :yes."




Or you could upgrade from windows 95


----------



## Smurf1976

I'm not convinced that this isn't about to become obsolete. Sure, wireless data speeds have their limitations but you only need to spend an hour or two around an average 16 year old to realise that this isn't much of a problem in practice. Whatever I can do on a PC with ADSL, they've already done on a phone / iPad more quickly than I can walk to the PC. If wireless is good enough that they can watch live TV etc, then it's good enough for most actual uses I would think.

I do understand that wireless (4G etc) has limitations. But my thinking is that are we getting to the point where those limitations aren't sufficiently serious to actually matter? Surely there's a point that if wireless is good enough, then nobody is really going to care how much better something else is?

It's a bit like saying that MP3 is a truly rotten means of sound recording in terms of audio quality but it's good enough and, combined with the massive convenience it offers, it has gained public acceptance to the point that (vastly superior audio quality) CD's are almost obsolete. 

Thinking of all the big format changes over the past 30 or so years, the only one to have really been driven by quality is Bluray, and that hasn't fully displaced DVD's anyway. Looking at the others, Beta was better technically than VHS but it lost since VHS was more commonly produced. Vinyl had better quality than cassettes but it lost due to convenience. CD's sound better than MP3 but the latter is more convenient and has largely taken over. And I've never heard anyone say that image quality is the main advantage of DVD over VHS - it's all about convenience so far as the average person is concerned. 

The same goes for just about everything really. The overall trend in society has been very much toward convenience in preference to quality. Witness the rise of fast food, retail chains in everything from fashion to hardware and all the rest. Convenience first, quality second is very much the overall trend.

Now, wireless is a lot more convenient than wired I would think even if wired is technically superior. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm not convinced that the average person is really going to want a wired connection in their house when most of their devices will have a SIM card (or whatever replaces that technology) in them anyway.

All that said, the NBN will have ongoing use for bulk data transfer. It's just the direct connection to every home that I'm not convinced about the long term usefulness of.


----------



## sptrawler

Smurph, succintly put, as usual.
The major bulk data users, who just happen to be in the C.B.D's, should be paying for optical upgrades from their premises, to the optical fibre backbone(exchange).
The plebs would be much better served by a national wireless upgrade and an optical upgrade to the c.b.d of regional centres.


----------



## todster

sptrawler said:


> Smurph, succintly put, as usual.
> The major bulk data users, who just happen to be in the C.B.D's, should be paying for optical upgrades from their premises, to the optical fibre backbone(exchange).
> The plebs would be much better served by a national wireless upgrade and an optical upgrade to the c.b.d of regional centres.




Why do they need to be in the CBD?


----------



## sptrawler

todster said:


> Why do they need to be in the CBD?




Because that is where the banks, insurance companies, major retailers, are moving your data.
The rest of the users are non critical, with regard security, and the only reason they need bling speed is for non critical or non economy dependant applications.
So why the hell spend stupid money on it? Bit like saying every road in Australia should be built 6 lanes wide because eventualy we will use them.


----------



## todster

sptrawler said:


> Because that is where the banks, insurance companies, major retailers, are moving your data.
> The rest of the users are non critical, with regard security, and the only reason they need bling speed is for non critical or non economy dependant applications.
> So why the hell spend stupid money on it? Bit like saying every road in Australia should be built 6 lanes wide because eventualy we will use them.


----------



## sptrawler

todster said:


>




Well thats o.k todster, but I played inter school sports against Shay Gap in the 60's. Now if you go to Shay Gap there is nothing there, it has been completely removed. 
All the roads have been ripped all the houses are gone, what would have been the point of putting N.B.N there?
There are heaps of towns that governments are allowing to die with fly in fly out, yet you are going to pay for N.B.N to rolled out there, thats dumb.
The only ones that benefit are the companies, they can have brilliant video conferencing untill they shut down and close up shop. Then the town has all this obsolete infrastructure, magic.
Like I have said on numerous occasions, the money would be better spent developing water supplies from the north and supporting farming, food we need.


----------



## NBNMyths

Smurf1976 said:


> snip




A few point with this:

*1. The NBN doesn't mean you are tied to a wired device.* The vast majority of iPad data is delivered via WiFi, not cellular networks. WiFi data is, of course, delivered via the fixed network (ie, in future the NBN). Far from limiting the usefulness of wireless networks, the NBN will improve them because it can deliver the speeds that WiFi is capable of. The limitation of WiFi (range) is also the reason why it has this capability. The longer the range of the wireless network, the less capable it is of carrying large volumes of data to a large number of users.

According to the Cisco Visual Networking Index (a regular report on internet trends etc), by 2015 about 60% of data will be delivered wirelessly, but only 7% will be via cellular networks. The rest will be via fixed line WiFi.


2. *Cellular performance degrades with more users.* If proposing that cellular wireless will displace fixed networks, you must judge it's capability under that level of load. Currently, "21-42Mbps" 3G cellular networks struggle to deliver 5Mbps to users and it's only carrying 6% of total network traffic. Even new "150Mbps" 4G networks are only delivering 10Mbps with a tiny fraction of cellular users. Probably less than 0.5% of total network traffic. Can you imagine what would happen to speeds if it were carrying 20x more data than currently? And that's not even taking into account the >50% growth every year in fixed network traffic.


3. *Convenience v quality.* Really? The only significant upgrade from the iPad 2 to 3 was for video quality. Even a 4G wireless network cannot stream full quality video to that iPad. You need a WiFi connection. TVs are constantly getting bigger and higher resolution. Just last week, a standard with 16x more pixels than 1080p FullHD was announced. Uncompressed, the 3D video stream requires 1.5Gbps. Compressed about 160Mbps.

Video (of one kind or another) is the driver behind bandwidth growth, and it is increasing exponentially every few years.


A few points you didn't mention...
*4. Cellular coverage.* It doesn't matter how fast the cellular network is, it cannot overcome physical barriers, whether they be man-made (like buildings) or natural (like hills). The fact is that barriers stop or degrade cellular signals. Blackspots are everywhere. I was upstairs in a 2-story building on the main road of suburban Baulkham Hills the other day, and my "21Mbps" NextG device was getting 0.2Mbps thanks to poor signal. If even Telstra can't serve a heavily populated suburb after 20 years of development, what hope is there for really hilly areas?


*5. Monthly cost*
It is horrendously expensive to deliver cellular wireless data. The technology has such a short lifespan that equipment replacement is regular and expensive. Each wireless generation is superseded about every 5 years, meaning regular multi-billion dollar upgrades. Then there is the cost of spectrum. More users and/or more data requires more spectrum. More speed requires that it is in contiguous frequency blocks. So there is huge competition between carriers to buy spectrum at lease auctions, driving the price to ridiculous levels. And they only buy it for short periods, so it will only go up in the future.

Telstra 4G (15GB data at ~10Mbps): $99.95/month (without home phone bundle)
iiNet NBN (1000GB data at 100Mbps): $99.95/month (without bundle).
10x speed, 67x volume. That's a pretty big hit for convenience.

Exetel NBN (50GB at 12Mbps): $35.00/month (including phone)
1.2xspeed, 3.3x data for 1/3 the price.



Yes, people want convenience. I myself have an iPad and a couple of iPhones, all with cellular data connections. But they are in addition to my ADSL, as they are for almost everyone. There is simply no decline in fixed network users even as wireless devices boom. People want volume at home/work, and convenience when they're out on the road. That's why cellular and fixed networks are complementary, and one is a valid alternative to the other for only a very small portion of the population.


----------



## MrBurns

I havent followed this thread but let me ask a a simple question - 

What happens to all the providers including Telstra when this wonderful thing is available to everyone and the public can get connection for $35 a month instead of having to pay $100.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Thanks NBNMyths,

That has clarified a number of points for me. A good post.

gg


----------



## Calliope

Smurf1976 said:


> All that said, the NBN will have ongoing use for bulk data transfer. It's just the direct connection to every home that I'm not convinced about the long term usefulness of.




Thanks Smurf for a very insightful foray into this debate. It is only natural that Myths would bring out his big guns to try to shoot you down, but of course he has unlimited resources. Everyone loves bright and shiny new toys and it is Myths job to sell them. He bases his support of NBN on the argument that most people want one (except Coalition voters.)

Most people want high speed trains, but Australia will never afford them, except maybe, to an airport.


----------



## todster

sptrawler said:


> Well thats o.k todster, but I played inter school sports against Shay Gap in the 60's. Now if you go to Shay Gap there is nothing there, it has been completely removed.
> All the roads have been ripped all the houses are gone, what would have been the point of putting N.B.N there?
> There are heaps of towns that governments are allowing to die with fly in fly out, yet you are going to pay for N.B.N to rolled out there, thats dumb.
> The only ones that benefit are the companies, they can have brilliant video conferencing untill they shut down and close up shop. Then the town has all this obsolete infrastructure, magic.
> Like I have said on numerous occasions, the money would be better spent developing water supplies from the north and supporting farming, food we need.




Which towns in WA are dying through FIFO?
Lol a stock market forum and you want mining companies to take the more expensive option and build housing/infrastructure.
Shipping ore from Dampier since the early 60s and still a cronic housing shortage.
Did they have a phone service in Shay Gap then,what did that cost do you think?


----------



## NBNMyths

MrBurns said:


> I havent followed this thread but let me ask a a simple question -
> 
> What happens to all the providers including Telstra when this wonderful thing is available to everyone and the public can get connection for $35 a month instead of having to pay $100.




All current ISPs (including Telstra) are or will be providers of NBN services. NBN Co is only a wholesaler. Capability aside, the only real difference to now is that those ISPs will buy access from NBN Co instead of Telstra. Instead of Telstra being a wholesaler _and_ retailer of fixed line services, they will only be a retailer.

For people who want the high end plans, you can still spend $100 or more on an NBN service. It's just that the $100 buys you something much faster than it would now.


----------



## Calliope

Smurf1976 said:


> All that said, the NBN will have ongoing use for bulk data transfer. It's just the direct connection to every home that I'm not convinced about the long term usefulness of.




Thanks Smurf for a very insightful foray into this debate. It is only natural that Myths would bring out his big guns to try to shoot you down, but of course he has unlimited resources. Everyone loves bright and shiny new toys and it is Myths job to sell them. He bases his support of NBN on the argument that most people want one (except Coalition voters.)

Most people want high speed trains, but Australia will never be able to afford them, except maybe, to an airport. 

Keep up the good work.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Thanks Smurf for a very insightful foray into this debate. It is only natural that Myths would bring out his big guns to try to shoot you down, but of course he has unlimited resources.....
> 
> Most people want high speed trains, but Australia will never afford them, except maybe, to an airport.




I assume by "big guns" you mean "inconvenient facts".

And by "unlimited resources" you mean "a large list of bookmarks".


Poor analogy. People might want high speed trains, but they wouldn't be willing to pay the ticket price which would be required to fund the build.

The NBN's "ticket" prices are generally no more than the existing network (and often much less), so affordability is not an issue.


----------



## sptrawler

todster said:


> Which towns in WA are dying through FIFO?
> Lol a stock market forum and you want mining companies to take the more expensive option and build housing/infrastructure.
> Shipping ore from Dampier since the early 60s and still a cronic housing shortage.
> Did they have a phone service in Shay Gap then,what did that cost do you think?




Yes I lived in Dampier from1966 - 1968 and there is no doubt the iron ore industry is going to trundle along nicely for a long time yet.
What about Kalgoorlie, the superpit has 7 years reserves of gold, less if the price of gold drops. 
Kambalda relying on nickel, shaky at best. They ran the N/W shelf gas pipe right past town, yet didn't reticulate the town. That shows the long term confidence in the towns future, yet we are going to put the N.B.N there.  
Mt Magnet, have you been there recently, the locals say F.I.F.O is killing the town? 

You can't have it both ways todster, on one hand you are saying mining companies should be taking the cheaper fifo option. Yet we should be taking the more expensive option putting in optical to those towns.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> so affordability is not an issue.




Except to the taxpayer.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Except to the taxpayer.




Why? The NBN is funded from bonds, which will be repaid by network revenue (not taxation revenue).

Unless there is either a substantial cost blowout and/or substantially lower revenue (neither of which is likely on current contracts/figures), then the taxpayer has nothing to do with it. So high is the takeup of high-end NBN plans currently, if that trend continues then NBN Co will earn too much revenue and will have to lower their pricing to comply with their SAU.

Conversely, the Coalition's $17bn Fibre To The Node alternative includes on-budget rural subsidies, which "taxpayers" will foot the bill for.


----------



## todster

sptrawler said:


> Yes I lived in Dampier from1966 - 1968 and there is no doubt the iron ore industry is going to trundle along nicely for a long time yet.
> What about Kalgoorlie, the superpit has 7 years reserves of gold, less if the price of gold drops.
> Kambalda relying on nickel, shaky at best. They ran the N/W shelf gas pipe right past town, yet didn't reticulate the town. That shows the long term confidence in the towns future, yet we are going to put the N.B.N there.
> Mt Magnet, have you been there recently, the locals say F.I.F.O is killing the town?
> 
> You can't have it both ways todster, on one hand you are saying mining companies should be taking the cheaper fifo option. Yet we should be taking the more expensive option putting in optical to those towns.




You have got to be kidding Mt Magnet lol how do you kill something that has been dead for years.
You can't have been there to make a statement like that.

So your saying theres no NG retic in Kalgoorlie?


----------



## todster

todster said:


> You have got to be kidding Mt Magnet lol how do you kill something that has been dead for years.
> You can't have been there to make a statement like that.
> 
> So your saying theres no NG retic in Kalgoorlie?




MT Magnet 2006 census population wait for it...........wait.......ready....456
Awesome example got any more lol.


----------



## sptrawler

todster said:


> You have got to be kidding Mt Magnet lol how do you kill something that has been dead for years.
> You can't have been there to make a statement like that.
> 
> So your saying theres no NG retic in Kalgoorlie?




Mt Magnet population has been decimated by fifo, as for never been there I've lived there on and off for 18mths building a power station.

As to your second statement, I said Kambalda has no NG retic.
Also like I said we will probably waste money putting in N.B.N fibre optics to the households.


----------



## sptrawler

todster said:


> MT Magnet 2006 census population wait for it...........wait.......ready....456
> Awesome example got any more lol.




I can't follow what you are getting at. I think we are wasting taxpayers money putting optical fibre to the home in these towns. 
You seem to be agreeing with me.


----------



## todster

sptrawler said:


> I can't follow what you are getting at. I think we are wasting taxpayers money putting optical fibre to the home in these towns.
> You seem to be agreeing with me.




Ok can you recall Mt Magnet being decimated by FIFO?
It was your example...in 2006 it had a population of 456.


----------



## todster

sptrawler said:


> Mt Magnet population has been decimated by fifo, as for never been there I've lived there on and off for 18mths building a power station.
> 
> As to your second statement, I said Kambalda has no NG retic.
> Also like I said we will probably waste money putting in N.B.N fibre optics to the households.




Shire website has the current population at 750  lol.
Your just digging a deeper hole.


----------



## moXJO

NBNMyths said:


> Why? The NBN is funded from bonds, which will be repaid by network revenue (not taxation revenue).
> 
> Unless there is either a substantial cost blowout .




This is the only thing I think the NBN will fail on. I read some of the contracts a way back and some of the conditions were a little suss. High union control as well.


----------



## sptrawler

todster said:


> Shire website has the current population at 750  lol.
> Your just digging a deeper hole.




Mt Magnet council minutes.

Council makes the following comments on FIFO workforce:
(A) Organisations using the FIFO options to towns that have appropriate infrastructure that has been provided in most cases using Federal State and Local Government funds, should be required to have a percentage of their staff reside in that area.
(B) The Federal Government could use its taxation powers to make the FIFO option less attractive for the employer.
(C) Many FIFO workers claim “A” or “B” zone tax rebates, but spend their monies and invest in the area that their families reside, not in Regional Australia, and therefore should not qualify for this concession.
(D) During the Census of Population, most FIFO workers record their residential address as where their family lives and therefore the region where they work is not recognised and as a result the regional or remote Council’s miss out on many/less grants for that Local Government. Many grants are based on population numbers.
(E) Council recognises that some FIFO is inevitable (specialised and short term contractors etc).
(F) An incentive that would provide some benefit to residents of remote areas is a large increase in Zone “A” and “B” tax rebates. Zone Tax rebates have not increased for many years and are not of the incentive value that they used to be when they were introduced. An increase in Zone Tax rebates to a realistic level is requested.


From W.A State Government report
Population
The Mid West’s population has increased steadily over the past 20 years and at June 2010 was estimated to be 55,584. The region's population makes up 9% of the states regional population and 2.4% of the total state population. Between 2005 and 2010 the region grew at an average rate of 1.7% per anum. 

While the current population makes the Mid West the sixth largest of Western Australia’s nine regions, with the region's high projected population growth expected to make it the fourth largest by 2026. Major economic developments such as the numerous resource projects proposed for the Region have the capacity to boost these projections quite significantly. The region’s enviable lifestyle, proximity to the metropolitan area, strong supportive social infrastructure and relatively cheap housing are attracting even more interest from retirees and those looking for a sea-change. A number of growth scenarios have been calculated and depending on actual developments, the region's population could grow to between 80,000-90,000 by 2026.

Population within the region is unevenly dispersed. The City of Greater Geraldton's population is estimated to be 38,733 or more than 70% of the region's population. Between 2000 and 2006 coastal municipalities (Geraldton/Greenough, Chapman Valley and Irwin) have shown a strong growth, including 1.8% average annual average growth in the Shire of Chapman Valley to the north of the Geraldton/Greenough area. Many farming areas (Carnamah, Morawa, Mingenew and Coorow) have recorded decreases in population, largely as a result of farm amalgamation. The population of inland shires where mining is a dominant feature has tended to be variable depending on the level of economic activity.* However, since the mid 1990's when fly-in/fly-out became established, population has tended to decline*.

From State Government documents


----------



## Smurf1976

NBNMyths said:


> It is horrendously expensive to deliver cellular wireless data. The technology has such a short lifespan that equipment replacement is regular and expensive. Each wireless generation is superseded about every 5 years, meaning regular multi-billion dollar upgrades.



This cost still exists with the NBN since unless it is literally everywhere, having WiFi at home doesn't remove the need to be able to use the device where WiFi is not available.

10 years ago ISP's had trouble most evenings because people came home, dialed up (yes, dialed up) the ISP and used the internet. The point being that most usage was at home, and most of that was of an evening. People sat down to use the computer as a specific task.

Two or three years ago people still rushed to post updates once they got home after things like music festivals etc. But in 2012 they post the update not only before they get home, but while the band is still playing. You can find out what others are saying about a particular performance, only a few minutes after it has started and whilst you're standing outside.

I also out remember employers and their policies regarding staff internet usage. No share trading, gambling, streaming media etc even during official lunch breaks. These days such policies are completely pointless - walk into the lunch room and every employee under 30 is sitting there watching, updating or downloading something using their own device. They wouldn't want to use the company's desktop PC for such things even if there were no rules to prevent it. 

So far as I can tell, the wireless era is already here perhaps not in terms of bulk data, but certainly in terms of the number of users, devices etc.


----------



## NBNMyths

For those interested, there is an NBN Q&A/info session tonight at 7pm via a webcast. They have been asking people to submit questions over the last couple of weeks.

Not sure if there is any limit to the number of users, but you have to register to watch it:

http://webcast.viostream.com/?viocast=5605&auth=4ebc7a4a-0e21-44c1-874d-fab3b890c277


----------



## DB008

*Conroy = Visionary....*

*Australia's official digital 'visionary': Conroy*









> Australia now has its own official visionary.
> Senator Stephen Conroy, Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, has collected his Visionary of the Year award from the New York-based Intelligent Community Forum for his work establishing the national broadband network (NBN).
> Senator Conroy was in New York city last week to receive the accolade, using the opportunity to level scathing attacks at Telstra which he identified as a major initial obstacle in the project's implementation.
> Advertisement: Story continues below
> "The challenge for our government was at the time how do we deal with our incumbent Telstra [...] I gave them two options - they could agree to a prospective structural separation over 10 years [...] if they didn't agree they would be banned from buying new mobile spectrum of 4G services. Telstra's management chose to agree to the NBN."




Link


----------



## sptrawler

Funny thing is, it depends which side of the fence you are on. 
One side call him a visionary, the other side call him a blackmailer and extortionist.


----------



## Logique

Good of the govt to use our tax dollars to advertise the NBN -that a lot of us won't even get access to, and plenty won't be able to afford.

Looking at the ads, apparently everyone in the bush is a self employed web designer, commodities trader or white collar professional. Presumably this is how bush folks can afford to pay the NBN rates.


----------



## NBNMyths

Logique said:


> Good of the govt to use our tax dollars to advertise the NBN -that a lot of us won't even get access to, and plenty won't be able to afford.
> 
> Looking at the ads, apparently everyone in the bush is a self employed web designer, commodities trader or white collar professional. Presumably this is how bush folks can afford to pay the NBN rates.




100% of Australians will have access to the NBN, via either optical fibre (93%), 4G-LTE wireless (4%) or satellite (3%).

The NBN is no more expensive than ADSL+phone. At the entry level, it's actually much cheaper. Exetel for example have a 12/1Mbps NBN service with 50GB of data _and_ a phone for $35/month total. Up the speed to 25/5Mbps for an extra $5. Perhaps you'd like to link to a cheaper option on the copper network?

What's more, NBN pricing is the same nationwide, whether you live on a cattle station in Anna Creek or an apartment on George St Sydney.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> 100% of Australians will have access to the NBN, via either optical fibre (93%), 4G-LTE wireless (4%) or satellite (3%).
> 
> What's more, NBN pricing is the same nationwide, whether you live on a cattle station in Anna Creek or an apartment on George St Sydney.




That's no way to run a business. It is not surprising that the taxpayers won't get their money back before 20 to 30 years. It reminds me of German war reparations after WW1.

Quigley, the NBN Co Supremo said the government business enterprise was planning to repay the Government’s equity contribution to the project — expected to run into the several tens of billions of dollars — within a 20 to 30-year time period.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> That's no way to run a business. It is not surprising that the taxpayers won't get their money back before 20 to 30 years. It reminds me of German war reparations after WW1.
> 
> Quigley, the NBN Co Supremo said the government business enterprise was planning to repay the Government’s equity contribution to the project ”” expected to run into the several tens of billions of dollars ”” within a 20 to 30-year time period.




Maybe you missed the entire point of the NBN then? 

They aren't building it to make a profit. They are building it to provide ubiquity and break even.

How long do you think it took to recoup the investment in the rollout of power, water, sewer, gas and telephone networks?


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> How long do you think it took to recoup the investment in the rollout of power, water, sewer, gas and telephone networks?




Yeah, but there were no better alternatives. Bad analogy.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Yeah, but there were no better alternatives. Bad analogy.




What's the better alternative? Make sure you include some supporting refs.


----------



## Julia

NBNMyths said:


> What's more, NBN pricing is the same nationwide, whether you live on a cattle station in Anna Creek or an apartment on George St Sydney.



How is that reasonable?   Means people in cities are subsidising the others doesn't it?  Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding how it works.

Article in the Weekend Australian, with specific reference to cost for students, but obviously relevant to other people on low incomes, extract:


> Under the copper network students can access the internet from as little as $20 a month but under the NBN internet service providers face a $24 a month access fee even before retail packages are offered to consumers.
> 
> Under the new system an entry level broadband user will face fees of about $60 a month, effectively tripling costs, while mid level plans hover about $90 and high level packages at $110.




I'm presently paying just $39.95 for a service which is entirely adequate for my purposes and resent any suggestion that this will become much more expensive for something I neither want nor need.

Comments, NBN Myths?


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> What's the better alternative? Make sure you include some supporting refs.




OK, make it *other* alternatives if you like. However any private enterprise broadband system would be more taxpayer-friendly.


----------



## NBNMyths

Julia said:


> How is that reasonable?   Means people in cities are subsidising the others doesn't it?  Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding how it works.
> 
> Article in the Weekend Australian, with specific reference to cost for students, but obviously relevant to other people on low incomes, extract:
> 
> 
> I'm presently paying just $39.95 for a service which is entirely adequate for my purposes and resent any suggestion that this will become much more expensive for something I neither want nor need.
> 
> Comments, NBN Myths?




Yes, that's the way it works. A cross-subsidy in essentially the same way as other services (eg: Phone, mail, healthcare and to a certain extent water, power and gas).

The Australian isn't exactly known for their accurate NBN reporting. 

You cannot currently get internet for $20 a month because (almost everywhere) you first need to have a phone with line rental before you can buy the internet connection. So you must add line rental at ~$30 a month to the $20 for internet, for a total of $50 a month.

Under the NBN there is no line rental charge. So the $35 plan from Exetel (which I mentioned above) is all you pay for phone and broadband combined. Also, the phone calls on that $35 plan are 10c each, un-timed to any fixed line in Australia. This is less than half the cost of a local call on the copper network, let alone STD calls.


----------



## Knobby22

Julia said:


> How is that reasonable?   Means people in cities are subsidising the others doesn't it?  Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding how it works.
> 
> ?




Yes, but that is how we work in Australia. The country gets a good deal and I think that is good. They already suffer in heathcare and petrol (though they are subsidised in both). I can't see what is wrong with that.


----------



## Knobby22

Calliope said:


> OK, make it *other* alternatives if you like. However any private enterprise broadband system would be more taxpayer-friendly.




Hasn't worked with electricity. They stop maintenance and start working out ways to rort us. At least that is what has happened in Victoria.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> The Australian isn't exactly known for their accurate NBN reporting.




Naturally you would think like Conroy who wants to censor it because it is *too accurate*.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Naturally you would think like Conroy who wants to censor it because it is *too accurate*.




Well, let's see. 

The Australian says _"entry level prices start at $60"._

According to the actual ISPs though, entry level pricing starts at $35.00 (or even less).

*So either The Australian is wrong, or the ISP is lying to its customers.*



The Australian says  that it will cost a school "up to $200,000 to connect to the NBN".

Oops, then they print a teeny-tiny correction, saying that the school's connection will actually be free:






I notice they haven't removed the original false story though....


It goes on and on with a whole list of demonstrably false stories documented by ZDNet:
http://www.zdnet.com.au/advance-australian-fair-339306784.htm


----------



## tinhat

sptrawler said:


> Funny thing is, it depends which side of the fence you are on.
> One side call him a visionary, the other side call him a blackmailer and extortionist.




As a TLS shareholder I call him a visionary! Thanks for the $$$.


----------



## Calliope

Good work Myths. You should ask Conroy for a raise and maybe a position with the Australian Communications and Media Authority, Accuracy Police.

I know Gillard and Conroy hate porkies


----------



## sptrawler

tinhat said:


> As a TLS shareholder I call him a visionary! Thanks for the $$$.




Yes, they are finally above their first listing price 15 years ago. Thanks heaps.LOL,LOL

Also you will be able to buy back what they just took off you, when they resell you the wholesale network(N.B.N)LOL,
Yes thanks heaps.


----------



## Logique

NBN Myths, 

in this rural district (not so far from Wollongong) we asked the NBN co when it will arrive, answer - not in the near term future. Also with optical fibre, my arithmetic tells me that 93% doesn't equal 100%. 

Entry level phone plus broadband for $35, outside of metropolitan areas, surely you jest.


----------



## NBNMyths

Logique said:


> NBN Myths,
> 
> in this rural district (not so far from Wollongong) we asked the NBN co when it will arrive, answer - not in the near term future. Also with optical fibre, my arithmetic tells me that 93% doesn't equal 100%.
> 
> Entry level phone plus broadband for $35, outside of metropolitan areas, surely you jest.




They have only announced the next 3 years of fibre, so outside that they won't tell you when it will arrive. The fixed wireless rollout has not really been announced, except for a few areas, but it will be finished by 2015. The interim sat is available now, and the final sat will be in 2015. 

The NBN has never been promised to deliver fibre to 100%. It has always been a combination of fibre, wireless and satellite. Originally it was "90% fibre, 10% wireless or sat". After the KPMG implementation study, it was increased to 93% fibre, and specified as 4% wireless, 3% sat. Add it together and it's 100% coverage.


No, I don't jest. NBN pricing is identical nationwide. Exetel charge $35 for a phone and 12Mbps broadband bundle on the NBN (fibre or wireless). That's ~30% less than phone+ADSL. See for yourself: http://www.exetel.com.au/residential-fibre-pricing-mainland.php

So much for "bush folk not being able to afford it" huh?


----------



## Smurf1976

Knobby22 said:


> Hasn't worked with electricity. They stop maintenance and start working out ways to rort us. At least that is what has happened in Victoria.



You'd be hard pressed to find anywhere this hasn't happened when utilities have been privatised.

Construction of the NBN is effectively a taxpayer funded bailout of the nation's communications infrastructure after years of being run down by Telstra. It is politically convenient that it happens to be associated with the introduction of new technology, but we'd still be paying for this even if it was simply to replace the copper lines with new copper lines. That's not because they suddenly wore out, it's because the system has simply been neglected for years and would need massive investment to continue operating.

I have serious reservations regarding the NBN, but there are some things private enterprise doesn't cope well with and infrastructure like this is one of them. That said, if it is to be publicly owned then it should be a proper Commission as such with strictly limited ministerial control. Such things worked well in the past, although it was generally the Left side of politics which didn't like them so much (interesting...).

PS One thing that nobody seems to mention - what happens to all the toxics in the old network? There's plenty of it...


----------



## Julia

NBNMyths said:


> Under the NBN there is no line rental charge. So the $35 plan from Exetel (which I mentioned above) is all you pay for phone and broadband combined. Also, the phone calls on that $35 plan are 10c each, un-timed to any fixed line in Australia. This is less than half the cost of a local call on the copper network, let alone STD calls.



OK, I hope you're right.  Thank you for the response.



Knobby22 said:


> Yes, but that is how we work in Australia. The country gets a good deal and I think that is good. They already suffer in heathcare and petrol (though they are subsidised in both). I can't see what is wrong with that.



So if I decide I'm fed up with suburbia and decide to build my house thousands of kms from anywhere, I should have every right to expect the same services as I obtained in suburbia?
You must be joking!


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> No, I don't jest. NBN pricing is identical nationwide. Exetel charge $35 for a phone and 12Mbps broadband bundle on the NBN (fibre or wireless). That's ~30% less than phone+ADSL. See for yourself: http://www.exetel.com.au/residential-fibre-pricing-mainland.php




Thanks for that N.B.N, an old bloke at the gym who has fixed line phone and mobile broadband and was asking my opinion of his options.
If this info is correct it would be perfect for him, I will let you know next week, how it goes.


----------



## drsmith

Julia said:


> OK, I hope you're right.  Thank you for the response.



He's right, but has compared apples with oranges.

There's no line rental for VOIP over copper either.


----------



## Calliope

Smurf1976 said:


> I have serious reservations regarding the NBN, but there are some things private enterprise doesn't cope well with and infrastructure like this is one of them.




As long as it is not called a Labour Government Enterprise. That is an oxymoron, and the kiss of death for any project. It is just a licence to waste money.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> He's right, but has compared apples with oranges.
> 
> There's no line rental for VOIP over copper either.




That's true. But Telstra don't offer unbundled services on their network and only about 10% of exchanges have 3rd-party ADSL2+ which do allow unbundled DSL.

Even in that 10%, you can't get $20 ADSL. The cheapest I've seen is DoDo (who are in about 300 of the 5,000 exchanges nationwide) at $27.95 for 5GB (!!!) of data, $37.95 for 10GB and $47.95 for 100GB. None of which include a VoIP number, although there are some free services available with limitations.

Still doesn't compare to Exetel's 50GB w/VoIP and 10c calls on the NBN, and access to the same 'free' VoIP services as naked DSL.


----------



## IFocus

NBNMyths said:


> Still doesn't compare to Exetel's 50GB w/VoIP and 10c calls on the NBN, and access to the same 'free' VoIP services as naked DSL.




I pay around $85 per month for 1.5k / 20GB / line rental and use VoIP its the best deal I can get not even close to the proposed NBN costs.

The continued cost claims from some sections of the media is... well ...just disgracefull then of course the same people sling mud at the ABC.

Fortunately I am in the 1st year connection area............bring it on.

Thanks for the updates NBNMyths


----------



## Smurf1976

Calliope said:


> As long as it is not called a Labour Government Enterprise. That is an oxymoron, and the kiss of death for any project. It is just a licence to waste money.



Agreed. I'd prefer an old-style Commission largely beyond the day to day reach of politics. I can't see it happening in today's political climate however (regardless of whoever wins the next election).


----------



## sptrawler

Smurf1976 said:


> Agreed. I'd prefer an old-style Commission largely beyond the day to day reach of politics. I can't see it happening in today's political climate however (regardless of whoever wins the next election).




No, it will be off loaded to the mum's and dad's as soon as practicable, at the maximum price obtainable. Then the taxpayer will pick up the shortfall. If a publicly listed company behaved like this, all hell would break loose.IMO


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> That's true. But Telstra don't offer unbundled services on their network and only about 10% of exchanges have 3rd-party ADSL2+ which do allow unbundled DSL.



How does that translate to percentage of households ?

I for example am on Iinet's ADSL2+ Naked-home 1 which provides 100GB monthly data (speed ~14/1 mbps at approx 1km from exchange) and free local and national calls through VOIP for ~$70.

Iinet don't have a precise equivalent for NBN, but the nearest two are 12/1 mpbs/20GB+20GB (peak and offpeak) for ~$50 and 12/1 mpbs/100GB+100GB for ~$60. Equivalent VOIP phone service is ~$10 extra.

With Iinet, the NBN service is cheaper, but only marginally. With Iinet, I could save $10 per month and take a hit on quota or pay what I pay now and potentially get some advantage on quota from the off peak limit. On the figures above, the nett advantage of the NBN is effectively between $0 and $10 per month, depending on quota usage.

The NBN plans needs to be cheaper at ADSL levels otherwise no one would use it, but that does not take into account the cost to the taxpayer of building the network. Whether or not that cost is recoverable in full in the ultimate business value of the NBN remains to be seen and will depend very much on the government's ability to judge and manage its large scale investment projects.


----------



## drsmith

IFocus said:


> I pay around $85 per month for 1.5k / 20GB / line rental and use VoIP its the best deal I can get not even close to the proposed NBN costs.
> 
> The continued cost claims from some sections of the media is... well ...just disgracefull then of course the same people sling mud at the ABC.
> 
> Fortunately I am in the 1st year connection area............bring it on.
> 
> Thanks for the updates NBNMyths



A question that comes to mind here is the impact the NBN has had on the rollout of ADSL2+ enabling of Telstra's exchanges by the ISP's themselves ?

For example, Iinet's DSLAM rollout has largely ground to a halt in most states, although SA is a notable exception.

http://www.iinet.net.au/iinetwork/coverage.html


----------



## drsmith

A question for the floor.

Did Iinet late last year have a low usage (10 or 20GB) naked DSL plan (ADSL2+) with VOIP included for ~$50 ?

I can recall considering a cheaper, lower usage Iinet naked DSL plan at the time. Now, the one I'm on is their cheapest.

Can someone confirm ?


----------



## DB008

drsmith, I looked into iinet for NBN.
The peak/off peak periods aren't the best.
Having said that, l expect prices to drop/change as the roll out continues.


----------



## Smurf1976

Is up to 2am really a genuine peak in internet usage?

I'd have thought it would follow a similar pattern to other things, for example electricity, gas, water, road traffic, phone calls and anything else where the behaviour of a large number of consumers can be measured in aggregate.

In the case of electricity, 2am - 4am is generally the absolute lowest demand, and there's no way you could say that anything after 11pm was even remotely close to being a peak. It's much the same with road traffic - graphs of that pretty much "fall off a cliff" after 6pm. I would have thought that midnight would be off-peak as far as the internet is concerned, but perhaps not?


----------



## DB008

Smurf1976 said:


> Is up to 2am really a genuine peak in internet usage?




I don't have figures to back me up, but probably not.


----------



## Eager

The coalition have backflipped on their stance regarding the NBN.

http://www.news.com.au/breaking-new...rap-nbn-turnbull/story-e6frfku9-1226412903973


----------



## bellenuit

Eager said:


> The coalition have backflipped on their stance regarding the NBN.
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/breaking-new...rap-nbn-turnbull/story-e6frfku9-1226412903973




I don't think that is anything new. I have heard Turnbull say that several times before. Saying you will scrap a project right at the beginning when little or no costs have been incurred is quite different from saying you will scrap it when it is largely under way. 

If I and another were sharing driving a car from Perth to Cairns and I were to argue the best coastal route is along the south and east coast via Sydney, but the other person were to favour a western and northern route via Darwin, if as first driver the other takes his preferred route and reaches Darwin, it would be rather stupid of me when taking over the driving from Darwin to insist we go back to Perth and take my preferred route. 

The coalition are just being sensible. Most of us who have opposed the NBN have done so on the basis that with many alternative infrastructure projects needing to be done, spending so much on the NBN is not the best deployment of our resources, particularly when there is much valuable networking infrastructure in place that could be used or upgraded that would achieve not quite as good a network as an all fibre network, but a good enough network at a much lower cost, leaving funds available for other projects that are also needed. We know a 4 lane highway to everyone's front door provides optimum speed to get from anywhere to anywhere, but is it a good investment when there are lots of other projects that cannot be undertaken due to lack of left over funding.


----------



## Julia

bellenuit said:


> I don't think that is anything new. I have heard Turnbull say that several times before. Saying you will scrap a project right at the beginning when little or no costs have been incurred is quite different from saying you will scrap it when it is largely under way.
> 
> If I and another were sharing driving a car from Perth to Cairns and I were to argue the best coastal route is along the south and east coast via Sydney, but the other person were to favour a western and northern route via Darwin, if as first driver the other takes his preferred route and reaches Darwin, it would be rather stupid of me when taking over the driving from Darwin to insist we go back to Perth and take my preferred route.
> 
> The coalition are just being sensible. Most of us who have opposed the NBN have done so on the basis that with many alternative infrastructure projects needing to be done, spending so much on the NBN is not the best deployment of our resources, particularly when there is much valuable networking infrastructure in place that could be used or upgraded that would achieve not quite as good a network as an all fibre network, but a good enough network at a much lower cost, leaving funds available for other projects that are also needed. We know a 4 lane highway to everyone's front door provides optimum speed to get from anywhere to anywhere, but is it a good investment when there are lots of other projects that cannot be undertaken due to lack of left over funding.




Correct.  But why would Eager let the facts get in the way.


----------



## Eager

bellenuit said:


> If I and another were sharing driving a car from Perth to Cairns and I were to argue the best coastal route is along the south and east coast via Sydney, but the other person were to favour a western and northern route via Darwin, if as first driver the other takes his preferred route and reaches Darwin, it would be rather stupid of me when taking over the driving from Darwin to insist we go back to Perth and take my preferred route.



Nice try, but the reality is that the NBN project (driving from Perth to Cairns) was opposed full stop by the noalition (ie the journey wasn't going to happen at all). Now, as we are approaching Darwin, the people opposing the journey now want to keep on going...


----------



## Eager

Julia said:


> Correct.  But why would Eager let the facts get in the way.



Oh, for Pete's sake! Just because you agree with bellenuit's well-put last paragraph opinion doesn't mean it is fact in its own right.

As for facts, the pure fact is the opposition have changed their position. I reported that fact. Don't shoot the messenger.


----------



## drsmith

Where's Myths ?

He's much better than the lite version.

I left a couple of questions towards the bottom of the previous page to which I thought he would be keen to respond.


----------



## bellenuit

Eager said:


> Nice try, but the reality is that the NBN project (driving from Perth to Cairns) was opposed full stop by the noalition (ie the journey wasn't going to happen at all). Now, as we are approaching Darwin, the people opposing the journey now want to keep on going...




Opposed to the NBN in the beginning, yes, but the journey wasn't going to happen at all, no. The NBN isn't the only way to get to fast broadband for most people that want it and are willing to pay for it.


----------



## IFocus

Abbott tried to wedge Malcolm but looks like Malcolm has successfully side stepped one of Abbotts boasts to scrap the NBN.



> These statements come almost two years after Opposition Leader Tony Abbot said the coalition would scrap the NBN project.
> 
> "If you want to cut spending, look at the NBN," Mr Abbott said in 2010.
> 
> "Not proceeding with it could save billions of dollars."



Read more: http://www.news.com.au/breaking-new...ll/story-e6frfku9-1226412903973#ixzz1zFktkSJk


----------



## NBNMyths

I don't think much has changed recently. While it's true that their policy has gradually evolved from
"12Mbps is enough, and priv sect can do it > Priv Sect FTTN > FTTN NBN


Turnbull still wants to scale it back to an obsolete FTTN version, he'll just let the existing FTTP rollout continue until the contracts run out. He's also stuck with the satellites, and the wireless is something they would have done anyway. When Turnbull says we'll do it "cheaper and faster", he means "we'll build a cheaper, less capable version". 

I think the Coalition's current tactic is that, having finally worked out that the public actually want the NBN, they'll take a punt that average Joe consumer won't understand the difference between FTTN and FTTP, and hope they just assume the Libs will build essentially the same thing but do so more efficiently.

I think it's a nice step forward that they are essentially promising a wholesale-only, open access network with decent speeds. At least we can look forward to somewhat improved services and uniform national pricing. It's a real pity though that we would lose an opportunity to be right up there in a worldwide basis, and instead fall back to being a follower. And, it will still come back and bite us in 10 years when it's no longer up to the job, and we have to throw away $10-odd billion and start again. But then, that's several elections into the future, isn't it. 




drsmith said:


> A question that comes to mind here is the impact the NBN has had on the rollout of ADSL2+ enabling of Telstra's exchanges by the ISP's themselves ?
> 
> For example, Iinet's DSLAM rollout has largely ground to a halt in most states, although SA is a notable exception.
> 
> http://www.iinet.net.au/iinetwork/coverage.html




I think most of the ISP DSLAM rollouts had reached most of the areas they were planning to cover.



drsmith said:


> A question for the floor.
> 
> Did Iinet late last year have a low usage (10 or 20GB) naked DSL plan (ADSL2+) with VOIP included for ~$50 ?
> 
> I can recall considering a cheaper, lower usage Iinet naked DSL plan at the time. Now, the one I'm on is their cheapest.
> 
> Can someone confirm ?




No idea.


----------



## So_Cynical

Eager said:


> the noalition




Nice 




drsmith said:


> Where's Myths ?
> 
> He's much better than the lite version.
> 
> I left a couple of questions towards the bottom of the previous page to which I thought he would be keen to respond.




Were they stupid questions with obvious answers?


----------



## sptrawler

Eager said:


> The coalition have backflipped on their stance regarding the NBN.
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/breaking-new...rap-nbn-turnbull/story-e6frfku9-1226412903973




That is a stupid statement.
They still have to pick up the bucket of manure labor leave, rationalising and the scope of the project. 
While working within the constraints of contracts already let and infrastructure deployed is actually good contractual and fiscal management of obligations.
Something labor wouldn't have a clue about and obviously you don't either.


----------



## sails

Who cares if the opposition back flip on anything.  Any of their policies will be taken to the next election and the people will have a chance to vote on it.

Gillard did not have the democratic decency to take her massive back flip on major policy to the people.  I suspect she will pay a very heavy price politically for forcing her legislation on the people.  Looks like she refuses to learn the lessons of history - and recent history too.


----------



## sails

So_Cynical said:


> ...Were they stupid questions with obvious answers?





Apparently not.  Myths has no idea...


----------



## drsmith

Politically, the Opposition can effectively be a policy free zone given Labor's woes. 



So_Cynical said:


> Were they stupid questions with obvious answers?




You're welcome to read and answer them if you like.


----------



## Julia

drsmith said:


> Where's Myths ?
> 
> He's much better than the lite version.


----------



## Eager

sptrawler said:


> That is a stupid statement.
> They still have to pick up the bucket of manure labor leave, rationalising and the scope of the project.
> While working within the constraints of contracts already let and infrastructure deployed is actually good contractual and fiscal management of obligations.
> Something labor wouldn't have a clue about and obviously you don't either.



Again, don't shoot the messenger!


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> I think most of the ISP DSLAM rollouts had reached most of the areas they were planning to cover.



Thanks fo the reply.

I don't know either hence the question, but would there be a basic economic argument for third party ISP's to scale back and ultimately discontinue their DSLAM rollouts as the NBN would make this hardware redundant sooner than would have otherwise been the case ?

The second question of specific interest was in response to this,



NBNMyths said:


> That's true. But Telstra don't offer unbundled services on their network and only about 10% of exchanges have 3rd-party ADSL2+ which do allow unbundled DSL.






drsmith said:


> How does that translate to percentage of households ?


----------



## drsmith

Where's mine ?


----------



## Calliope

drsmith said:


> Where's mine ?




I'm looking forward to NBNMyths trotting out a Conroy rebuttal to this, and a justification for wasteful box of propaganda.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> I'm looking forward to NBNMyths trotting out a Conroy rebuttal to this, and a justification for wasteful box of propaganda.




The first I knew about "the box" was seeing Malcolm's rather pathetic video. He sure is getting a serious flaming in the comments. 

I have no idea what the story behind it is, who it goes to, how many there are or anything else about it.


I note that Mal got it wrong talking about NBN Co being the producer though. It's actually a DBCDE kit. I suppose that goes nicely with just about everything else he says about the NBN.

Either way, I'm not sure what the issue is though? Is there something wrong with the Dept producing info kits about their flagship policy?

Personally, I prefer this Turnbull video:


----------



## DB008

*Google Fibre*

Just saw this on the net

Google fibre - 1GB/s
https://fiber.google.com/about/

Pricing
https://fiber.google.com/plans/residential/


----------



## boofhead

*Re: Google Fibre*



DB008 said:


> Just saw this on the net
> 
> Google fibre - 1GB/s




1 Gb/s. NBN will be offering those speeds too. It's been the sticking point about Telstra offering services in Tasmania on the NBN because some premises have equipment that could only go to 100 Mbit/s.


----------



## NBNMyths

*Re: Google Fibre*



DB008 said:


> Just saw this on the net
> 
> Google fibre - 1GB/s
> https://fiber.google.com/about/
> 
> Pricing
> https://fiber.google.com/plans/residential/




I like what they're offering.

$120/month for Gigabit internet+TV

$70/month for Gigabit internet stand alone

Or *Free* 5Mbps internet for 7 years!


I'll bet the existing operators in Kansas are a bit nervous!


----------



## Aussiejeff

*Re: Google Fibre*



NBNMyths said:


> I like what they're offering.
> 
> $120/month for Gigabit internet+TV
> 
> $70/month for Gigabit internet stand alone
> 
> Or *Free* 5Mbps internet for 7 years!
> 
> 
> I'll bet the existing operators in Kansas are a bit nervous!




Mmm.

How about our gummint opens up to competition and lets Google come here and offer US those sorts of "fiber" prices - why should we have to pay some of the highest broadband prices in the world?


----------



## NBNMyths

*Re: Google Fibre*



Aussiejeff said:


> Mmm.
> 
> How about our gummint opens up to competition and lets Google come here and offer US those sorts of "fiber" prices - why should we have to pay some of the highest broadband prices in the world?




Google could come here and do the same (or at least a similar) thing. There isn't any prohibition on anyone else building a broadband network in Australia. The only restriction (since the NBN legislation was passed) is that any new network must be operated on a wholesale-only, open access basis.

Prior to the NBN, anyone could have build a competing network on a vertical/closed basis, but nobody did. The only one to give it a go was Optus, and they only covered 15-20% of the population, then gave up after losing a billion dollars. They have publicly said they wouldn't try again.

I too lament the price of broadband in Australia. However at least some of it can be attributed to the higher cost of getting the data here. A good portion of our data comes from overseas, and our ISPs have to pay to get it here via the undersea cables (essentially they pay for every MB that comes through those cables).


----------



## NBNMyths

*Promo video for Google Fiber*

Google's promo video for the fibre service. The awesomeness is overwhelming.


----------



## Smurf1976

The real question comes down to how much further growth does the internet have? At some point it will become a "mature" technology, after which growth will only be in line with overall GDP growth of a few % per annum.

There was a time when road traffic was growing rapidly and many thought this would continue forever. Reality set in eventually - regardless of the cost of petrol or standard of the roads, there's only so much travelling that the average person wants to do. Per capita car travel is now actually declining in much of the developed world such that any growth in overall volume will be less than population growth.

Electricity was the same. It was taken for granted that depending on the location in question, demand went up 7 - 10% per annum compounding and enormous power projects were planned on the assumption this would continue. Then the 1980's arrived and reality set in - no matter how cheap it became and how much was available, there's only so much electricity that the average person can usefully consume. People didn't actually want their living room bathed in the equivalent of full sunlight at 10pm and with very few exceptions not even city streets did the "turn night into day" thing. 30 years later and we're no closer to building some of those elaborate power schemes than we were when they were first thought up. There just isn't a sensible use for that much power, at least not one that we've come up with thus far.

Ultimately, there's a limit to how much internet there will be worthwhile use for. I very much doubt that internet connected ovens or fridges will ever catch on and most don't want it in the shower either. As with the motor car and electricity before it, much of the internet growth has now become about displacing other means of supplying the same thing.

At first, the car (and trucks etc) was a novelty and didn't compete against rail so much as complement it. Then that changed and growth came from transferring existing load from rail to road. Then growth ended.

Same with electricity. It was in many cases the gas companies which first introduced it and they saw no threat. Then electricity growth switched, and became all about taking market share from gas, wood etc. Then growth fell in a heap.

And with the internet. At first it was all new and not a threat to anything. In the more recent past however, growth has been all about taking from some established industry and doing it online instead. Music and movies are the big data hogs, just like heating water and rooms are the big electricity uses that were "taken" from other technologies. But there's only so many movies that anyone really wants to watch and there's only so much hot water they can sensibly use.

Sure, I could have 1 Gbps internet just like I could have a sub-station in the backyard and live on a 6 lane highway. But what practical use does this have that can't be done at 100 Mbps or even 10 Mbps? 

If the movie streams as fast as I can watch it then that's good enough. I don't actually want to watch it at 50 times its' intended speed since whilst the connection might be that fast, humans aren't. Likewise any other use.

I'm not arguing against the NBN per se, but there's got to be a limit on the practical amount of data the average person actually wants. Just like lew people pay much attention to computer specs these days simply because any new computer easily exceeds what the average user requires, so too the internet will in due course be the same.


----------



## sptrawler

Thats goes along my thoughts smurph, I don't see the point in running optical to the house in most places, it is just overkill. I do agree running it to commercial districts and c.b.d's, where high data transfers occur also a degree of point to point security is requred e.g banks and big business.
However most households don't need more than what is already available on the copper network. 
Also with the copper network when you have a power failure, your normal basic phone still works. I know, I have one in the shed, for just such occassions.
I can't wait untill there is a power failure in an N.B.N coverage area, which has limited mobile coverage. 
My bet is, it will hit the national news. 
It may be caused by a bushfire or something, but all of a sudden the people affected will go "$hit the phone doesn't work"

There are some occassions where the 'kiss' system is the best system. 
"Keep It Simple Stupid", but that would never apply with this government.
 Make it bigger, make it sillier, look at meeee, look at meee. Talk about an inferiority complex. The government has it in spades and it is deserved.


----------



## NBNMyths

There's no doubt that demand will level off eventually, but it won't happen any time soon. The internet is a very immature technology, and bandwidth needs/growth is still increasing very rapidly. There are *many* current uses that already exceed the capability of the copper network, let alone known emerging technologies and unknown future technologies. 

The rate of growth is still increasing:




To use your electricity analogy, demand has always come in spurts as new technologies took advantage of the network....lighting, refrigeration, hot water, TV, heating, air conditioning, computers etc.

And so it is with the demand for data, but we are only at the beginning of the sequence. Just last month, a Japanese manufacturer released the first QuadHD 3D TV. Uncompressed video for it is over 1Gbps per channel.




sptrawler said:


> Thats goes along my thoughts smurph, I don't see the point in running optical to the house in most places, it is just overkill. I do agree running it to commercial districts and c.b.d's, where high data transfers occur also a degree of point to point security is requred e.g banks and big business.
> However most households don't need more than what is already available on the copper network.
> Also with the copper network when you have a power failure, your normal basic phone still works. I know, I have one in the shed, for just such occassions.
> I can't wait untill there is a power failure in an N.B.N coverage area, which has limited mobile coverage.
> My bet is, it will hit the national news.
> It may be caused by a bushfire or something, but all of a sudden the people affected will go "$hit the phone doesn't work"
> 
> There are some occassions where the 'kiss' system is the best system.
> "Keep It Simple Stupid", but that would never apply with this government.
> Make it bigger, make it sillier, look at meeee, look at meee. Talk about an inferiority complex. The government has it in spades and it is deserved.




Saying most households won't need fibre is incredibly short-sighted. People said the same thing before the telephone was rolled out everywhere. I'm also certain that 20 years ago, most Australians would have thought they'd never want the internet at all (See this 1995 Newsweek article). Then when 256k ADSL arrived 10 years ago, people thought they could never possibly need more speed than that.... Do you see a pattern? 

The NBN has a backup battery, which maintains a corded phone for about 4 hours, so you don't lose your phone in the case of a typical blackout. This is essentially the same situation as the Optus HFC network, and I don't recall seeing too many front page stories about Optus phones dying. But then, it's not an ALP policy so I would expect some beatup in the News Ltd fish wrappers with regards to the NBN. 

That said, many people have moved to cordless phones and/or Naked DSL/VoIP so the number of people who can use a phone in a blackout is constantly declining.

By the way, the opposition's FTTN plan will be substantially worse in this case than the NBN. You can't fit many batteries in a street cabinet, and they are prone to flooding/fire/accident damage due to the active electronics therein. So not only will they be no better than the NBN in a blackout, but they will also suffer much more severely from natural disasters and accidental damage (Because the NBN's nodes are unpowered/passive).


It's not "just this government" doing fibre networks. The world is moving to fibre networks. There are now residential brownfield FTTP networks being built in over 50 countries around the World, and greenfield FTTP is the standard in essentially every developed nation.

A couple of months ago, Alcatel-Lucent, one of the World's largest suppliers of copper-FTTN and fibre-FTTP equipment announced that their ratio of copper:fibre sales revenue had gone from 71:29 to 50:50 in the last 6 months. Clearly, FTTP is not just the _future_, it is the _current_.


If I may finish with an appropriate quote from Prof Rod Tucker:

*An enduring characteristic of human nature is our inability to understand and accept the rate of technological change and its impact on society.
*


----------



## dutchie

NBNMyths said:


> let alone known emerging technologies and unknown future technologies.
> 
> If I may finish with an appropriate quote from Prof Rod Tucker:
> 
> *An enduring characteristic of human nature is our inability to understand and accept the rate of technological change and its impact on society.
> *




Including wireless technology which will make the NBN worthless.

(Please excuse my selective editing of your post NBNMyths)


----------



## boofhead

dutchie said:


> Including wireless technology which will make the NBN worthless.




How so? Every time I read such lines I've never found they match the reality - speeds, downloads, pricing. Please note Telstra recently increased the price of some mobile calls.

What is the wireless technlogy that will make the NBN worthless? The NBN does include a wireless component. 3G and fixed wireless are different things too.


----------



## spooly74

boofhead said:


> How so? Every time I read such lines I've never found they match the reality - speeds, downloads, pricing. Please note Telstra recently increased the price of some mobile calls.
> 
> What is the wireless technlogy that will make the NBN worthless? The NBN does include a wireless component. 3G and fixed wireless are different things too.




Here is a few links I came across recently 

http://www.grepscience.com/archives/4395

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/...aves-could-boost-wireless-capacity-infinitely


----------



## NBNMyths

dutchie said:


> Including wireless technology which will make the NBN worthless.
> 
> (Please excuse my selective editing of your post NBNMyths)




I thought the wireless argument had been done to death?

There is a difference between technological advance and breaking the laws of physics.

Don't you wonder -just a little- why the only people saying that the NBN will be made obsolete by wireless are people with no technical knowledge? Where are all the engineers? The physicists? The telecommunication experts saying this? The answer, of course, is that they actually know what they're talking about so they don't make such ridiculous statements. For that, you'll have to listen to Alan Jones et al.

Oh, and the twisted radio waves (and other assorted variations on the theme) do not overcome any of the other limitations of wireless (ie weather, obstructions, geography, distance etc), and therefore do not solve any problem other than spectrum shortages. And even then, only in theory. They also have inherent problems with a moving transceiver (because the "twist" changes based on distance and position), and have currently only been tested over relatively short distances.

Perhaps the biggest problem though, is that they use modified parabolic antennas between those fixed points, because that's what is required to twist the signals. Obviously, it's rather difficult to a) Get parabolic antennas into small devices and b) Ensure that the mobile antenna always faces the source. 


The other point, of course, is cost of wireless services. Telstra recently increased their large 4G data plan pricing. The cost for a 400GB/month service at about 10Mbps is now $600.00!

On the NBN you can get 1000GB/month at 100Mbps for $100.

Would you pay 6x more money for 1/2 the data at 1/10th the speed?


Let me leave you with another quote. This time one of mine:

*There is not a single country or telecommunications company -anywhere in the World- attempting or proposing to replace their urban fixed line networks with wireless networks.*


----------



## dutchie

NBNMyths said:


> I thought the wireless argument had been done to death?
> 
> There is a difference between technological advance and breaking the laws of physics.
> 
> Don't you wonder -just a little- why the only people saying that the NBN will be made obsolete by wireless are people with no technical knowledge? Where are all the engineers? The physicists? The telecommunication experts saying this? The answer, of course, is that they actually know what they're talking about so they don't make such ridiculous statements. For that, you'll have to listen to Alan Jones et al.
> 
> Oh, and the twisted radio waves (and other assorted variations on the theme) do not overcome any of the other limitations of wireless (ie weather, obstructions, geography, distance etc), and therefore do not solve any problem other than spectrum shortages. And even then, only in theory. They also have inherent problems with a moving transceiver (because the "twist" changes based on distance and position), and have currently only been tested over relatively short distances.
> 
> Perhaps the biggest problem though, is that they use modified parabolic antennas between those fixed points, because that's what is required to twist the signals. Obviously, it's rather difficult to a) Get parabolic antennas into small devices and b) Ensure that the mobile antenna always faces the source.
> 
> 
> The other point, of course, is cost of wireless services. Telstra recently increased their large 4G data plan pricing. The cost for a 400GB/month service at about 10Mbps is now $600.00!
> 
> On the NBN you can get 1000GB/month at 100Mbps for $100.
> 
> Would you pay 6x more money for 1/2 the data at 1/10th the speed?
> 
> 
> Let me leave you with another quote. This time one of mine:
> 
> *There is not a single country or telecommunications company -anywhere in the World- attempting or proposing to replace their urban fixed line networks with wireless networks.*




So are you saying that there will *never* be a wireless solution that is as fast or faster than the NBN?


----------



## NBNMyths

dutchie said:


> So are you saying that there will *never* be a wireless solution that is as fast or faster than the NBN?




I'm saying there will *never* be a wireless solution as fast or faster than optical fibre. OF has already achieved 69 Terabits per second (Tbps) on a single strand using 120 wavelengths over hundreds of km, plus a recent success of 26Tbps using a single wavelength (meaning 120x26 or ~3,100Tbps is theoretically possible on a single strand using known technology), wireless is not even on the radar (current max of 0.0003Tbps per cell, not per user). The only limiting factor for OF currently is the computer equipment at the ends of the cable.

The actual speeds implemented on the NBN fibre will depend on demand, one would imagine. It's currently capable of 1Gbps, with 10Gbps on the roadmap for ~5 years and 100Gbps in ~15 years.


----------



## dutchie

NBNMyths said:


> I'm saying there will *never* be a wireless solution as fast or faster than optical fibre. OF has already achieved 69 Terabits per second (Tbps) on a single strand using 120 wavelengths over hundreds of km, plus a recent success of 26Tbps using a single wavelength (meaning 120x26 or ~3,100Tbps is theoretically possible on a single strand using known technology), wireless is not even on the radar (current max of 0.0003Tbps per cell, not per user). The only limiting factor for OF currently is the computer equipment at the ends of the cable.
> 
> The actual speeds implemented on the NBN fibre will depend on demand, one would imagine. It's currently capable of 1Gbps, with 10Gbps on the roadmap for ~5 years and 100Gbps in ~15 years.




All I can say, even though I have no expertise in this field, is the following:

"When talking about technology - never say never - as those that do often end up with egg on their face."

Guess I am just a technological optimist.


----------



## sptrawler

dutchie said:


> All I can say, even though I have no expertise in this field, is the following:
> 
> "When talking about technology - never say never - as those that do often end up with egg on their face."
> 
> Guess I am just a technological optimist.





I think NBN is right Dutchie, the fastest medium known, that humans can use is the speed of light. 
That's why the optical fibre will be the backbone infrastructure for a very long time. Downstream the delivery medium may change i.e wireless, microwave ect.
But the only way to move bulk data at bling speed, is optical.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Saying most households won't need fibre is incredibly short-sighted. People said the same thing before the telephone was rolled out everywhere. I'm also certain that 20 years ago, most Australians would have thought they'd never want the internet at all (See this 1995 Newsweek article). Then when 256k ADSL arrived 10 years ago, people thought they could never possibly need more speed than that.... Do you see a pattern?
> 
> If I may finish with an appropriate quote from Prof Rod Tucker:
> 
> *An enduring characteristic of human nature is our inability to understand and accept the rate of technological change and its impact on society.
> *




Yes NBN, I just hope online gaming becomes an olympic sport, we will kick ar$e. That is, if our kids can get off theirs.


----------



## NBNMyths

dutchie said:


> All I can say, even though I have no expertise in this field, is the following:
> 
> "When talking about technology - never say never - as those that do often end up with egg on their face."
> 
> Guess I am just a technological optimist.




There's no doubting that technology will improve. But it isn't about technology, it's about physics, and I think Montgomery Scott said it best:

_"Ya canna overcome the laws of physics, Cap'n"_

In an optical fibre network, the method of transmission is light, and the medium is glass. In a wireless network, the method of transmission is radio and the medium is air.

So we're not really debating wireless v fixed line technologies, but the physical characteristics of shielded glass versus open air and the bandwidth of the light v radio spectrums. It doesn't matter how much you improve the transmission technology, it must still overcome the inherent lossyness, interference etc. of open air, and the smaller size of the radio spectrum.

For a wireless technology to eclipse optical fibre would mean that everything we know about the physics of radio and light must be wrong. A rather unlikely outcome.




sptrawler said:


> I think NBN is right Dutchie, the fastest medium known, that humans can use is the speed of light.
> That's why the optical fibre will be the backbone infrastructure for a very long time. Downstream the delivery medium may change i.e wireless, microwave ect.
> But the only way to move bulk data at bling speed, is optical.




Speed isn't the issue per se. Radio waves also travel at ~the speed of light.

It is the size of the light spectrum v the radio spectrum, combined with the inherent loss of an unshielded medium that gives fibre a higher capacity.


----------



## Smurf1976

I am sitting in a hotel room right now by myself (travel for work) killing time online.

It took me about a 2 minutes to take the laptop out of the bag, plug the mains power lead in, start it up and get online.

20 years ago anyone who tried setting up a computer with external communications in a hotel room would likely have been thrown out for interfering with the hotel's phone service. The police would probably have been called to, the assumption being some sort of criminal activity (why else would anyone want a computer in a hotel room?)

In defence of the NBN and technology in general, I'd say that there's very few who predicted 20 years ago that there would be virtually no use of 35mm film cameras and that most photos would be taken not with a camera but with a phone, that CD's would have joined vinyl as largely obsolete for music sales and that there would even be such a concept as Facebook. Nor would they have predicted that 18 year old females would be as tied to computers as the stereotypical male geek. 

Technology is inherently hard to predict however. People have been predicting a bright future for nuclear power ever since the first commercial power reactor started up back in 1957. Thus far at least, it's been a relative dud. Likewise supersonic flight never really caught on because it was simply too expensive relative to the benefits. And I've been hearing about 3D movies and TV since the 1980's and thus far it has failed to really catch on despite plenty of marketing over the years.

I don't doubt that technology will change radically over the next 20 years just as it has over the past 20. But what I'm not convinced about is that this technology will be tied to a cable. As I said, I'm sitting in a hotel room right now and the only cable connected to the computer is the mains power lead. I didn't even need anyone to help me carry the computer up the steps, and nobody's likely to question what I'm doing or why.

I don't doubt the technical abilities of fibre, it's just the need to run it straight to the device inside the home that I'm questioning given that the general trend does seem to be in the opposite direction with wireless networks etc.


----------



## So_Cynical

Smurf1976 said:


> Technology is inherently hard to predict however. People have been predicting a bright future for nuclear power ever since the first commercial power reactor started up back in 1957. Thus far at least, *it's been a relative dud*.




A Relative dud hey.  



			
				euronuclear.org said:
			
		

> On June 26, 1954, at Obninsk, Russia, the nuclear power plant APS-1 with a net electrical output of 5 MW was connected to the power grid, the world's first nuclear power plant that generated electricity for commercial use.
> 
> As of July 2 2012 in 31 countries 435 nuclear power plant units with an installed electric net capacity of about 370 GW are in operation and 62 plants with an installed capacity of 59 GW are in 14 countries under construction.




From 1 to 435 in less than 60 years...a total dud. 

http://www.euronuclear.org/info/encyclopedia/n/nuclear-power-plant-world-wide.htm



			
				nei.org said:
			
		

> Nuclear power plants provided 13.5 percent of the world's electricity production in 2010.




http://www.nei.org/resourcesandstats/nuclear_statistics/worldstatistics/

On a global scale Nuclear produces only a little less power than Hydro...hardly a dud.

We are less than 60 years into an unlimited future for Nuclear, 30 years into the internet and commercial fibre optics.


----------



## Smurf1976

*It is off the topic of this thread*, but nuclear energy has indeed been a dud at least in relative terms.

It was promised as "too cheap to meter".

In reality, it's too expensive for most utilities to be interested in unless government steps in. It hasn't lowered the cost of electricity so as to make reticulated gas redundant for running boilers or heating buildings, indeed in most places it hasn't even made gas redundant for generating electricity. Even in France, final energy consumption at the device level is dominated by fossil fuels, not electricity. We're nowhere close to the all-electric, nuclear powered world that was promised. 

I'm not saying that there shouldn't be nuclear power, or some form of NBN, but the former has clearly not lived up to the hype. It's nowhere close to being "too cheap to meter".

There's a place for nuclear energy and there's a role for optical fibre communications. The former has a habit of chewing up a lot of taxpayer funds however, and I'm concerned that the latter may well end up doing the same. Both are, in the main, inherently government projects for the simple reason that the private sector sees them as too risky. Try getting finance for either of them, without the backing of government, and see how you go....

I'm not outright against the NBN but it's a worry that there are people who presently can't get any fixed line services simply because they are "in an NBN area" which doesn't yet have the NBN. That's not a good sign in my opinion - how do they plan on connecting millions of homes in Sydney and Melbourne if they're struggling to finish Midway Point (Tas)? Something doesn't seem right with the way this is being carried out...


----------



## NBNMyths

Smurf1976 said:


> I am sitting in a hotel room right now by myself (travel for work) killing time online.
> 
> It took me about a 2 minutes to take the laptop out of the bag, plug the mains power lead in, start it up and get online.
> ....
> I don't doubt that technology will change radically over the next 20 years just as it has over the past 20. But what I'm not convinced about is that this technology will be tied to a cable. As I said, I'm sitting in a hotel room right now and the only cable connected to the computer is the mains power lead. I didn't even need anyone to help me carry the computer up the steps, and nobody's likely to question what I'm doing or why.
> 
> I don't doubt the technical abilities of fibre, it's just the need to run it straight to the device inside the home that I'm questioning given that the general trend does seem to be in the opposite direction with wireless networks etc.




The NBN isn't about putting a cable to every device. It's just as much about improving the wireless networks you're (probably) using - WiFi (as opposed to long-range cellular wireless networks that are touted as being an NBN replacement).

WiFi can currently keep up with NBN speeds, so long as there aren't many users on your WiFi network and there aren't too many WiFi networks nearby. It can do this *because* of its very short range, meaning cellular wireless drawbacks such as obstructions, weather and the lack of spectrum is not much of an issue.

There's absolutely no doubt that WiFi (and soon WiGig) networks will boom in the future, but they require fibre to the premises before they can do so.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> For a wireless technology to eclipse optical fibre would mean that everything we know about the physics of radio and light must be wrong. A rather unlikely outcome.
> 
> 
> Speed isn't the issue per se. Radio waves also travel at ~the speed of light.
> 
> It is the size of the light spectrum v the radio spectrum, combined with the inherent loss of an unshielded medium that gives fibre a higher capacity.




Isn't that what I said, the optical system will be the backbone, whereas the downstream delivery may be an alternative technology?
I defer to your superior knowledge on the subject, but lets not get over the top.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Isn't that what I said, the optical system will be the backbone, whereas the downstream delivery may be an alternative technology?
> I defer to your superior knowledge on the subject, but lets not get over the top.




Yes, you are right about that. Just being pedantic about the reason. It's not the speed of the signals, but the capacity that makes the difference.

Think of it as a road. You can do 100km/h down a single lane road or on a freeway. But a freeway can carry 6x as many cars all doing 100km/h.

Radio and light both travel at ~the speed of light. But an the light spectrum can carry 20,000 times more data than the radio spectrum for any given period of time


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Yes, you are right about that. Just being pedantic about the reason. It's not the speed of the signals, but the capacity that makes the difference.
> 
> Think of it as a road. You can do 100km/h down a single lane road or on a freeway. But a freeway can carry 6x as many cars all doing 100km/h.




Yes, I agree 100%, just can't see the point of running it out to some of the places I have worked.
Most will still spend the time, down the pub or the park. Ends up being a lot of outlay for sod all benefit.

It all works well in yuppyville, doesn't count for anything in a lot of places. Just wasted money.
To use your analogy, think of it as a freeway that can carry 6x as many cars to somewhere that nobody goes to.


----------



## Smurf1976

NBNMyths said:


> The NBN isn't about putting a cable to every device. It's just as much about improving the wireless networks you're (probably) using - WiFi (as opposed to long-range cellular wireless networks that are touted as being an NBN replacement).



Agreed and I do comprehend the "backbone" nature of a fibre network as it relates to WiFi or similar systems.

But if connection to the actual device is going to be wireless anyway (and that's certainly the way it seems to be going) then do we really need to take the cable inside the average house in the first place? Has there been a proper evaluation of options to leave the equipment "out on the street" and communicate to that via wireless? 

Putting a cable along a street is one thing. Taking it into every house is sure to add lots of $ - is that really necessary especially if it's not even going to be directly connected to anything other than a wireless router?

Maybe what is proposed really is the best way, but I'm not convinced that there's been a proper analysis done.


----------



## NBNMyths

Smurf1976 said:


> Agreed and I do comprehend the "backbone" nature of a fibre network as it relates to WiFi or similar systems.
> 
> But if connection to the actual device is going to be wireless anyway (and that's certainly the way it seems to be going) then do we really need to take the cable inside the average house in the first place? Has there been a proper evaluation of options to leave the equipment "out on the street" and communicate to that via wireless?
> 
> Putting a cable along a street is one thing. Taking it into every house is sure to add lots of $ - is that really necessary especially if it's not even going to be directly connected to anything other than a wireless router?
> 
> Maybe what is proposed really is the best way, but I'm not convinced that there's been a proper analysis done.




There are a few issues with a wireless "last mile". WiFi (like all wireless) signals degrade over distance. The further you are from the base station, the worse the signal. In the case of WiFi, that's pretty deliberate. The shorter the range, the more users can use WiFi in the same vicinity. If you increase the range, you reduce the performance.

Having a WiFi base station on the street would deliver poorer service to your devices than having one inside your house. There's a longer distance and more obstructions. It would also make life hard for other WiFi networks in the area, because being out on the street would mean more interference from/to everyone else's networks.

In reality the average house has a mix of wired and wireless devices. Doing a quick count, I have 4 wired devices in my house (Computers, TV, network Printer) and 5 wireless devices (Laptop, Phones, iPad, airport express). By wiring the three big data consumers (the computers and the TV), it improves the performance of the wireless devices (reduced sharing of available bandwidth), and also improves the performance of the wired devices (Less lag + no sharing of bandwidth).

A wired connection will always offer better performance, so it makes sense to wire devices that don't need to be mobile, hence plugging the TV and computer into ethernet, even though both my computer and TV have wireless networking built in.


----------



## dutchie

Wireless or not wireless will be irrelevant.

1. NBN implemented by Labor - say no more.
  (Actually will say more - bats, ber, clunkers, etc etc (list is too long))

2. No cost/benefit study. (private industry would be shot for even thinking about spending so much money
     without  a cost/benefit study).

3. Will go well and truly over budget (double budget if we are lucky).

4. Will go well and truly over roll out time.


----------



## pilots

dutchie said:


> Wireless or not wireless will be irrelevant.
> 
> 1. NBN implemented by Labor - say no more.
> (Actually will say more - bats, ber, clunkers, etc etc (list is too long))
> 
> 2. No cost/benefit study. (private industry would be shot for even thinking about spending so much money
> without  a cost/benefit study).
> 
> 3. Will go well and truly over budget (double budget if we are lucky).
> 
> 4. Will go well and truly over roll out time.




5. A lot of people will make a load of money giving us some thing we DON'T  need.


----------



## NBNMyths

pilots said:


> 5. A lot of people will make a load of money giving us some thing we DON'T  need.




Speak for yourself. If you don't want it, don't connect. Simple.


----------



## MrBurns

NBNMyths said:


> Speak for yourself. If you don't want it, don't connect. Simple.






Fine dont use my taxes to pay for it then


----------



## NBNMyths

MrBurns said:


> Fine dont use my taxes to pay for it then




They're not using your taxes.

The Government equity to the NBN is being funded from the issue of Government bonds, not from taxation revenue. The bonds (including the interest paid on them) will be repaid from network revenue, not from taxation dollars.

Therefore, it is the users of the NBN that will pay for it. If you don't connect, you won't contribute. Users who connect at the higher speeds, such as businesses, contribute far more than home users.


All that said, even if it were funded from tax dollars _and_ generated zero revenue, the cost of the NBN is tiny when compared to other government expenditure. Over the same period we spend $27bn on the NBN, we'll spend $1.2Trillion on public health, $500bn on public education, $500bn on transport and $250bn on defence. The average yearly Govt investment in the NBN of $3bn represents about 1% of federal taxation revenue.

BTW, on a per-capita basis, the NBN costs less than the Govt spent to roll out the copper network.

Finally, the NBN has been policy for the last two elections and therefore has a mandate. Additionally, every poll ever taken on the topic shows that more Australians support the project than oppose it:
http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/opinion-of-nbn/
http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/opinion-of-nbn-2/
http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/opinion-of-nbn-3/
http://cci.edu.au/sites/default/files/sewing/CCi Digital Futures 2010 1.pdf


----------



## MrBurns

NBNMyths said:


> They're not using your taxes.
> 
> The Government equity to the NBN is being funded from the issue of Government bonds, not from taxation revenue. The bonds (including the interest paid on them) will be repaid from network revenue, not from taxation dollars.
> 
> Therefore, it is the users of the NBN that will pay for it. If you don't connect, you won't contribute. Users who connect at the higher speeds, such as businesses, contribute far more than home users.
> 
> 
> All that said, even if it were funded from tax dollars _and_ generated zero revenue, the cost of the NBN is tiny when compared to other government expenditure. Over the same period we spend $27bn on the NBN, we'll spend $1.2Trillion on public health, $500bn on public education, $500bn on transport and $250bn on defence. The average yearly Govt investment in the NBN of $3bn represents about 1% of federal taxation revenue.
> 
> BTW, on a per-capita basis, the NBN costs less than the Govt spent to roll out the copper network.
> 
> Finally, the NBN has been policy for the last two elections and therefore has a mandate. Additionally, every poll ever taken on the topic shows that more Australians support the project than oppose it:
> http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/opinion-of-nbn/
> http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/opinion-of-nbn-2/
> http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/opinion-of-nbn-3/
> http://cci.edu.au/sites/default/files/sewing/CCi Digital Futures 2010 1.pdf




And if people dont take it up the money will come from taxes, after it all falls in a hole, we will pay, I dont get connected till 2014 the whole thing is just another Gillard "reforming Govt" jaunt.

You cant compare this to the health budget, get real.....

Good to see you earning your kickbacks from trolling for Gillards waste machine.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> Finally, the NBN has been policy for the last two elections and therefore has a mandate. Additionally, every poll ever taken on the topic shows that more Australians support the project than oppose it




Actually it is only the majority of Labor and Green supporters. Of course they would like to have the choice of a faster broadband service. They would also vote in favour faster services in every field, if asked.

The polls that you are continually throwing up are irrelevant.


----------



## NBNMyths

MrBurns said:


> And if people dont take it up the money will come from taxes, after it all falls in a hole, we will pay, I dont get connected till 2014 the whole thing is just another Gillard "reforming Govt" jaunt.
> 
> You cant compare this to the health budget, get real.....
> 
> Good to see you earning your kickbacks from trolling for Gillards waste machine.




People will take it up. Takeup is already over 30% in some areas, after only being available for ~9 months. At this stage, forecast takeup was only about 12%.

The takeup of ADSL was only 3% after 18 months, and the takeup of Optus HFC cable is ~20% after 10 years in areas where it's available.

On top of that, 18 months after the fibre rolls through, the copper will be switched off and customers migrated across to the NBN by their ISPs. So unless you want to pay 10x more and get a wireless service instead, then takeup is essentially guaranteed.

I can compare it to anything I like.

I receive no pay, benefit or inducement of any kind for my opinion of the NBN, and I have no link of any kind to the NBN or anything related to it.

I have no idea when I'll be connected, unfortunately. In all likelihood it won;t be until 2030, because Turnbull will scale back to (already obsolete) FTTN after the next election, and it won't be until 2020 before people realise we've been completely left behind by the rest of the World, and we have to start rolling it out again.




Calliope said:


> Actually it is only the majority of Labor and Green supporters. Of course they would like to have the choice of a faster broadband service. They would also vote in favour faster services in every field, if asked.
> 
> The polls that you are continually throwing up are irrelevant.




While over 50% of labor/green voters support it, even amongst coalition supporters the supporters and opposers are evenly split, and it becomes more popular with them each poll.

Just look at the Kiama Downs trial site. Blue ribbon Liberal area, and the highest NBN takeup of anywhere in the country at 40% already.

Overall, amongst all Australians, many more people support the NBN than oppose it. I don't know how you think that is irrelevant.


----------



## MrBurns

NBNMyths said:


> I receive no pay, benefit or inducement of any kind for my opinion of the NBN, and I have no link of any kind to the NBN or anything related to it.




I cant think of any other reason someone would set up a specific and comprehensive blog on the subject and spend hours refuting every negative comment about it on ASF


----------



## dutchie

NBNMyths said:


> People will take it up. Takeup is already over 30% in some areas, after only being available for ~9 months. At this stage, forecast takeup was only about 12%.




Why was the forecast so low?

So that they can say look how good it is, the takeup is x% - where x is any number bigger than 12!




NBNMyths said:


> ......... and it won't be until 2020 before people realise we've been completely left behind by the rest of the World, and we have to start rolling it out again.




Just like we don't want to be completely left behind by the rest of the the world with a carbon tax.

(there are so many that I don't think we'll ever catch up)


----------



## NBNMyths

MrBurns said:


> I cant think of any other reason someone would set up a specific and comprehensive blog on the subject and spend hours refuting every negative comment about it on ASF




I guess you don't have any interests outside your job then?

Nothing you're passionate about that doesn't result in being paid?

You don't have any children and want them to have access to world-class technology?


----------



## MrBurns

NBNMyths said:


> I guess you don't have any interests outside your job then?
> 
> Nothing you're passionate about that doesn't result in being paid?
> 
> You don't have any children and want them to have access to world-class technology?




You must be the only person in Australia who's hobby is the NBN, really it just doesnt make sense.

My children will have world class technology not organised by that half wit Conroy but probably by Goolge who know what they're doing.

By the time this is rolled out it wil be well and truly redundant like the computer I bought last month.


----------



## NBNMyths

dutchie said:


> Why was the forecast so low?
> 
> So that they can say look how good it is, the takeup is x% - where x is any number bigger than 12!




That forecast was made by KPMG-McKinsey and is based on the takeup of similar projects worldwide and in Australia.

The NBN, like every technology, has relatively low takeup rates initially.

It was no different for the telephone, fax, internet, broadband. Or radio, television, PCs, iPods, tablets, smartphones. All had very low sales/adoption initially.

The standard technology adoption curve:





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_adoption_lifecycle


----------



## NBNMyths

MrBurns said:


> You must be the only person in Australia who's hobby is the NBN, really it just doesnt make sense.
> 
> My children will have world class technology not organised by that half wit Conroy but probably by Goolge who know what they're doing.
> 
> By the time this is rolled out it wil be well and truly redundant like the computer I bought last month.




That's hilarious. In the one sentence, you've bagged the NBN optical fibre network for its "future obsolescence", while saying you'd rather some "world class technology" from Google.

I wonder if you get the irony?

Here's a hint: https://fiber.google.com/about/

And another: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-02-19/google-boss-praises-nbn/1949508



> The chairman of internet giant Google has thrown his support behind Australia's National Broadband Network (NBN).
> 
> The Federal Government has come under pressure from the Opposition because of the cost of the $36 billion rollout.
> 
> Speaking at a conference in Barcelona, chairman Eric Schmidt says Australia has shown great leadership on the issue.
> 
> "Australia is leading the world in understanding the importance of fibre," he said.
> 
> "Your new Prime Minister has announced that 93 per cent of Australians, which I guess are all the folks in the cities, will have gigabit or equivalent service using fibre, and the other 7 per cent will be handled through wireless services of a nature of LTE," he said.
> 
> "This is leadership from Australia, which I think is wonderful."




Seems Google and the NBN are on the same page, huh?


----------



## MrBurns

NBNMyths said:


> Seems Google and the NBN are on the same page, huh?




I just have no faith in Conroy and Gillard like millions of other Australians.

They both like the technology, big difference is the present Govt cant put pink batts in ceilings so this may be beyond them..........the Libs may tidy it up.

https://fiber.google.com/about/

Thats what I was talking about, if Google were doing it I 'd be much happier


----------



## NBNMyths

MrBurns said:


> I just have no faith in Conroy and Gillard like millions of other Australians.
> 
> They both like the technology, big difference is the present Govt cant put pink batts in ceilings so this may be beyond them..........the Libs may tidy it up.
> 
> https://fiber.google.com/about/
> 
> Thats what I was talking about, if Google were doing it I 'd be much happier




I should add that I don't care who does it.

So long as:

• It's a Fibre To The Premises network;

• The fibre covers the vast, vast majority of Australian premises (>90%);

• Everyone else at least gets something;

• It provides regulated, universal nationwide pricing (including the non-fibre rural areas).


Of the 2 policies on the table, the NBN is the only one that achieves those things. If the coalition upgraded their policy to FTTP, then I'd probably be fine with it. But, as it currently stands, they are proposing FTTN, which was a dubious goal 5 years ago, let alone now or in 5 years time.

They also haven't really outlined their coverage or capability goals. On the plus side, they have vaguely committed to universal pricing, albeit via a (probably clunky) subsidy system.


----------



## MrBurns

AND by the time Labor roll it out it WILL be redundant which is what I meant.......perhaps not said clear enough.


----------



## boofhead

How will it be redundant? I suspect you have a strong personal bias against it because of your political leanings and not because of technology or economics.

Various forms of wireless communications have been around for a lot longer than fibre communications. Wireless gets further and further behind.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> While over 50% of labor/green voters support it, even amongst coalition supporters the supporters and opposers are evenly split, and it becomes more popular with them each poll.
> 
> *Just look at the Kiama Downs trial site. Blue ribbon Liberal area, and the highest NBN takeup of anywhere in the country at 40% already.*




You obviously don't realise the irony of this statement, Jamie. The lefties will vote for high speed broadband, but they won't put their money where their mouth is.


----------



## MrBurns

boofhead said:


> How will it be redundant? I suspect you have a strong personal bias against it because of your political leanings and not because of technology or economics.
> 
> Various forms of wireless communications have been around for a lot longer than fibre communications. Wireless gets further and further behind.




Any tech project that wil take 10 years or more to implement will be redundant before it's finished.

The map doesnt show much at all but plenty of this rubbish - 


> We have not commenced work on the NBN in your area just yet.
> 
> •To keep up to date about when you will get access to high speed broadband, please subscribe to our newsletter.
> •Or you can find out more about the rollout.




and they give another lisnk to more BS and yes you're right my political bias does lead me to believe that Gillard couldnt get anything right let alone a project such as this and Google's comments ? Political niceness.


----------



## boofhead

MrBurns said:


> Any tech project that wil take 10 years or more to implement will be redundant before it's finished.




I'm sure you don't understand why the fibre buildout is very much not redundant. That's the point of fibre. For relatively low cost, the same fibre will be able to have massive amounts of speed increases as the termination technology evolves and faster speeds are affordable. I suggest you research how the submarine fibre cables have had capacity upgraded considerably through the years without needing to replace the physical fibre.

the physical buildout of the fibre cables is a major part of the cost. The cables have long life. As different transmission technologies develop for it you reuse the same cables. It is sort of like how the copper network has been through stages to provide voice/dialup then ADSL by replacing only the equipment at the ends of the copper except fibre can go to terabits/s currently and that is increasing. Also note fibre powers the wireless solutions.

That's the point of transmitting light and not electrical signals. Light has massive capacity. If you want to know details may I suggest contacting someone that works in a physics department at a university.

It reminds me of Abbott at the 2010 election campaign not believing the NBN could go to 1 gigabit/s from the then 100 mbit/s for relatively low cost. He made comments about something plenty of 15 year olds know more about than him.


----------



## MrBurns

boofhead said:


> I'm sure you don't understand why the fibre buildout is very much not redundant. .




With the rate of progress these days I wouldn't be too sure something wont come along to superceed this long before it's done.


----------



## So_Cynical

MrBurns said:


> *And if people dont take it up* the money will come from taxes, after it all falls in a hole, we will pay, I dont get connected till 2014 the whole thing is just another Gillard "reforming Govt" jaunt.
> 
> You cant compare this to the health budget, get real.....
> 
> Good to see you earning your kickbacks from trolling for Gillards waste machine.




Your commenting without any real idea of what your talking about..you didn't even know the copper is going to get turned off...at least have the courtesy to have a rudimentary dig around of the facts. 



MrBurns said:


> You must be the only person in Australia who's hobby is the NBN, really it just doesnt make sense.




Spend some time on whirlpool and get a clue.


----------



## MrBurns

So_Cynical said:


> Your commenting without any real idea of what your talking about..you didn't even know the copper is going to get turned off...at least have the courtesy to have a rudimentary dig around of the facts.
> Spend some time on whirlpool and get a clue.




Thats BS too, what millenium do you think they'll ditch copper ?

I think you need to get a clue yourself, you make yoo many assumptions out of arrogance or ignorance or a mixture of both.


----------



## Smurf1976

NBNMyths said:


> They're not using your taxes.
> 
> The Government equity to the NBN is being funded from the issue of Government bonds, not from taxation revenue. The bonds (including the interest paid on them) will be repaid from network revenue, not from taxation dollars.



This is interesting in itself given that governments of all persuasions have spent the past two decades effectively ridiculing this funding model for anything. 

I'm in favour of this approach, but can't help but notice the huge backflip this constitutes to all that's been said about roads, rail, power, water and other infrastructure. The wheel may have turned it seems...


----------



## sptrawler

Hey boofhead and So_Cynical, MrBurns has every right to be stressed about another government stuff up. 
Some of the towns they will run fibre to, will probably be ripped and put back to nature within the next 20 years.
The cost will blow out, that is a given, all government tenders(to the lowest bidder) have loop holes trucks can be driven through.
NBNMyths, has a great understanding of the technology and the method of delivery, however I am sure he will be dissapointed in the end.
As the costs blowout and economy contracts so will the grandiiose delusions or better still the economic reality, sink in.
Just another labor f####up on the horizon, watch this space. I am seeing a huge increase in the amount of people driving around in NBN logo 4 X 4 vehicles. Not seeing a lot of people pulling in fresh blue cable.


----------



## sptrawler

Smurf1976 said:


> This is interesting in itself given that governments of all persuasions have spent the past two decades effectively ridiculing this funding model for anything.
> 
> I'm in favour of this approach, but can't help but notice the huge backflip this constitutes to all that's been said about roads, rail, power, water and other infrastructure. The wheel may have turned it seems...




Does it all work on the premise, that the revenues generated exceeds the interest cost of the bonds.
In other words a means of defering a loss being recorded untill a later date. The date of maturity of the bonds, creative accounting. 

It all sounds familiar IMO, like River City Motorway, Brisconnect, and Connect East.  Projected returns, real winners, projected traffic flows trust us on this we are the government and we have checked the figures. LOL,LOL
Boy don't you get over government guarantees. :1zhelp:


----------



## MrBurns

sptrawler said:


> Just another labor f####up on the horizon, watch this space. .




No doubt about it, but will be left for the Libs to sort out like everything else.
This poster was supposed to be a joke but it's a statement of fact now.


----------



## noco

According to the latest reports, the NBN is well behind schedule and way over budget.

The target of connections before the 2013 election will only be 25% complete. So what will be Conroy's excuse? He certainly won't admit incompetence. He can't blame Abbott.

I cannot see it's completion by 2020 at this rate and what about the cost?

As someone else commented, "it will be redundant before it is finished".

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...nbn_threatening_to_be_another_labor_disaster/


----------



## Smurf1976

sptrawler said:


> Does it all work on the premise, that the revenues generated exceeds the interest cost of the bonds.



It's the same logic which underpinned, amongst other things, state run utilities for most of the 20th Century.

Borrow the money, build the asset, repay the loans over the life of the asset. Repeat the cycle when something else needs to be built. 

There isn't supposed to be a profit as such, the aim being to provide a public service "at cost".

It worked fine for decades until Thatcher-inspired politicians and accountants decided that these self running entities actually had an "owner" and that this "owner" was government. They then ramped up the prices and, in most cases, sold off the assets. Then prices went up some more, and up again, and up again to the point we see today where it's become a significant issue for many.

I just see a broader context here of the wheel turning. The likes of AGL are dropping "outsourcing" in favour of building capability and resources "in house" simply because doing so is cheaper (as anyone who ever worked in such a place could have told them years ago). Now we see a government proposing a return to the old way of funding what is, effectively, a nationalisation of telecommunications infrastructure.

It's all cyclical I suppose, but there seems to be a slowly growing push to reverse the "reforms" of the 90's at the moment so far as things like public utilities etc are concerned. I'm surprised to see a national government actually embracing it so soon however, I thought it would be a few years until we got to that point.

It's a sign of the general economic conditions I think. The old model, and state run utilities etc themselves, largely emerged out of previous hard times (mostly WW1 and the Depression). In all this talk of an NBN we are ultimately discussing what amounts to a substantial nationalisation of Telstra. That's a huge departure from the "privatisation" mantra of the 90's and 00's.


----------



## MrBurns

I wish it would bre done ASAP and on budget but this Govt is more concerned about political matters and Conroy is borderline simple so my main objection is who's trying to implement this.
Wish they'd outsourced it to Google.

For the good of implemntation only, at least the damn thing would work.


----------



## sptrawler

Smurf1976 said:


> It's the same logic which underpinned, amongst other things, state run utilities for most of the 20th Century.
> 
> Borrow the money, build the asset, repay the loans over the life of the asset. Repeat the cycle when something else needs to be built.
> 
> There isn't supposed to be a profit as such, the aim being to provide a public service "at cost".
> 
> It worked fine for decades until Thatcher-inspired politicians and accountants decided that these self running entities actually had an "owner" and that this "owner" was government. They then ramped up the prices and, in most cases, sold off the assets. Then prices went up some more, and up again, and up again to the point we see today where it's become a significant issue for many.
> 
> I just see a broader context here of the wheel turning. The likes of AGL are dropping "outsourcing" in favour of building capability and resources "in house" simply because doing so is cheaper (as anyone who ever worked in such a place could have told them years ago). Now we see a government proposing a return to the old way of funding what is, effectively, a nationalisation of telecommunications infrastructure.
> 
> It's all cyclical I suppose, but there seems to be a slowly growing push to reverse the "reforms" of the 90's at the moment so far as things like public utilities etc are concerned. I'm surprised to see a national government actually embracing it so soon however, I thought it would be a few years until we got to that point.
> 
> It's a sign of the general economic conditions I think. The old model, and state run utilities etc themselves, largely emerged out of previous hard times (mostly WW1 and the Depression). In all this talk of an NBN we are ultimately discussing what amounts to a substantial nationalisation of Telstra. That's a huge departure from the "privatisation" mantra of the 90's and 00's.




You are spot on smurph, it is just like this new mantra, where it is of the utmost importance that young people be given free reign to find themselves.
Well I think the olympic results are showing the benefit of self management as opposed to a structured regime.
Not that I give a rats either way, but to watch a kid beat herself up over being on the internet(tweet and facebook) rather than focus on her future, is a sad indictment of poor management. 
It just shows what a sad state we are in, and what are we doing, spending $40billion on the NBN, so the kids can do their heads in faster.
Someone needs to sit back and say, humans don't need more reasons to sit on their ar$e and do nothing.
For some reason, people want bling speed internet, probably so they don't have to get up from the keyboard at all. 
Then all they need is someone to carry the pizza from the front door to the coffee table. Then they won't miss out on a kill or be killed moment in online game.
I just think someone needs to call a timeout and stop encouraging people to sit on their ar$e. 
Computers are great in their place but they are the greatest time wasters ever invented.


----------



## MrBurns

sptrawler said:


> You are spot on smurph, it is just like this new mantra, where it is of the utmost importance that young people be given free reign to find themselves.
> Well I think the olympic results are showing the benefit of self management as opposed to a structured regime.
> Not that I give a rats either way, but to watch a kid beat herself up over being on the internet(tweet and facebook) rather than focus on her future, is a sad indictment of poor management.
> It just shows what a sad state we are in, and what are we doing, spending $40billion on the NBN, so the kids can do their heads in faster.
> Someone needs to sit back and say, humans don't need more reasons to sit on their ar$e and do nothing.
> For some reason, people want bling speed internet, probably so they don't have to get up from the keyboard at all.
> Then all they need is someone to carry the pizza from the front door to the coffee table. Then they won't miss out on a kill or be killed moment in online game.
> I just think someone needs to call a timeout and stop encouraging people to sit on their ar$e.
> Computers are great in their place but they are the greatest time wasters ever invented.




All very true but unfortunately I think this will all get worse not better.

The world has changed and not all for the better, "progress"doesnt factor in what's best for people.


----------



## sptrawler

MrBurns said:


> All very true but unfortunately I think this will all get worse not better.
> 
> The world has changed and not all for the better, "progress"doesnt factor in what's best for people.




I agree with you MrBurns, my guess is within 10 years we won't even compete in the olympics.
But hallelujah, we will be able to watch any crap we want on the internet, without the wait time, yeh.
Then we will be able to self diagnose type two diabetes. The computer will be able to tell you to switch off and drag your fat ar$e outside for some excercise.
In the end the government will probably have to impose an internet tax, because of the health problems associated with sitting on your ar$e in front of the computer. Much like the sugested junk food tax.


----------



## MrBurns

sptrawler said:


> I agree with you MrBurns, my guess is within 10 years we won't even compete in the olympics.
> But hallelujah, we will be able to watch any crap we want on the internet, without the wait time, yeh.
> Then we will be able to self diagnose type two diabetes. The computer will be able to tell you to switch off and drag your fat ar$e outside for some excercise.
> In the end the government will probably have to impose an internet tax, because of the health problems associated with sitting on your ar$e in front of the computer. Much like the sugested junk food tax.




We are increasingly controlled by the media, Govts are controlled by the media, and look at it ....Ch 9 a station dedicated to BS and Ch 7 no better, their "current affairs" shows are disgraceful.
Their programming and reality shows are disgusting and thats what our kids watch.

The ABC and SBS should be the only stations allowed on free to air.


----------



## sptrawler

MrBurns said:


> We are increasingly controlled by the media, Govts are controlled by the media, and look at it ....Ch 9 a station dedicated to BS and Ch 7 no better, their "current affairs" shows are disgraceful.
> Their programming and reality shows are disgusting and thats what our kids watch.
> 
> The ABC and SBS should be the only stations allowed on free to air.




It won't be free to air in a few years it will all come through the internet via the governments filter.:1zhelp:
Then not only will the government know what you are watching, you will be paying to watch "free to air"


----------



## NBNMyths

noco said:


> According to the latest reports, the NBN is well behind schedule and way over budget.
> 
> The target of connections before the 2013 election will only be 25% complete. So what will be Conroy's excuse? He certainly won't admit incompetence. He can't blame Abbott.
> 
> I cannot see it's completion by 2020 at this rate and what about the cost?
> 
> As someone else commented, "it will be redundant before it is finished".
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...nbn_threatening_to_be_another_labor_disaster/






The Andrew Bolt blog? Seriously?

Well, there's an accurate and objective source. I may as well call it quits now then.


----------



## NBNMyths

MrBurns said:


> Thats BS too, what millenium do you think they'll ditch copper ?
> 
> I think you need to get a clue yourself, you make yoo many assumptions out of arrogance or ignorance or a mixture of both.




The copper will be progressively turned off in the NBN fibre footprint one area at a time, about 18 months after the NBN is activated in that area. If it exists, then it will remain active in the NBN wireless and satellite areas.


----------



## Calliope

MrBurns said:


> Thats BS too, what millenium do you think they'll ditch copper ?
> 
> I think you need to get a clue yourself, you make yoo many assumptions out of arrogance or ignorance or a mixture of both.




NBNMyths may be arrogant but he is not ignorant. To find out more about him just Google "Jamie Benaud." You will be surprised at how he generously finds the time to put us on the right track with his spin.


----------



## MrBurns

Calliope said:


> NBNMyths may be arrogant but he is not ignorant. To find out more about him just Google "Jamie Benaud." You will be surprised at how he generously finds the time to put us on the right track with his spin.




Richie's son ? 

Then I retract everything previously said and will let what happens with the NBN speak for itself.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> NBNMyths may be arrogant but he is not ignorant. To find out more about him just Google "Jamie Benaud." You will be surprised at how he generously finds the time to put us on the right track with his spin.




I'm a generous sort of guy! 



MrBurns said:


> Richie's son ?
> 
> Then I retract everything previously said and will let what happens with the NBN speak for itself.




Nephew, actually. The sporting gene skipped a generation though.


----------



## MrBurns

NBNMyths said:


> Nephew, actually. The sporting gene skipped a generation though.




Well out of respect for your uncle I wont be arguing with you any more, when it's all said and done if it wasnt Gillard trying to do this I might even support it but I just think it's doomed under Labor and Conroy.


----------



## Smurf1976

NBNMyths said:


> The Andrew Bolt blog? Seriously?
> 
> Well, there's an accurate and objective source. I may as well call it quits now then.



It may be somewhat biased, but at least it does discuss actual current affairs.

Note to those under about 30 years old - current affairs, and anything shown on the TV program "A Current Affair" are entirely different things. Disputes between neighbours, inaccurate cash registers and someone getting food poisoning are NOT current affairs of national importance. Such things did used to be discussed on TV and indeed on that very program, but it all went to **** sometime in the 1990's unfortunately.


----------



## MrBurns

Smurf1976 said:


> It may be somewhat biased, but at least it does discuss actual current affairs.
> 
> Note to those under about 30 years old - current affairs, and anything shown on the TV program "A Current Affair" are entirely different things. Disputes between neighbours, inaccurate cash registers and someone getting food poisoning are NOT current affairs of national importance. Such things did used to be discussed on TV and indeed on that very program, but it all went to **** sometime in the 1990's unfortunately.




It's called infotainment and its 100% BS, contrived, sensationalised depressing rubbish.
Even the promos make me sick.


----------



## drsmith

There was a piece in Thursday's Financial Review on the NBN.

According to the article on page 10, the government is preparing to release a document that confirms the NBN is going to exceed the $36bn cost target and is falling behind on construction and connection targets.


----------



## Julia

The same info ran in "The Australian".
Are we surprised?


----------



## So_Cynical

From Google

tar·get/ˈtÃ¤rgit/
Noun:	 A person, object, or place selected as the aim of an attack.
Verb:	Select as an object of attention or attack.
Synonyms: aim - mark - goal - objective - object - purpose

Get a grip people.


----------



## Smurf1976

drsmith said:


> Tgovernment is preparing to release a document that confirms the NBN is going to exceed the $36bn cost target and is falling behind on construction and connection targets.



50 years ago, it was reasonably possible to build large infrastructure projects (at the time, dams, power stations, highways, rail etc) using one of two methods. 

For ongoing construction programs, such as generally existed for roads and power, employing your own workforce and having your own machinery etc made sense. Then you had competent people, generally engineers, in charge with an assortment of professional and other practical types under them. Things got done, not perfectly but in most cases fairly well.

For one-off projects you used contractors since the cost of setting up permanently was not justified. Again, you had engineers and other practical types running the show and contracts were actually enforced.

Now we have a problem where government runs everything using either people with no qualifications and experience at all, or accountants. Now, I have nothing against accountants per se but they don't make good engineers and aren't generally the best people to run a physical workforce either. They do accounting. Same with the lawyers who seem to find a liking for politics - they're (hopefully) good at law but you wouldn't expect them to have a clue about running a construction project.

And so far as contracts are concerned, a project like this one is as close as you'll ever get to money for nothing (or at least very little). It was fairly obvious right from the start that that there would be loopholes, so it's no surprise to now see that costs are blowing out. Even though we have rather a lot of ex lawyers in parliament, enforcing contracts seems to be a persistent problem for all governments.

The problem isn't the NBN so much as it's that Labor, and largely Liberal as well, simply can't build things like this due to either lack of understanding on how to go about it or due to ideological barriers to doing it properly. Both major parties have big problems there - they don't know, but have this strange notion that some lawyer sitting in an office with an accountant beside them is the way to go about it.

Just wait until the shortcuts start causing problems. That's when it gets really interesting.....


----------



## NBNMyths

The "document" they are about to release is the updated corporate plan.

There will undoubtedly be delays contained therin, because we already know about them, and they have happened since the old 2010 plan was released.

There may well be some cost blowouts in there, but I doubt they will be substantial. If I had to guess, I'd say it's still below the original $43bn target, but above the revised $37bn target.

I would also say that revenue estimates will be increased, given that we now have takeup stats which are showing that NBN users are choosing much faster speed tiers than was predicted in the 2010 corporate plan. eg: The 2010 plan predicted only 8% would choose 100Mbps ($37 p/m), but almost 40% have chosen it in practise. The 2010 plan predicted 55% would choose the base 12Mbps ($24 p/m), but only 12% have, with the rest taking up higher speeds providing more revenue.

Overall, I don't think there will be any massive changes to the Govt equity required or the payback time.....fingers crossed....


----------



## joea

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/nbn-seeks-verdict-on-wall-warts-20120801-23for.html

and the plot thickens further. When is a decision, not a decision.??

Plan as we go. In Japan they plan for 55 minutes, then install for 5 minutes.
In Australia we plan for 5 minutes, and install for 55 minutes.:1zhelp:

joea


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Overall, I don't think there will be any massive changes to the Govt equity required or the payback time.....fingers crossed....




That's the first time I have heard you use reference, to a degree of luck being required.

During my working career, which wasn't long ago, I was involved in a few fairly large State Government infrastructure projects. 
As smurph alluded to, very few if any, ever come in on time or under budget and most times fall short in the  delivery of the promised outcomes.
We will get what we get, hopefully if and when it is abandoned, what is left behind is of some value.


----------



## sails

joea said:


> http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/nbn-seeks-verdict-on-wall-warts-20120801-23for.html
> 
> and the plot thickens further. When is a decision, not a decision.??
> 
> Plan as we go. In Japan they plan for 55 minutes, then install for 5 minutes.
> In Australia we plan for 5 minutes, and install for 55 minutes.:1zhelp:
> 
> joea




From that link, Joea - it seems these ugly boxes on lounge room walls shown below is upsetting people the most and the fact that fibre-optic cables carry light, not electricity, and makes phone lines useless during a blackout and copper wires will be removed once households are transferred to NBN Co's fibre-optic cables.


----------



## sptrawler

sails said:


> From that link, Joea - it seems these ugly boxes on lounge room walls shown below is upsetting people the most and the fact that fibre-optic cables carry light, not electricity, and makes phone lines useless during a blackout and copper wires will be removed once households are transferred to NBN Co's fibre-optic cables.
> 
> View attachment 48409




Also who pays for the backup batteries when they require replacing. 
At the moment the 50vd.c on the phone line is supplied from the exchange.
Now people not only have a phone bill, they also cop the increase in the electricity bill to run a battery charger 24hrs per day.


----------



## sails

sptrawler said:


> Also who pays for the backup batteries when they require replacing.
> At the moment the 50vd.c on the phone line is supplied from the exchange.
> Now people not only have a phone bill, they also cop the increase in the electricity bill to run a battery charger 24hrs per day.





And there is concern about the effect on the environment - these are being installed under the direction of a government which is taxing us under the guise of the environment.  How hypocritical is this?  From the same link:



> There is also a huge cost associated with the batteries and an environmental impact, with at least 10 million 12-volt lead acid batteries needed. These batteries must be replaced every five years.


----------



## Julia

Those boxes are hideous.  Are we going to be forced to have the NBN or will wireless be an alternative?
NBN Myths?


----------



## sptrawler

10 million batteries, wow that will help our battery manufacturers, LOL I forgot they will be all bought from overseas. 
Too expensive to manufacture here, but isn't battery storge one of our leading edge new technology industries that the carbon tax is going to encourage. What a load of BS, the government is full of it.:bad:


----------



## sptrawler

Julia said:


> Those boxes are hideous.  Are we going to be forced to have the NBN or will wireless be an alternative?
> NBN Myths?




How I see it is, if you don't install it when it goes past your house, it will be difficult to get it retrofitted at a later date. It is a bit like natural gas, when Perth was reticulated by by the government it was free.
If you buy an established house now that didn't have it fitted, it is just about impossible to get it retrofitted. This is becoming a huge problem for people who are completely reliant on electricity for heating and cooking, as electricity prices sky rocket.

I think the NBN will cause a similar issue for households that don't install the fibre when it goes past the house. Once the optical fibre is installed and capacity handling capability is increased, it opens up new avenues of charging you for what you presently get for free e.g television.
It won't take long for the free to air t.v stations to say, hang on a minute, why transmit something free and rely on advertising. When we can send it down a cable and charge for it, the reason they don't do it now is the current infrastructure can't handle it.
As for using wireless rather than the fibre, it will be available, like telsra 4g at the moment. But it won't have the data handling and speed capabilities of the fibre.
It will be only a matter of time before the content providers have the applications that make you rue the day you didn't get it installed when it was free. 
Even if I don't use it and opt not to take the backup batteries, if it goes by the house and it's free I will be getting the cable pulled in. I will just get the box put in a closet and worry about wiring the house later.


----------



## joea

Julia said:


> Those boxes are hideous.  Are we going to be forced to have the NBN or will wireless be an alternative?
> NBN Myths?




All I can contribute is, if you are on satellite and want faster speed you go through NBN.
Because they will own the bit on the ground.
The concept is ok, its just how they went about it that is on the nose.

Personally I think there is nothing like a bit of cable hooked to the computer.

Wireless or microwave or what ever, nothing is like a cable hook up to get what will be available in the future. 

joea


----------



## Calliope

Ho hum, another Labor failure to deliver

*NBN Co fails on target rollout*



> BROADBAND Minister Stephen Conroy's reluctance to share the National Broadband Network's new corporate plan is in sharp contrast to his usual enthusiasm for spruiking the NBN. After sitting on the plan for weeks, he's due to release it tomorrow. His reluctance is understandable given it can only highlight the massive failure to reach any of the initial plan's goals.
> 
> The initial plan was released in December 2010 by Julia Gillard. That plan is now in tatters despite the fact before its release the Prime Minister's Department paid corporate advisers Greenhill Caliburn $1.1 million for an initial 11 days' work to vet the plan.
> 
> The subsequent report said: "Greenhill Caliburn believes that, taken as a whole, the corporate plan for the development of the NBN is reasonable."
> 
> Why then, if costly advice said the plan was reasonable and implicitly realistic, has NBN Co missed the targets set by that plan for mid-2012 by a huge margin? Could it be that NBN Co and its head Mike Quigley simply aren't up to the job?
> 
> *Bd on its original targets, NBN Co has achieved only 9 per cent of its rollout target for homes passed by fibre and 3 per cent of the planned connections where customers are hooked up to broadband. Based on its initial estimates, by June this year 317,000 households should have been passed with fibre and 137,000 homes actually connected to a broadband service. In reality, fewer than 25,000 homes had been passed and fewer than 4000 connected.*




Read more

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...n-target-rollout/story-e6frgd0x-1226444256903


----------



## drsmith

Rob Oakshott's getting fidgety.



> Mr Oakeshott said he did not understand why the government was reticent about providing his committee with up-to- date financial and construction data on the NBN. He added that his constituents were largely excited by the project’s benefits.
> 
> “Most of our relationship [with the government] has been good but there’s been this issue around data and the committee has raised it a couple of times,” he said. “We’re an agnostic committee that will promote the good and criticise the bad. So there’s no *reason to play games with the committee and in fact doing so will only *agitate the 59 members involved.”
> 
> Ovum research director David Kennedy said that the NBN data *currently available was not detailed enough for forecasts and audits due to months of delays caused by various factors. He added that NBN Co had failed to adhere to its own targets set by the previous corporate plan and that this could be its last chance to prove itself before the next election.




http://afr.com/p/technology/tell_the_truth_on_nbn_oakeshott_j03rUy3qfNSOmfnLK6BVaK


----------



## joea

drsmith said:


> Rob Oakshott's getting fidgety.
> 
> 
> 
> http://afr.com/p/technology/tell_the_truth_on_nbn_oakeshott_j03rUy3qfNSOmfnLK6BVaK




Poor old Bob. Still not on the correct wavelength with Conroy and Labor.
joea


----------



## awg

Further to a post I made some time ago, after chatting today with a very experienced individual employed by a major sub-contractor to manage installations. This man has 30+ yrs experience.

He absolutely confirmed many of my suspicions.

He considered the majority of managers are inexperienced.
Very highly paid engineers are sitting about twiddling their thumbs.

He also stated much of the initial cost estimation had been carried out by inexperienced younger staff, he has been urgently drawing atterntion to the numerous difficulties of bringing in the actual jobs for the allocated budget.

Conroy is a Class A clown

I confidently predict the NBN will be an overpriced fiasco, and an abortion when Abbott gets elected.
(and I actually think its an ok idea in principle)


----------



## Smurf1976

sptrawler said:


> How I see it is, if you don't install it when it goes past your house, it will be difficult to get it retrofitted at a later date. It is a bit like natural gas, when Perth was reticulated by by the government it was free.
> If you buy an established house now that didn't have it fitted, it is just about impossible to get it retrofitted.



Why is it so hard to get connected to gas? Isn't it in the gas company's interest to connect new customers? 

Here in Tas the gas company advertises quite heavily trying to get new customers to connect. Standard cost to connect is $3000 but they'll do it for $0 if you switch your major energy uses (heating and hot water) to gas.


----------



## Smurf1976

awg said:


> He also stated much of the initial cost estimation had been carried out by inexperienced younger staff, he has been urgently drawing atterntion to the numerous difficulties of bringing in the actual jobs for the allocated budget.



There's lots to go wrong when pulling cable, lots. 

It's risky enough in a new conduit system, but once you consider the re-use of an existing network then there's sure to be issues with rocks (or rats, mice, mud, sand and all sorts of other things) in conduits. And there will be broken conduits too. And ones with silly tight bends that someone who has never actually pulled in a cable installed because it was quick and easy. And conduits that were damaged (or removed altogether) by roadworks, road signage or other utilities. 

And that's just what goes wrong with plastic conduit or GWI pipe. The old Telstra network includes various earthenware and fibro pipes as well - I've never pulled cable through either of those materials but I'd expect that it's not a lot of fun. Those old earthenware pipes are easily broken during roadworks, and I'm pretty sure that in many cases they don't get fixed before being covered up again.  

And then there's that little "conduit's already full" problem too. 

On the positive side, I do recall a few funny moments pulling in various cables. I wish those estimating this job the best of luck. I don't expect them to over estimate on time however, and cost overruns are likely. (And no, I wouldn't want to be estimating it either by the way - too much risk of others under quoting in order to win the work, safe in the knowledge that they can always add on extra costs later (they will...)).


----------



## sptrawler

Smurf1976 said:


> Why is it so hard to get connected to gas? Isn't it in the gas company's interest to connect new customers?
> 
> Here in Tas the gas company advertises quite heavily trying to get new customers to connect. Standard cost to connect is $3000 but they'll do it for $0 if you switch your major energy uses (heating and hot water) to gas.




When our daughter moved into a unit (stand alone not in an apartment situation) we rang the gas supply company and they flatly refused to connect the gas.
I will look into it again and give an update, that was 10 years ago.


----------



## sptrawler

Smurf1976 said:


> There's lots to go wrong when pulling cable, lots.
> 
> It's risky enough in a new conduit system, but once you consider the re-use of an existing network then there's sure to be issues with rocks (or rats, mice, mud, sand and all sorts of other things) in conduits. And there will be broken conduits too. And ones with silly tight bends that someone who has never actually pulled in a cable installed because it was quick and easy. And conduits that were damaged (or removed altogether) by roadworks, road signage or other utilities.
> 
> And that's just what goes wrong with plastic conduit or GWI pipe. The old Telstra network includes various earthenware and fibro pipes as well - I've never pulled cable through either of those materials but I'd expect that it's not a lot of fun. Those old earthenware pipes are easily broken during roadworks, and I'm pretty sure that in many cases they don't get fixed before being covered up again.
> 
> And then there's that little "conduit's already full" problem too.
> 
> On the positive side, I do recall a few funny moments pulling in various cables. I wish those estimating this job the best of luck. I don't expect them to over estimate on time however, and cost overruns are likely. (And no, I wouldn't want to be estimating it either by the way - too much risk of others under quoting in order to win the work, safe in the knowledge that they can always add on extra costs later (they will...)).




This is where the cost + quotes that came in the early days caused all the angst. I think the government threw out about six tenders. However to get it up and running one would assume they agreed to a degree of "flexibility" in the contract, for unforseen circumstances, that will burn them.
Every contract is based on best case scenario, very seldom does it work out that way.


----------



## NBNMyths

sails said:


> From that link, Joea - it seems these ugly boxes on lounge room walls shown below is upsetting people the most and the fact that fibre-optic cables carry light, not electricity, and makes phone lines useless during a blackout and copper wires will be removed once households are transferred to NBN Co's fibre-optic cables.






sptrawler said:


> Also who pays for the backup batteries when they require replacing.
> At the moment the 50vd.c on the phone line is supplied from the exchange.
> Now people not only have a phone bill, they also cop the increase in the electricity bill to run a battery charger 24hrs per day.






sails said:


> And there is concern about the effect on the environment - these are being installed under the direction of a government which is taxing us under the guise of the environment.  How hypocritical is this?  From the same link:




Personally, I have no interest in the backup battery box. I have a cordless phone anyway, so it doesn't work in a blackout. If I want to call 000, I use my mobile. But there are many people (particularly elderly) who use a corded phone and expect it to work in a blackout, hence the battery backup system that is part of the trial.

I hope that the policy changes and it becomes opt-in, because as cordless phones, naked DSL and cable internet grows, there are already many people without a "blackout" phone, and that number grows every day.

Other Qs:
If you take up the battery backup option, then it will be your ISP that replaces it when required.

The two boxes shown do not have to go "on the lounge room wall". They can be placed (within reason) wherever you choose, such as in the garage, home-office, laundry etc. In my case, I'd choose the home-office. One of the boxes is the NBN fibre-ethernet box, the other is the battery backup.





Julia said:


> Those boxes are hideous.  Are we going to be forced to have the NBN or will wireless be an alternative?
> NBN Myths?




You can choose wireless instead if you want. But with prices 5 or 10 times higher than the NBN (with smaller quotas and slower speeds), it will only be a small percentage of users for which a wireless alternative makes sense. Telstra just put all their 4G data prices up 10%.

Also as I mentioned, you really only need one of those boxes (the other is the battery), and they don't have to go "on the lounge room wall".


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Ho hum, another Labor failure to deliver
> 
> *NBN Co fails on target rollout*
> 
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...n-target-rollout/story-e6frgd0x-1226444256903




I usually ignore anything about the NBN published by the Australian, since their record on accuracy is.....ummm.... less than perfect....

And I certainly ignore anything about the NBN written by self-annointed "independent telecommunications expert" Kevin Morgan, whose only "claim to fame" was allegedly helping design the atrocious privatisation of Telstra for the ALP, later implemented by the Libs. He still argues against the structural separation of Telstra, perhaps embarrassed by the 15 years of problems caused by it's privatisation as a vertical monopoly.

As far as I'm aware, Kevin seems to do little else but bag the NBN is newspaper columns, which he has done constantly for the last 3 years. He has no qualifications of which I'm aware, has no business website and apart from claiming to be a former advisor to Kim Beasley, has no public resumÃ© of positions or who, aside from the occasional newspaper, he has ever provided communications consultancy services for.


----------



## NBNMyths

Smurf1976 said:


> There's lots to go wrong when pulling cable, lots.
> 
> It's risky enough in a new conduit system, but once you consider the re-use of an existing network then there's sure to be issues with rocks (or rats, mice, mud, sand and all sorts of other things) in conduits. And there will be broken conduits too. And ones with silly tight bends that someone who has never actually pulled in a cable installed because it was quick and easy. And conduits that were damaged (or removed altogether) by roadworks, road signage or other utilities.
> 
> And that's just what goes wrong with plastic conduit or GWI pipe. The old Telstra network includes various earthenware and fibro pipes as well - I've never pulled cable through either of those materials but I'd expect that it's not a lot of fun. Those old earthenware pipes are easily broken during roadworks, and I'm pretty sure that in many cases they don't get fixed before being covered up again.
> 
> And then there's that little "conduit's already full" problem too.
> 
> On the positive side, I do recall a few funny moments pulling in various cables. I wish those estimating this job the best of luck. I don't expect them to over estimate on time however, and cost overruns are likely. (And no, I wouldn't want to be estimating it either by the way - too much risk of others under quoting in order to win the work, safe in the knowledge that they can always add on extra costs later (they will...)).






sptrawler said:


> This is where the cost + quotes that came in the early days caused all the angst. I think the government threw out about six tenders. However to get it up and running one would assume they agreed to a degree of "flexibility" in the contract, for unforseen circumstances, that will burn them.
> Every contract is based on best case scenario, very seldom does it work out that way.




Part of the $11bn deal with Telstra is for access to their duct network. A condition is that the ducts must be fit for purpose, and if they are not then Telstra must make them so (at their expense). IIRC, Thodey stated at the shareholder meeting that they have budgeted ~$2bn for NBN-related duct/pit/pipe repairs/replacements/upgrades.

The NBN quotes that were rejected a while back were pre-Telstra deal, and included a clause where the tenderer would possibly be liable for duct repairs and upgrades. Once the Telstra deal was done, that clause was removed from the requirements for the contractors, which contributed to the lower costs. This was stated by Quigley at a (Estimates?) hearing when asked why the new quotes were lower than the rejected ones.


----------



## Smurf1976

NBNMyths said:


> Personally, I have no interest in the backup battery box. I have a cordless phone anyway, so it doesn't work in a blackout. If I want to call 000, I use my mobile. But there are many people (particularly elderly) who use a corded phone and expect it to work in a blackout, hence the battery backup system that is part of the trial.



I've been to a few emergency planning meetings etc in the past and one point which practically everyone forgets is that in a real emergency of a widespread nature (fires, flood, major power failure, important structural collapse or anything else which impacts a large number of people) the mobile phone network will be effectively useless and must not be relied upon for critical communications during the emergency. 

Major incidents generate a large spike in mobile network traffic, and the distributed nature of the network and connected devices is such that it can not meet more than a very small percentage of demand under emergency conditions. 

So far as the power backup is concerned, if there's a need for a service tech to replace the battery when it fails then quite simply that's a poor design of the equipment. It ought to be designed for DIY replacement - it's a battery after all, we're not launching any rockets here. Presumably this is the case.

So far as location of the equipment is concerned, I can't see any real issues with that as long as NBN Co doesn't impose any silly rules.


----------



## joea

NBNMyths said:


> I usually ignore anything about the NBN published by the Australian, since their record on accuracy is.....ummm.... less than perfect....
> 
> And I certainly ignore anything about the NBN written by self-annointed "independent telecommunications expert" Kevin Morgan, whose only "claim to fame" was allegedly helping design the atrocious privatisation of Telstra for the ALP, later implemented by the Libs. He still argues against the structural separation of Telstra, perhaps embarrassed by the 15 years of problems caused by it's privatisation as a vertical monopoly.
> 
> As far as I'm aware, Kevin seems to do little else but bag the NBN is newspaper columns, which he has done constantly for the last 3 years. He has no qualifications of which I'm aware, has no business website and apart from claiming to be a former advisor to Kim Beasley, has no public resumÃ© of positions or who, aside from the occasional newspaper, he has ever provided communications consultancy services for.




So your say that only comment from you and "The Man on the Monument " are correct??

No doubt you sit on the right hand of God.(Gingerella)

joea


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> I usually ignore anything about the NBN published by the Australian, since their record on accuracy is.....ummm....




Your mate Conroy shares your view, and he is working on reining in _The Australian_ and their inconvenient truths.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Your mate Conroy shares your view, and he is working on reining in _The Australian_ and their *inconvenient truths*.




HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa.

Truth? The Oz wouldn't know the truth if they fell over it on the way to a Liberal party conference!


I've lost count of the Oz's NBN trash, but here are a few from memory....

There was the lie about homes requiring $3,000 of rewiring (still uncorrected)

The relentless pursuit of Mike Quigley, which amounted to nothing other than smearing his good name. (No apologies provided)

A month or so ago they ran a piece which claimed entry-level NBN services cost double current entry-level ADSL services, when in fact the reverse is true (Still uncorrected).

They have corrected one of their anti-NBN rants though. After a huge-headline story claiming that a SA school would have to pay $200,000 to connect to the NBN, the next day they ran a tiny correction saying that the school would, in fact, be connected for free. Well, they were close.....


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> The "document" they are about to release is the updated corporate plan.
> 
> There will undoubtedly be delays contained therin, because we already know about them, and they have happened since the old 2010 plan was released.
> 
> There may well be some cost blowouts in there, but I doubt they will be substantial. If I had to guess, I'd say it's still below the original $43bn target, but above the revised $37bn target.
> 
> I would also say that revenue estimates will be increased, given that we now have takeup stats which are showing that NBN users are choosing much faster speed tiers than was predicted in the 2010 corporate plan. eg: The 2010 plan predicted only 8% would choose 100Mbps ($37 p/m), but almost 40% have chosen it in practise. The 2010 plan predicted 55% would choose the base 12Mbps ($24 p/m), but only 12% have, with the rest taking up higher speeds providing more revenue.
> 
> Overall, I don't think there will be any massive changes to the Govt equity required or the payback time.....fingers crossed....



Looks like you've had the inside tip,



> There are positive early signs that the NBN will deliver higher revenue earlier than expected.
> 
> The first people connected to the fibre network are paying higher revenue than the amounts built into the original assumptions. They are buying plans with faster download and upload rates than first expected. That could be because they are early adopters who always want the latest technology.
> 
> However, if the patterns of take-up are the norm, the NBN Co could reach break-even more quickly than forecast.




but,



> Only 1 million premises will be completed or under construction by June 2013 compared with the original plan of 1.7 million.




and,



> Conroy has said that about 15,000 Australians are now using the NBN, compared with a 2010 forecast of 150,000 connections.
> 
> The 2010 corporate plan predicted the NBN would turn cash flow positive in 2021 when it would generate $48 million in pretax profits and free cash flows of $1.5 billion. It will be interesting to see what that number is today.




Your fingers are safe, for now. 

http://afr.com/p/business/chanticleer/nbn_co_update_plenty_of_figuring_pPTdFGHprI2HGID08bDMsM


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa.




He who laughs last etc. Labor government enterprise is an oxymoron. I suppose you are still laughing at the "success" of Pink Bats and BER  where bureaucratic mismanagement succeeded in wasting billions.  HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa.  The Australian (not the ABC) continually exposed this wastage. It was your mob who was trying to mislead the taxpayers. Contractors naturally see NBN Co and their bureaucratic management as a soft touch and will bleed them dry. Billions will go down the drain.  

 The Australian is also hot on the trail of the Gillard/Wilson/Blewitt gang. This is also forcing your heroes Gillard and Conroy to try to step up the process of censoring the Australian

The Australian is the only news outlet that will expose wastage by NBN Co.


----------



## drsmith

Calliope said:


> He who laughs last etc. Labor government enterprise is an oxymoron. I suppose you are still laughing at the "success" of Pink Bats and BER  where bureaucratic mismanagement succeeded in wasting billions.  HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa.



One thing we can be sure of is that Labor will try to hide the problems for as long as they can.

It will be interesting inparticular to see how the rollout schedule continues to slip.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> He who laughs last etc. Labor government enterprise is an oxymoron. I suppose you are still laughing at the "success" of Pink Bats and BER  where bureaucratic mismanagement succeeded in wasting billions.  HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa.  The Australian (not the ABC) continually exposed this wastage. It was your mob who was trying to mislead the taxpayers. Contractors naturally see NBN Co and their bureaucratic management as a soft touch and will bleed them dry. Billions will go down the drain.
> 
> The Australian is also hot on the trail of the Gillard/Wilson/Blewitt gang. This is also forcing your heroes Gillard and Conroy to try to step up the process of censoring the Australian
> 
> The Australian is the only news outlet that will expose wastage by NBN Co.




Strawmen.

I'm no huge fan of Conroy, and I much prefer Rudd to Gillard. I never listen to ABC radio, and I rarely watch ABC television.

There is a difference between censoring the media, and ensuring they report objectively, rather than with a clear political bias, which even a strident conservative will admit The Australian is guilty of.

I have no issue with the media exposing Government wastage/corruption, although the Oz's attacks on insulation and BER went way beyond the reality. (eg: the name alone is misleading, since the "pink bats" are/were fine. It was the cheap nasty Chinese foil, and horrible cellulose fibre insulation that was (and always has been) the problem).

I am also a little curious as to why The Australian et al do not pursue the plethora of broken promises from the three "new" state Coalition governments as much as they pursue the Labor Governments. Surely, it couldn't be political bias.... Maybe you'd like to rationalise that for me?


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> I am also a little curious as to why The Australian et al do not pursue the plethora of broken promises from the three "new" state Coalition governments as much as they pursue the Labor Governments. Surely, it couldn't be political bias.... Maybe you'd like to rationalise that for me?




But you don't read News Ltd papers, so how would you know? The local Courier Mail is very critical of the Newman Government. As for rationalising their policies to a Labor spin doctor...sorry it can't be done.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> But you don't read News Ltd papers, so how would you know? The local Courier Mail is very critical of the Newman Government. As for rationalising their policies to a Labor spin doctor...sorry it can't be done.




Yes I do. We get the Daily Telegraph at work each day (alongside the SMH). I have given up reading Bolt and Akerman though. I've decided that reading the deluded rants of right wingnuts isn't good for my blood pressure.

If I didn't read the Tele, how would I know when they are lying about the NBN? :


----------



## sails

Calliope said:


> But you don't read News Ltd papers, so how would you know?




Good one, Calliope - Myths wouldn't be politically biased, would he?...


----------



## NBNMyths

sails said:


> Good one, Calliope - Myths wouldn't be politically biased, would he?...




I don't think I'm more politically biased than anyone else. But the point is that I'm not a _supposedly_ objective media outlet. News Ltd has a journalistic code of conduct, which the Oz is supposed to adhere to. They are also supposed to follow the objectivity guidelines laid down by the Press Council, since News is a signatory. Perhaps they've forgotten.


----------



## dutchie

http://m.smh.com.au/it-pro/governme...nveils-new-corporate-plan-20120808-23tuh.html


NBN Co unveiled its new corporate plan today. It reveals the NBN will cost *$4.6b* more than forecast to build.


Senator Conroy says it will take six months longer than forecast to build the NBN.

Really - who would have thought.

This is just the beginning.


----------



## awg

I heard just a few sentences of Conroy muttering...the only thing I heard was him trumpeting that NBN have more or less fixed price contracts, so they shouldnt get burned. (my interpretation)

However, to my knowledge, many of these contracts are with entities/joint ventures formed for the purpose of doing this work.

So in the instance of them being unable to perform the contract to price means they wear it, not NBN.

In the real world however, when a major contractor has a cashflow situation, what happens is you get piles of dirt, and lots of furious unpaid subbies.

Example..the head contractor for a section of bypass Pacific Highway near Newcastle has gone bust.
The NSW Govt wont stump up, the subbies are broke, no-one knows when the road will be built.

Building the major infrastructure is only part of the battle, if they require access to each premises, that will be a logistical nightmare...I was a technician for years, and imo no-one on the planet can accurately cost the amount of time wastage caused by extensive customer interaction


----------



## NBNMyths

dutchie said:


> http://m.smh.com.au/it-pro/governme...nveils-new-corporate-plan-20120808-23tuh.html
> 
> 
> NBN Co unveiled its new corporate plan today. It reveals the NBN will cost *$4.6b* more than forecast to build.
> 
> 
> Senator Conroy says it will take six months longer than forecast to build the NBN.
> 
> Really - who would have thought.
> 
> This is just the beginning.




Actually, (according to the article linked from your link) it will cost $1.4bn more to build, plus $3.2bn more in opex, due to increased use of Telstra backhaul and the Optus deal.

Even adding both the capex/opex increases together, it's still well below the original $43bn budget. Maybe NBN Co should have just left it there for their 2010 corp plan, instead of reducing it to $36.9! But then there will be substantially more revenue earned (because customers are choosing higher-end plans), so the projected return has increased from 7 to 7.1%.

There's a lot more certainty now than in 2010, with the Telstra and Optus deals signed, equipment supply contracts signed, all of the satellites and wireless contracts signed, and fibre rollout contracts for 30% of the project signed. They have data about takeup percentages and speeds which they did not have in 2010. NBN Co should now have a very good idea of both their costs and income.

I'm a happy camper. My finger crossing apparently worked!


----------



## Smurf1976

NBNMyths said:


> I have no issue with the media exposing Government wastage/corruption, although the Oz's attacks on insulation and BER went way beyond the reality. (eg: the name alone is misleading, since the "pink bats" are/were fine. It was the cheap nasty Chinese foil, and horrible cellulose fibre insulation that was (and always has been) the problem).



Agreed that actual Pink Batts are a quality product which ought not be rubbished due to the insulation stuff ups of government.

I would question however the logic in importing huge volumes of insulation from China, Germany and other places and then subsequently depressing the market for the Australian manufacturers which historically dominated the local market. That is essentially what the insulation scheme achieved.

As for the safety problems, well that largely comes down to a lack of proper training for workers and a lack of proper care an attention. There's nasty things to be found in roofs, live electricity being one of them, and it's no place for inexperienced workers with no supervision.


----------



## Smurf1976

awg said:


> In the real world however, when a major contractor has a cashflow situation, what happens is you get piles of dirt, and lots of furious unpaid subbies.
> 
> Example..the head contractor for a section of bypass Pacific Highway near Newcastle has gone bust.
> The NSW Govt wont stump up, the subbies are broke, no-one knows when the road will be built.



I know what you mean but in the case of the NBN I'd be expecting a bail out of the contractor given the huge political commitment to building it. Eg spend the $ and keep the issues out of the public eye rather than allowing delays because someone went broke. My guess is that's what will happen...


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> If I didn't read the Tele, how would I know when they are lying about the NBN? :




Yes. You were the one who complained to the press council about the Tele. What was your agenda Jamie? Just being a good citizen?:shake:


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Yes. You were the one who complained to the press council about the Tele. What was your agenda Jamie? Just being a good citizen?:shake:




I actually complained to the paper, and was annoyed by the arrogant dismissal from one of the editors who was unconcerned that they got it wrong and refused to publish a correction.

Thus, I thought I'd teach them a lesson in the PC. I thoroughly enjoyed the verbal drubbing dished out by the PC members to the Tele's rep editor during the hearing. Their NBN articles have been far more accurate since then, I note....


----------



## sptrawler

Well we are up and running again, at last Conroy is starting to front up. But Quigley doesn't look happy.

http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/government-it/nbn-costs-blow-out-by-billions-20120808-23u0f.html

I think this will be a big election issue, that is if the election goes out to 12 months.


----------



## Calliope

It will be interesting to see if NBNMyths reports the Financial Review to the Press Council for publishing inconvenient truths.



> Fewer than 100,000 Australian homes are likely to be linked up to the national broadband network in the months before the next federal election, making it easier for an incoming Coalition government to scale back the costly project.
> 
> NBN Co’s four-year corporate plan, released yesterday, predicts that 92,000 homes and offices will be customers by June 2013, a 14 per cent take-up rate well below the previous forecast of 566,000.
> 
> With an election due by November next year and the Coalition against a full-blown broadband network, there is great uncertainty about the NBN’s long-term future. The relatively low number of subscribers could help a Coalition government replace NBN Co’s plan with a simpler version.
> 
> The government will have to inject an extra $2.9 billion to cover a rise in capital and operating expenses. The completion date will be pushed back six months to mid-2021.


----------



## DB008

This is the thread l mentioned a while ago.

Just go to Whirlpool -> Forums -> NBN and it's in there (up to page 82). No doubt NBNMyths also has a presence there too.

*Whirlpool more accurate than AFR, says Conroy*



> Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has delivered a fiery tirade against the media for constantly repeating misconceptions about Labor’s National Broadband Network project, singling out the Financial Review newspaper for particular ridicule and recommending that those interested in accuracy read broadband forum Whirlpool.
> 
> The Labor Senator opened a press conference held in Sydney yesterday to release NBN Co’s latest corporate plan by speaking in detail about what he said were a series of “misconceptions” regularly repeated in the media with respect to the NBN.
> 
> “You often think if Malcolm Turnbull put out a press release saying “Cost blowout in the NBN due to the Earth being flat”, it’d probably lead the front page of the Fin Review lately,” Conroy told the audience, which was composed of technology journalists from mainstream publications such as The Australian, The Financial Review and technology vertical outlets such as Communications Day, ZDNet and iTNews.
> 
> 
> “For those that are interested in a comprehensive discussion of these issues, I can recommend to you the Whirlpool website, particularly the thread entitled *‘fighting the FUD’*,” Conroy added. “It is a very informative thread, and I would encourage you to take a look at it. because it does address quite a few of the issues which we debate regularly.”




*F*ear
*U*ncertainty
*D*oubt

Link to above article


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> It will be interesting to see if NBNMyths reports the Financial Review to the Press Council for publishing inconvenient truths.




I didn't attack the Tele for reporting inconvenient truths, I attacked them for reporting demonstrably false information. The press council agreed that the three articles contained numerous factual errors.


Does that FR article contain demonstrably false information, or just opinion that I may not agree with?


----------



## Glen48

Your Government is spend about $5,600 per head  ( stand by to pay more ) to get this to your door and you are not happy???


----------



## sptrawler

Well NBNMyths, I just hope the roll out has been carried out on a financial basis, not a political basis.
It would be terrible if the roll out was shut down due to cost blowouts. Then we find out Ma and Pa Kettle have bling speed, but the CBD is hamstrung by slow connections. That would be another pink batt scenario.


----------



## NBNMyths

Glen48 said:


> Your Government is spend about $5,600 per head  ( stand by to pay more ) to get this to your door and you are not happy???




That's some interesting maths you've got there. Care to show some working?


If we take the *total* funding of the NBN to 2021 ($44bn) and divide by the *current* population (22million), we get $2,000 per head.

If we take the *total* funding of the NBN to 2021 ($44bn) and divide by the *projected* population in 2021 (26million), we get $1690 per head.

If we take the peak *Govt* investment ($30.4bn) and divide by the *current* population (22million), we get $1,380 per head.

If we take the peak *Govt* investment ($30.4bn) and divide by the *projected* population in 2021 (26million), we get $1170 per head.


FYI, the per-capita *Govt* (PMG) funding to build the copper network (according to BRW) was $1,222.


----------



## Glen48

from Money Morning today:

Yesterday, communications minister, Senator Stephen Conroy revealed the NBN would - surprise, surprise - cost more than originally thought.

That doesn't surprise us. We warned long ago that the real end cost will probably be at least three-times the original forecast.

As _The Australian_ reported:


_'The funding required to roll out the super-fast National Broadband Network has blown out by $3.2 billion, with the vast majority of the extra money to come from taxpayer funds.'_

The government says the NBN will now cost $44.1 billion. Based on the last Census which showed Australia has 7.8 million households, the NBN will cost $5,653.85 per household.

We're sure that given the choice, you would happily spend $5,653.85 on an Internet connection too. What's that? You wouldn't...we thought as much.

As it happens, when we arrived home last night we saw a letter from our Internet provider, iPrimus. They had written to say that due to an upgrade in the Frankston area we could now use the iPrimus network to get faster speeds.

How much do we have to pay for this upgrade? $5,000? More perhaps? No. It won't cost us a bean for the upgrade. _In fact our monthly bill will be $20 cheaper_.

Got that? The private sector can provide us with a better service at a lower cost. While the government has to charge each household $5,653.85 for a service we can't be sure will be any better than the one we've already got.

But as usual, the government thinks it knows how to better spend your money than you. So it forces you to spend thousands on health insurance that you don't need, and now it's spending $5,653.85 of your tax dollars on an Internet connection you probably pay about $60 a month for.


----------



## MrBurns

Heard on 3AW this morning a pensioner who gets $800 a fortnight plus $200 from something else . after rent and costs lives on toast and crumpets.

Probably not the place to post this but I'm shocked and angry that her and thousands of others have been forced into poverty and then Gillard puts in a carbon tax to top it off.

Angry very angry.........


----------



## DB008

MrBurns said:


> Heard on 3AW this morning a pensioner who gets $800 a fortnight plus $200 from something else . after rent and costs lives on toast and crumpets.
> 
> Probably not the place to post this but I'm shocked and angry that her and thousands of others have been forced into poverty and then Gillard puts in a carbon tax to top it off.
> 
> Angry very angry.........




There is a solution.
Fly to Bali on Jetstar and hop on a boat back over here. On the way back, dump your passport in the water. Make up a name, go from there.


----------



## NBNMyths

Glen48 said:


> We're sure that given the choice, you would happily spend $5,653.85 on an Internet connection too. What's that? You wouldn't...we thought as much.
> 
> As it happens, when we arrived home last night we saw a letter from our Internet provider, iPrimus. They had written to say that due to an upgrade in the Frankston area we could now use the iPrimus network to get faster speeds.
> 
> How much do we have to pay for this upgrade? $5,000? More perhaps? No. It won't cost us a bean for the upgrade. _In fact our monthly bill will be $20 cheaper_.
> 
> Got that? The private sector can provide us with a better service at a lower cost. While the government has to charge each household $5,653.85 for a service we can't be sure will be any better than the one we've already got.
> 
> But as usual, the government thinks it knows how to better spend your money than you. So it forces you to spend thousands on health insurance that you don't need, and now it's spending $5,653.85 of your tax dollars on an Internet connection you probably pay about $60 a month for.





Right, except you wrote *per head*, not *per premises*.

That aside, your numbers are still wrong, because the NBN will not only connect to homes, but also to businesses, schools etc. So by 2021 there will be a total of ~14 million connections, making the cost ~$3100 per connection.

The fact you can type on this forum at all, and that iPrimus can give you a new ADSL2 connection is because the Govt of the day spend around the same amount connecting your house to the copper network.

All iPrimus are doing is installing a $500 piece of equipment into the Telstra exchange and connecting it to the copper wires that the Govt originally rolled out to your house. They will then connecting it to their own transit fibre network. The same transit fibre network that iPrimus will also use to connect to the NBN.

It's unlikely that iPrimus will give you a speed boost, because ADSL2 speeds are limited by the quality and length of copper between your house and the exchange. Nothing they install at the exchange can improve the maximum theoretical speed of your connection. The only way to do that is to replace the copper with fibre, or at least most of it (ie FTTN).

Also, the Govt is not spending your _tax dollars_ on the NBN. The cost of building the NBN is paid back by your monthly connection charge, just as the cost of building/maintaining the copper network is paid for through your line rental/monthly charge on that network. iPrimus aren't charging you up-front the $500 for installing the DSLAM that lets you use that network, they are recouping that investment through your monthly charge. Exactly the same way that the NBN recoups its investment.

The maximum theoretical speed of ADSL2+ is 24Mbps, but most people get less than 10. The current maximum speed of the NBN is 100Mbps, but that will increase to 1Gbps next year, and probably 10Gbps in another 10 years. Such is the benefit of fibre which has already been tested to 69,000Gbps. So yes, you can be sure that your NBN service will be better.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> That's some interesting maths you've got there. Care to show some working?
> 
> 
> If we take the *total* funding of the NBN to 2021 ($44bn) and divide by the *current* population (22million), we get $2,000 per head.
> 
> If we take the *total* funding of the NBN to 2021 ($44bn) and divide by the *projected* population in 2021 (26million), we get $1690 per head.
> 
> If we take the peak *Govt* investment ($30.4bn) and divide by the *current* population (22million), we get $1,380 per head.
> 
> If we take the peak *Govt* investment ($30.4bn) and divide by the *projected* population in 2021 (26million), we get $1170 per head.
> 
> 
> FYI, the per-capita *Govt* (PMG) funding to build the copper network (according to BRW) was $1,222.




Hey NBNMyths, I don't put any credibility in Glen48's figures. However I wouldn't bet my goolies on yours either.

I saw an industry upgrade that the scope of work was to upgrade control systems on 12 modules for a cost of $30m. After the first 2 the original $30m was gone, after 6 the cost had blown out to $80m. The project was abandoned. Maybe this will be different, however I doubt it.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> If we take the peak *Govt* investment ($30.4bn) and divide by the *current* population (22million), we get $1,380 per head.




If the *Govt* investment is $0 *(it borrows the lot)* and we divide that by any non-zero number, we get $0.00 per head.

It's this sort of voodoo economics that really worries me.


----------



## Calliope

Senator Conroy is obviously NBNMyth's mentor.



> MALCOLM Turnbull: As Senator Conroy descends further and further into the pit of paranoia, the ranks of the hate media in his mind get bigger and bigger. Anyone that disagrees with him is engaged in a vendetta.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...lat-earth-review/story-fn72xczz-1226447081912


----------



## DB008

Calliope - you seem to be on a paid subscription to the Australian. We only seem to be able to read the headline and 1 or 2 sentences.
Here is more of the article.



> Other highlights of the press conference. Has the cost increased?
> 
> CONROY: It's a pull-through rather than an increase.
> 
> If you subtract $35.9 billion from $37.4 billion, how does it come to $1.4 billion?
> 
> CONROY: Ah, rounding. If you go into the deep into the documents, that's why $3.9 billion is the correct figure though. A quick look at those rounded estimates would get you to a slightly higher figure than that, but if you look at it, there's a more detailed couple of decimal points. It's a rounding issue. It's literally just a rounding issue. Up front, they round them up. If you're looking for a detailed document to find the estimate, it's a couple of decimal points. When you do the divisions and adds and subtractions, it comes to the figures we're talking about.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/seriously-minister-cut-and-paste-tries-to-utterly-utterly-ignore-the-flat-earth-review/story-fn72xczz-1226447081912


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> Calliope - you seem to be on a paid subscription to the Australian. We only seem to be able to read the headline and 1 or 2 sentences.
> Here is more of the article.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/seriously-minister-cut-and-paste-tries-to-utterly-utterly-ignore-the-flat-earth-review/story-fn72xczz-1226447081912




It's not rocket science. The "more decimal places" Conroy is talking about would mean, for example that it has increased by $1.44bn from $35.94bn, to $37.38bn. While you may round when talking about each number individually, when adding them together correctly you would keep the additional decimal places until you finish, thus you could end up with a figure that doesn't seem to add up unless you are aware of the additional decimals. eg: $35.9+1.4=37.4, when it may actually have been 35.94+1.44 = 37.38 = 37.4


----------



## awg

Smurf1976 said:


> I know what you mean but in the case of the NBN I'd be expecting a bail out of the contractor given the huge political commitment to building it. Eg spend the $ and keep the issues out of the public eye rather than allowing delays because someone went broke. My guess is that's what will happen...




hmmm...if Labor was re-elected yes...but what chance of that?

dont pay much attention....has Abbott changed his tune?...thought he didnt want it, cant see him chucking extra $$$ at some contractors who cant get things right.

I wouldnt if I was him


----------



## So_Cynical

MrBurns said:


> Heard on 3AW this morning a pensioner who gets $800 a fortnight plus $200 from something else . after rent and costs lives on toast and crumpets.
> 
> Probably not the place to post this but I'm shocked and angry that her and thousands of others have been forced into poverty and then Gillard puts in a carbon tax to top it off.
> 
> Angry very angry.........




What a complete crock.

Is 1 vote Tony going to force the power company's to roll back the price rises that have all come BEFORE the carbon tax kicked in...no chance in hell.

Any idiot pensioner that has to live on Aldi baked beans now is and always was a charity case.



Glen48 said:


> The private sector can provide us with a better service at a lower cost. While the government has to charge each household $5,653.85 for a service we can't be sure will be any better than the one we've already got.



 Pure and utter fantasy...no ifs and or buts about it.

By the way Glen...hows the Internet in the Philippines? Private sector and lighting fast???


----------



## MrBurns

So_Cynical said:


> What a complete crock.
> Is 1 vote Tony going to force the power company's to roll back the price rises that have all come BEFORE the carbon tax kicked in...no chance in hell.
> Any idiot pensioner that has to live on Aldi baked beans now is and always was a charity case.
> Pure and utter fantasy...no ifs and or buts about it.
> By the way Glen...hows the Internet in the Philippines? Private sector and lighting fast???




I really think you'd be better joining the Nazi party if you havent already, though I guess the ALP is close enough.


----------



## IFocus

So_Cynical said:


> What a complete crock.
> 
> Is 1 vote Tony going to force the power company's to roll back the price rises that have all come BEFORE the carbon tax kicked in...no chance in hell.
> 
> Any idiot pensioner that has to live on Aldi baked beans now is and always was a charity case.
> 
> Pure and utter fantasy...no ifs and or buts about it.




Fair go SC you need to get a pair of those Liberal glasses you know the ones that don't see up to 50% rises in electricity bills but declare the world will end if you see a 9% rise tut tut you.


----------



## sails

Interesting comments from Telecommunications Consultant Kevin Morgan plus some history on the NBN before Kevin speaks:


----------



## pilots

After watching Bolt this morning Labour should hang there head in shame.


----------



## So_Cynical

pilots said:


> After *watching Bolt this morning* Labour should hang there head in shame.




You should hang your head in shame...watching that crap! 

Alan Jones with Pictures. :shake:


----------



## Ferret

pilots said:


> After watching Bolt this morning Labour should hang there head in shame.




Last 10 seconds is very interesting.  

When Bolt shakes his head at laying new fibre optic cable besides existing copper cable does he genuinely not understand the difference, or is he just mis-representing?


----------



## drsmith

Ferret said:


> Last 10 seconds is very interesting.



It's a pity Kevin Morgan got cut off in mid stream. He really ddi look like he wanted to say more.  I would very much preferred to have heard more from him than from the other Rudd.


----------



## DB008

Surprised that NBNMyths hasn't posted this yet..



> *Wozniak likes NBN so much, he’s applying for citizenship*
> 
> Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak has listed the rollout of a national broadband network as one of the reasons he wants to become an Australian.
> 
> Mr Wozniak told The Australian Financial Review in Sydney that he had spoken to Communications Minister Stephen Conroy and was in support of the federal government’s fibre rollout.
> 
> “I spoke to him and they plan to roll it out to everyone in the country,” Mr Wozniak said.
> 
> “I support it very much. It’s one of the reasons why I actually like this country and want to become a citizen. I live in a country where we don’t have any regulation of telecommunications.”
> 
> http://afr.com/p/technology/wozniak_likes_nbn_so_much_he_applying_lz4NGUtmpS2PvD55EJ4eoL


----------



## sptrawler

Yes Danny, this thread has been quiet. 
I read the other day that there were meant to be 540,000 connected by next year. It has now been revised to 54,000.

I bet the cost hasn't been revised down.LOL


----------



## sptrawler

sptrawler said:


> Yes Danny, this thread has been quiet.
> I read the other day that there were meant to be 540,000 connected by next year. It has now been revised to 54,000.
> 
> I bet the cost hasn't been revised down.LOL




Well I see today Conroy and the 'jack boot' boys, are going to sort out the problem with customers saying we don't want the N.B.N.
If you don't take it, they come in and rip out your phone connection.LOL,LOL,LOL what a hoot.
That will sort out the slow take up. 
MUM,I know your on holidays,but they've come in and taken the phone off the wall.LOL
Conroy reminds me a lot of Basil Fawlty with a touch of Adolph. Yep you can see where Tanner is coming from.


HOME OWNERS no longer have to consent to government-owned NBN Co installing fibre optic connections on their property, as the company moves from its cumbersome consent model to automatic installation.

The launch of NBN services in South Morang in Melbourne's north yesterday marks one of the last areas to get demand-driven installations, where households are only connected upon request. In August NBN Co said it would use powers in the Telecommunications Act that allow carriers to enter private property to install equipment.

Residents can still opt out of a fibre connection, an NBN Co spokeswoman confirmed. However, they will have no fixed line connection once the Telstra copper network is removed under a deal between Telstra and NBN Co.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/business/n...ation-model-20120926-26ld9.html#ixzz27fCIr5qS

Shouldn't it read the Government moves from the 'would you like the N.B.N'  to  'SHUT UP YOU ARE GETTING IT OR YOU WILL HAVE NOTHING, GET OVER IT' 
Your paying for it you have it or have nothing. What a joke.


----------



## Knobby22

We are all paying for it with our taxes, so why wouldn't you want it done?
So some idiot doesn't want it because of fuzzy political thinking. 
You can bet he would call them back once all his neigbours have it and he has missed out. But then it would cost a lot more. 

Hardly jackboots, more having to deal with the thicker members of the Australian Public, some with Kangoroos loose in the top paddock.


----------



## pilots

Knobby22 said:


> We are all paying for it with our taxes, so why wouldn't you want it done?
> So some idiot doesn't want it because of fuzzy political thinking.
> You can bet he would call them back once all his neigbours have it and he has missed out. But then it would cost a lot more.
> 
> Hardly jackboots, more having to deal with the thicker members of the Australian Public, some with Kangoroos loose in the top paddock.




No its NOT fuzzy political thinking, I for one DON'T NEED NBN, I have all I need with out all this extra expense to the tax payers. I can down load any thing I need the way it is now.


----------



## Knobby22

pilots said:


> No its NOT fuzzy political thinking, I for one DON'T NEED NBN, I have all I need with out all this extra expense to the tax payers. I can down load any thing I need the way it is now.




What if you sell your house? If I was buying it I would be very disappointed to find there was no NBN connection. Definitely lower the price.

Why fight getting it connected? Thet will waste taxpayers money as they have to hire people to deal with you.


----------



## pilots

Knobby22 said:


> What if you sell your house? If I was buying it I would be very disappointed to find there was no NBN connection. Definitely lower the price.
> 
> Why fight getting it connected? Thet will waste taxpayers money as they have to hire people to deal with you.




You just don't get it, what about the old lady next to us, she has no computer, what use is the NBN to her????.


----------



## boofhead

She probably uses a landline for phone. Resale value could be useful for her if she moves to somewhere else.


----------



## drsmith

Knobby22 said:


> We are all paying for it with our taxes, so why wouldn't you want it done?



Cost/benefit analysis ??

The current government has long since abandoned the idea that it's our taxes.


----------



## sptrawler

The slow roll out is going to have an exponential effect on the end cost.
Contracts have been let, manpower employed, logistics companies pre booked, materials ordered and committed to. 
If the expected connections next year were 540,000 and the actuals come in at 54,000, it will cause a huge blow out in time, costs and revenues.
Remember this monster is supposed to be self funding, that's why it's not included in the budget. Some time someone is going to have to answer for the shortfall of expenditure to income.


----------



## Knobby22

drsmith said:


> Cost/benefit analysis ??
> 
> The current government has long since abandoned the idea that it's our taxes.




That's an answer to a different question.
Whether you agree or disagree with the rollout, you would be a mug to stop your own personal connection.


----------



## Knobby22

drsmith said:


> Cost/benefit analysis ??
> 
> The current government has long since abandoned the idea that it's our taxes.




That's an answer to a different question.
Whether you agree or disagree with the rollout, you would be a mug to stop your own personal connection.


----------



## sptrawler

Knobby22 said:


> That's an answer to a different question.
> Whether you agree or disagree with the rollout, you would be a mug to stop your own personal connection.




Agree with you on both posts.LOL
If it goes past your house, get it connected. 
As Knobby say's it will cost you a lot more later on, when the tax payers aren't paying for it.
I don't agree with it ,I think the money would be better spent on more productive infrastructure. But I will get it put in my house at no cost if it goes past.
Reminds me of when Foxtel started up, $29 for an optical connection to the house and one months free Foxtel.
I payed the$29, they were there for a day getting the line in. 
I watched it for a month and then they had to come out and take the box away when I chose not to extend the subscription.
When I sold the house it was Foxtel cable ready. Jeez that was back in the late 80's 

What I disagree with is this governments lack of regard to peoples choice, they don't ask, they tell. 
Also their lack of moral compass, everyone pays out on Tony for being Tony, but nobody gives a $hit if Julia is Bob Brown or Julia is anyone who can give her a popularity spike.
I just think the press need a reality check, maybe they get payed that much, that it doesn't matterhow badly the economy is run.
However the grass roots people know you can't keep cranking up debt and say you are doing well. This is underlined by the way the government have cranked up their pays, they know where it is going.

Yes get the N.B.N while you can, IMO the cost blowouts will cut it well short of its targets so get it while you can. It's underwritten by the government, gulp, us.


----------



## drsmith

Senator Conroy and red underpants.



> "I'm in charge of spectrum auctions and if I say to you everyone in this room, 'if you want to bid next week in our spectrum auction you better wear red underpants on your head', you'll be wearing them on your head," he said.
> 
> "I have unfettered legal power."




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-28/conroy-caught-on-camera-making-undies-on-head-gaffe/4286562

He wasn't joking.


----------



## sptrawler

Knobby22 said:


> Hardly jackboots, more having to deal with the thicker members of the Australian Public, some with Kangoroos loose in the top paddock.




Hardly jackboots, I think you are ill informed Knobby, Conroy was born in the wrong era. IMO he would have fit very well in a political party from the 1930's that had grandious aspirations in Europe.
He appears to have issues, I wonder if anyone has looked into his early years?
How Labor can say Abbott has issues, when they have Conroy as a senior minister, is beyond belief.:1zhelp:


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> You should hang your head in shame...watching that crap!
> 
> Alan Jones with Pictures. :shake:




Yeh, maybe you should take a gander at your hero, Conroy, what a dick.
This is a perfect example of the people running the show, no wonder Tanner is pizzed off.
Now Tanner will be bad mouthed by the goon show, suprise, suprise.
If one person votes for the labor party, they need their heads read. Just my opinion.


----------



## Logique

I was, wondering what the current thinking is, for those following all this, what is expected to happen in regard to  

- what will be the price point of telephone and internet service by comparison to existing fixed line/ADSL2+
- when the Coalition comes in, if you're not connected to NBN by then, are you ever likely to be
- what will removal of copper lines elsewhere mean to those remaining on fixed line/ADSL internet, technically and with costs

If the NBN is to offer comparable service at price, then certainly I would want them to connect me on the way past.


----------



## sptrawler

sptrawler said:


> Agree with you on both posts.LOL
> If it goes past your house, get it connected.
> As Knobby say's it will cost you a lot more later on, when the tax payers aren't paying for it.
> I don't agree with it ,I think the money would be better spent on more productive infrastructure. But I will get it put in my house at no cost if it goes past.




This project by Rio will be interesting, when the yeild results come in the Chinnese will be buying up the Pilbara. Then they can put in a water supply to grow crops for themselves and we will be able to watch it live on the N.B.N. Yeh

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/business/a/-/wa/15024498/rio-uses-mine-water-for-wa-hay-fields/
That soil grows anything if you can keep the water up to it.
It's a shame everyone laughed at Barrnett, and the government decided there was more money in high speed download, than food.

Nothing like a dopy government to blow money and waste opportunity. I must stop posting on this thread I'm negative.


----------



## Knobby22

Rio Tinto into cattle producing, who would have thought?

We desperately need good infrastructure decisions like the fast train link between Melbourne and Sydney, better public transport, fix the road between Sydney and Brisbane, it goes on and on.
It was good to hear Jeff Kennett saying that now is the perfect time for Australia to borrow money at low interest rates and fix the place up. Too many rent seekers who like the present situation.


----------



## drsmith

Knobby22 said:


> It was good to hear Jeff Kennett saying that now is the perfect time for Australia to borrow money at low interest rates and fix the place up. Too many rent seekers who like the present situation.



The PIIGS if they could go back might have taken a different view to more debt. The starting point is to make better use of what we allready have/borrowed. 

Regarding debt, David Marray last night made some very good points last night on 7:30,



> LEIGH SALES: Given what's potentially ahead, how effectively do you think that successive governments have managed the proceeds of the resources boom?
> 
> DAVID MURRAY: Well I don't think they have because they haven't addressed this fundamental shape of the Australian economy. And what that shape implies is that we need capital from the rest of the world, we have a high operating leverage problem in the budget, that is, the welfare costs in Australia are so high that when - forget the boom, commodities always change prices. And a seller of commodities is a price-taker whereas we have a high fixed-cost in our budget, mostly in welfare, which is now up to 100 per cent of the personal tax take. *So, with those problems and a persistent current account deficit, Australia is not a country that can afford very much public debt, yet the public debt's been rising.*




http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2012/s3603244.htm

My bolds.


----------



## NBNMyths

Logique said:


> I was, wondering what the current thinking is, for those following all this, what is expected to happen in regard to
> 
> - what will be the price point of telephone and internet service by comparison to existing fixed line/ADSL2+
> - when the Coalition comes in, if you're not connected to NBN by then, are you ever likely to be
> - what will removal of copper lines elsewhere mean to those remaining on fixed line/ADSL internet, technically and with costs
> 
> If the NBN is to offer comparable service at price, then certainly I would want them to connect me on the way past.




*Q1*
The price NBN v ADSL2+phone price points are already out there. In a nutshell:
- The price of NBNw/phone from most telcos is cheaper than ADSL2w/phone from Telstra.
- The price of NBNw/phone from most telcos is the same as where those carriers have their own ADSL2 network.
- The price of NBNw/phone from Telstra is the same as ADSL2w/phone from Telstra.

*Q2*
My best guess re coalition is that they will honour all existing rollout contracts. That means the rollout will continue unchanged for at least 2 years beyond the next election. What happens after that is more murky. There are two realistic possibilities:
1) Due to pressure and increasing demand they will continue with the rollout, while bleating about contracts, costs, bad management etc. They will say _"we have been forced to continue it but will do a better job of management"._

2) They will renegotiate the Telstra contract and downgrade the rollout to FTTN. This will offer a maximum speed of about 50Mbps. I would expect that FTTN pricing for 12/25/50Mbps would be the same as those speeds on the "real NBN", but the NBN speeds of 100/250/500/1000Mbps will not be available for those customers. 50Mbps will also be unavailable for many due to distance from the node. Option #2 will present some problems: 
- First, we'll have a situation where many regional areas will have considerably better internet capability than many metropolitan areas. 
- Second, we will eventually have the problem of needing to upgrade the FTTN to FTTP. How will that upgrade be funded? Will they maintain the NBN's national flat pricing, or will the upgrade areas be forced to pay more to get what 1/3 of the country already has?

*Q3*
People will get considerable notice (>18 months) and opportunity to switch to the NBN before the copper is switched off. I would guess that stragglers (eg elderly) will get a personal visit, and perhaps their ISP will simply migrate their connection relatively seamlessly. We'll know in 20 months, because the first NBN areas have just been told that their copper will be switched off in 19 months.


----------



## moXJO

NBNMyths is the roll out still on schedule, or is it running behind?


----------



## NBNMyths

moXJO said:


> NBNMyths is the roll out still on schedule, or is it running behind?




As far as I know, apart from the initial and announced 9-month delay relating to getting the Telstra deal sorted, it's on schedule.

After the Telstra deal was finally signed, they announced a revised 3-year schedule about 8 months ago, which has not changed.


----------



## noco

NBNMyths said:


> As far as I know, apart from the initial and announced 9-month delay relating to getting the Telstra deal sorted, it's on schedule.
> 
> After the Telstra deal was finally signed, they announced a revised 3-year schedule about 8 months ago, which has not changed.




Two suburbs in Townsville, namely Mundingburra and Aitkenvale has NBN at thier door and in the local paper today they have been told they will have no alterantive but switch very shortly to NBN at $80 per month. 

Most of them are only paying $29.95 per month and I think they about to start a riot over  the monopoly created by this inept Labor Government.

Please don't come back and tell me they will get a faster service, we already know that. The thing is they are happy with their Telstra provider at $29.95 even though it may be a bit slower.


----------



## Julia

noco said:


> Two suburbs in Townsville, namely Mundingburra and Aitkenvale has NBN at thier door and in the local paper today they have been told they will have no alterantive but switch very shortly to NBN at $80 per month.



Well, I hope their protests are heard all the way to Canberra.
Such an increase would render many low income folk unable to have the internet and is entirely contrary to what was promised.
Perhaps NBN Myths might care to comment?


----------



## sptrawler

I was talking to an old bloke the other day(well older than me) and Iwas asking him how the HAM radio was going.
He told me it isn't really going at all, it is all done on the internet now, so he isn't involved anymore.
It got me thinking, if we(the public) pay for the N.B.N and it gives the private sector unlimited bandwidth. What do we get for free now that we could be forced to get on the internet later.
Well free to air t.v is the obvious one.


----------



## So_Cynical

noco said:


> Two suburbs in Townsville, namely Mundingburra and Aitkenvale has NBN at thier door and in the local paper today they have been told they will have *no alterantive but switch very shortly to NBN at $80 per month. *
> 
> Most of them are only paying $29.95 per month and I think they about to start a riot over  the monopoly created by this inept Labor Government.
> 
> Please don't come back and tell me they will get a faster service, we already know that. The thing is they are happy with their Telstra provider at $29.95 even though it may be a bit slower.




Is that so...this from the local paper



			
				townsvillebulletin.com.au said:
			
		

> A basic internet package with 50 gigabytes of data downloads at the fastest speed of 100 megabits per second will set back internet users *$59.95 a month* on a 24-month contract.
> 
> Telco rival *Optus *released their pricing for the NBN earlier this month with plans starting *from $59.*




Forced to pay 80 a month hey?

http://www.townsvillebulletin.com.au/article/2012/02/28/309461_news.html

A nice mix of comments at the bottom of the page...mostly NBN positive.


----------



## NBNMyths

noco said:


> Two suburbs in Townsville, namely Mundingburra and Aitkenvale has NBN at thier door and in the local paper today they have been told they will have no alterantive but switch very shortly to NBN at $80 per month.
> 
> Most of them are only paying $29.95 per month and I think they about to start a riot over  the monopoly created by this inept Labor Government.
> 
> Please don't come back and tell me they will get a faster service, we already know that. The thing is they are happy with their Telstra provider at $29.95 even though it may be a bit slower.






Julia said:


> Well, I hope their protests are heard all the way to Canberra.
> Such an increase would render many low income folk unable to have the internet and is entirely contrary to what was promised.
> *Perhaps NBN Myths might care to comment?*





Sure. The figures quoted in the article are rubbish. Demonstrably so.

First, the people paying "$29.95" a month now, aren't. They are paying a minimum of $29.95 for ADSL, *plus* a minimum of $22-32 a month for line rental *plus* phone calls. So they are paying at least $52 a month. If they are with Telstra, then they are paying a minimum of $80 per month.

Second, NBN plans are available for much less than $80 a month. Exetel have a bundled NBN broadband and phone plan, with 50GB of data each month and flat-rate 10c national calls for *$35 per month, total*. iiNet have NBN plans starting at $49.95 a month, plus $10 for a phone. Optus are about the same. Skymesh have NBN plans starting at $29.95, or $19.95 if you bundle a phone.


*So, far from being forced to pay more, people are able to connect to the NBN for 30% less per month than they pay now for an equivalent service.*

The article is just a little more NBN FUD, lapped up by Noco, Julia et al.


----------



## noco

So_Cynical said:


> Is that so...this from the local paper
> 
> 
> 
> Forced to pay 80 a month hey?
> 
> http://www.townsvillebulletin.com.au/article/2012/02/28/309461_news.html
> 
> A nice mix of comments at the bottom of the page...mostly NBN positive.




So_Cynical, your link appears a bit out dated (FEB 28 2012) my friend and what you read then would have been Labor Party spin. Good try old fellow!!!!!!

My link was published yesterday Saturday 13/10/2012 and much more up to date.



http://www.townsvillebulletin.com.au/article/2012/10/13/367611_news.html


----------



## NBNMyths

noco said:


> So_Cynical, your link appears a bit out dated (FEB 28 2012) my friend and what you read then would have been Labor Party spin. Good try old fellow!!!!!!
> 
> My link was published yesterday Saturday 13/10/2012 and much more up to date.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.townsvillebulletin.com.au/article/2012/10/13/367611_news.html




Yes, but that doesn't make it accurate. Don't take my word for it, check Exetel's NBN pricing for yourself:
http://www.exetel.com.au/residential-fibre-pricing-mainland.php

Starting at $35 month for broadband with phone, with 10c national un-timed calls. That's 30% less per month than what people pay now, with calls >50% cheaper than now.

Then there is the info from Telstra itself, which shows that their ADSL and NBN pricing is *identical* (Even though their NBN speed is faster):
http://www.telstra.com.au/my-offer-summaries/bundles/


----------



## drsmith

The journalist in the article above I think has compared Telstra's cheapest stand alone broadband plan ($29.95pm) to their cheapest NBN plan ($80pm).

http://www.telstra.com.au/internet/home-broadband-bigpond-elite-plans/
http://www.telstra.com.au/internet/national-broadband-network/our-plans/


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> The journalist in the article above I think has compared Telstra's cheapest stand alone broadband plan ($29.95pm) to their cheapest NBN plan ($80pm).
> 
> http://www.telstra.com.au/internet/home-broadband-bigpond-elite-plans/
> http://www.telstra.com.au/internet/national-broadband-network/our-plans/




Correct. He has failed to realise that to get the $29.95 "stand alone" broadband, you must first have a home phone with Telstra at a cost of $31.95 per month, for a total of $62 per month.

The $80 NBN plan includes the home phone plus assorted free/cheap phone calls in addition to the broadband.

As I said, if you compare apples with apples, both Telstra's copper and NBN entry plans are the same (exorbitant) $80 price.


----------



## So_Cynical

noco]So_Cynical said:


> The journalist in the article above I think has compared Telstra's cheapest stand alone broadband plan ($29.95pm) to their cheapest NBN plan ($80pm).
> 
> http://www.telstra.com.au/internet/home-broadband-bigpond-elite-plans/
> http://www.telstra.com.au/internet/national-broadband-network/our-plans/




The so called journalist from Townsville must be a mate of GG's, well practised in the art of attention seeking headlines followed by a complete lack of substance...happy to compare Apples with Oranges.


----------



## DB008

Will there be a 'naked NBN' option? Or, will someone like internode/dodo have a package for $60 which includes line and NBN in one price?


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> Will there be a 'naked NBN' option? Or, will someone like internode/dodo have a package for $60 which includes line and NBN in one price?




Telstra don't offer naked anything.

Most of the other ISPs offer naked NBN. Exetel's $35 includes a free phoneline if you want it, but you don't have to.

TPG offer unlimited data NBN at 12Mbps, with phoneline and calls for $70.


----------



## Julia

NBNMyths said:


> The article is just a little more NBN FUD, lapped up by Noco, Julia et al.



Criticism accepted, NBN Myths.  I should know better than to just believe such an allegation.
Your clarification and explanation is appreciated.


----------



## moXJO

NBNMyths said:


> As far as I know, apart from the initial and announced 9-month delay relating to getting the Telstra deal sorted, it's on schedule.
> 
> After the Telstra deal was finally signed, they announced a revised 3-year schedule about 8 months ago, which has not changed.




Thanks NBN.


----------



## noco

Well since all the posts of today have argued about the headlines in the Townsville Daily Bulletin, I decided to do some research thorugh Google and I became more confused than ever before. I was hoping to come up with a link which related to the number connected to the NBN and the current cost of installation and whether it was on budget and time.

One economist was adamant the final cost would be $80 billion while others were more conservative down to $8 billion over buget. I could not find acurate figures on the number of houses eligible for connection and the number actually connected as a percentage.

The confusion continues with the final date of completion from 2020 to 2028.

There was talk on google about prices up to $138 depending upon the GB download. There were comments about Telstra's $29.95 monthly fee which allowed 5GB per month. There next plan was for 200GB at $90 per month.

Further comments were made about the connection to a building as the NBN passed by. If your said "yes" at the time, the line would be laid to the building free and if you said "no" then it may cost you later. If one did say yes, then I am unsure whether that commitment was binding or not.

As I started out to say, I could not provde one link or the other without being biased because no doubt someone would  bound to say,"you picked this one because it suited your argument". 

I just wish this government of ours would come clean with some monthly statistics like:-

Is it on budget.
Is it on time.
What will be the true completion date be.
How many houses are currently elible.
How many have actually been connected as a percentage.
Will we all get 100 GBs.
As NBN is a monopoly what will be the increased cost of usage year after year.
How long will it take to recoup the installation outlay.
What will happen to NBN with a change of Government.
If and when NBN is sold off, will the government recover the full cost or will they accept a price much less.

Lots of answers required.


----------



## noco

noco said:


> Well since all the posts of today have argued about the headlines in the Townsville Daily Bulletin, I decided to do some research thorugh Google and I became more confused than ever before. I was hoping to come up with a link which related to the number connected to the NBN and the current cost of installation and whether it was on budget and time.
> 
> One economist was adamant the final cost would be $80 billion while others were more conservative down to $8 billion over buget. I could not find acurate figures on the number of houses eligible for connection and the number actually connected as a percentage.
> 
> The confusion continues with the final date of completion from 2020 to 2028.
> 
> There was talk on google about prices up to $138 depending upon the GB download. There were comments about Telstra's $29.95 monthly fee which allowed 5GB per month. There next plan was for 200GB at $90 per month.
> 
> Further comments were made about the connection to a building as the NBN passed by. If your said "yes" at the time, the line would be laid to the building free and if you said "no" then it may cost you later. If one did say yes, then I am unsure whether that commitment was binding or not.
> 
> As I started out to say, I could not provde one link or the other without being biased because no doubt someone would  bound to say,"you picked this one because it suited your argument".
> 
> I just wish this government of ours would come clean with some monthly statistics like:-
> 
> Is it on budget.
> Is it on time.
> What will be the true completion date be.
> How many houses are currently elible.
> How many have actually been connected as a percentage.
> Will we all get 100 GBs.
> As NBN is a monopoly what will be the increased cost of usage year after year.
> How long will it take to recoup the installation outlay.
> What will happen to NBN with a change of Government.
> If and when NBN is sold off, will the government recover the full cost or will they accept a price much less.
> 
> Lots of answers required.




Herewith an update from the Townsville Daily Bulletin.

http://www.townsvillebulletin.com.au/article/2012/10/15/367828_news.html


----------



## NBNMyths

noco said:


> Well since all the posts of today have argued about the headlines in the Townsville Daily Bulletin, I decided to do some research thorugh Google and I became more confused than ever before. I was hoping to come up with a link which related to the number connected to the NBN and the current cost of installation and whether it was on budget and time....
> ...
> 
> Lots of answers required.





Some of your questions are not for the Govt to answer. Others have already been answered many times.

This is a 10-year infrastructure project. Nobody can say with *absolute certainty* what the final cost will be, or how long it will take. I challenge you to find any 10-odd year project, public or private, which has cost exactly what was forcast at the time of commencement, or taken exactly the time forecast. All the Govt can do is provide running estimates of these things based on information known at the time, which is what they have done. 

There is (of course) plenty of speculation from others people about what the final cost will be and how long it will take. If you choose to believe that speculation rather than the official Govt line, then it's entirely up to you. But you can't attack the Govt for failing to provide the information, because they have done so. You just choose not to believe it. There is no confusion in the officially provided information.



> Is it on budget.
> Is it on time.
> What will be the true completion date be.



These questions are regularly answered in the lower house NBN committee, in Senate Estimates and in the NBN Co corporate plans. Last month the latest Corp plan was released which increased the budget from $36.9bn to $39bn. The original budget at announcement in 2009 was $43bn. 

The completion date was pushed back 6 months from December 2020 to June 2021.

Additionally to the above, NBN Co make a yearly announcement of the rough rollout plan for the next 3 years, and a firm plan for the next 12 months.



> How many houses are currently elible.



Again, this is regularly announced. In the case of the fibre footprint, it was 18,200 until recently when another 5,000 were added. If you want to know where it's available and underway, simply visit the NBN co rollout map on their website: http://www.nbnco.com.au/rollout/rollout-map.html



> How many have actually been connected as a percentage.



This is announced in Senate Estimates and the lower house NBN committee at every hearing. On average, it is currently about 30% across all the brownfield NBN sites. This is well above expectations at this stage (about 11%). In perspective, the takeup of ADSL was 3% after 18 months and the takeup of Optus cable is ~20% after 12 years.

However, since the copper network will be switched off 18 months after the NBN fibre rolls through, it's a rather moot figure.



> Will we all get 100 GBs.



NBN Co do not charge by volume, they charge by speed. They are a wholesaler who charge ISPs a flat wholesale charge per connection based on the speed of that connection. They also charge ISPs a aggregation fee based on the total speed they want at each "Point of interconnect", and a flat fee to connect to each POI. The costs are detailed in the NBN Corp plan, and concisely explained here: http://www.tektel.com.au/TekTel Report - NBN Pricing Explained.pdf

From the publicly-available costs from NBN Co, the ISP must add their own costs (Installing the physical connections to the NBN, providing their national and international connectivity and their own operating costs) to decide on what their retail pricing and options will be.

The Govt has absolutely no say on what the retail pricing will be, or what monthly volume the ISPs include. They therefore cannot provide that information any more than Telstra can provide it for the copper network.



> As NBN is a monopoly what will be the increased cost of usage year after year.



This has been answered many times. The NBN pricing is regulated by the ACCC. They are not permitted to increase their pricing at all for the first 5 years. After that, they are permitted to increase their pricing by a _maximum_ of 50%xCPI in any one year for the next 25 years. After that, the ACCC SAU will have to be renegotiated. Additionally, they are not permitted to earn a profit of more than "bond rate+3.5%". If they do, they must lower their prices.



> How long will it take to recoup the installation outlay.



The corporate plan predicts that the capital cost (inc interest) will be repaid by 2034.



> What will happen to NBN with a change of Government.



That's not a question the Govt can answer. Ask Tony Abbott.



> If and when NBN is sold off, will the government recover the full cost or will they accept a price much less.



Under NBN legislation, the NBN is not permitted to be sold off until it is completed and the sale is reviewed by the parliament. The price accepted and method of sale is a decision for the Govt of the day, and can not be answered now.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> The corporate plan predicts that the capital cost (inc interest) will be repaid by 2034.



The big question is their ability to deliver on the corporate plan.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> The big question is their ability to deliver on the corporate plan.




Certainly, it's your right to question that ability and as time goes on the question will be answered. 

I don't think at this stage there is any reason to think they won't deliver, based on:

Revenue side:
The takeup of high-end plans is well above forecast, meaning ARPU is ahead of expectations.
The Telstra and Optus migration deals are done, meaning takeup rate is essentially guaranteed.

Costs side:
Almost all of the wireless and sat portions have now been contracted, and are on budget.
Brownfield rollouts have been contracted on budget for the next 2 years, with a 2 year option.


----------



## DB008

Bugger me, some randoms have been uploading speed test screen shots from their '4G Mobiles' on the net....most are probably iPhone 5's.

Anyways, have a look at the speed some of them are getting...


----------



## paulyy

I think they are off 100mbit cable not opt us 4g. Download way too high and upload is way too low.


----------



## DB008

paulyy said:


> I think they are off 100mbit cable not opt us 4g. Download way too high and upload is way too low.




I'm getting these results from Whirlpool. You know, where Senator Conroy and his F.U.D. supporters are from...


----------



## DB008

paulyy said:


> I think they are off 100mbit cable not opt us 4g. Download way too high and upload is way too low.




Here is another one.







WTF...


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> The Telstra and Optus migration deals are done, meaning takeup rate is essentially guaranteed.




That is the bit that gets up my nose. You either take the NBN or we rip out your phone system anyway.
That may sit well with the younger generation that want bling speed internet and who cares if a lot don't want it.
Also who gives a rats what it costs, this is about ideology and ego's.
It will be interesting when the Y generation are asked to pay for something they aren't interested in. 
The government cant balance a budget but are still bankrolling this, I hope we can afford it. The up coming mini budget would indicate otherwise.


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> I'm getting these results from Whirlpool. You know, where Senator Conroy and his F.U.D. supporters are from...




I'm with Pauly, and for the same reason. There's too much difference between upload and download speeds. Those tests are most likely Optus cable, which offers a theoretical 100/2 speed.


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> Here is another one.




Now that is more typical of what 4G will get you. 3Mbps up and 3 down. Actually an extremely poor result when you consider how low the contention on 4G is currently (especially at 11pm!), plus the high signal strength and low latency which indicates the user is close to the tower. Imagine what will happen with a few million more connections.



> WTF...




...and that's the high end of what you'll get until the networks start to get a decent number of subscribers and the speed plummets, as is the case with all wireless systems.

4G/LTE currently has a theoretical maximum of 150Mbps (shared per cell), so from the above test we can assume that the user was the only person using that cell at the time of the test. Try it agin in a CBD at 10am, and the result will be closer to the first pic....


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> That is the bit that gets up my nose. You either take the NBN or we rip out your phone system anyway.
> That may sit well with the younger generation that want bling speed internet and who cares if a lot don't want it.
> Also who gives a rats what it costs, this is about ideology and ego's.
> It will be interesting when the Y generation are asked to pay for something they aren't interested in.




Your point would only be valid if the new network you were being "forced" on to cost more to use than the old network that's being turned off. But it doesn't. For an equivalent service, it actually costs less. Particularly for users at the low end, who are able to save 30% on what they pay now.

In the case of people outside the metro areas, the NBN costs much less. For the same price as I pay now for a phone+ADSL with 200GB at 13Mbps, I could get 1000GB at 100Mbps on the NBN. Such is the situation for people at the 4,500 telephone exchanges without access to the competitive ADSL networks enjoyed by those connected to the 500 city exchanges.

It makes absolutely no sense to keep the copper active once you install the fibre. It would be like keeping the rusty old iron water pipes going after new plastic ones were laid.


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> Bugger me, some randoms have been uploading speed test screen shots from their '4G Mobiles' on the net....most are probably iPhone 5's.
> 
> Anyways, have a look at the speed some of them are getting...






DB008 said:


> I'm getting these results from Whirlpool. You know, where Senator Conroy and his F.U.D. supporters are from...




Further to my post asserting that these are Optus cable rather than 4G results..... According to Optus they don't have a 4G network in Brisbane yet, making this result rather unlikely, wouldn't you say? 
https://www.optus.com.au/shop/networkcoverage/4G/WhereIs4G?sid=con:mob:net:hme:4g:btn::whereis


----------



## drsmith

*Iinet price comparison*

NBN: 20gig+20gig 12/1mbps + VOIP, $59.90 per month.

http://www.iinet.net.au/nbn/nbn-plan-residential.html

Naked DSL: 100gig (includes VOIP), $59.95 per month.

http://www.iinet.net.au/internet/broadband/naked-dsl/

At this end of the market, the NBN is clearly less value.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> *Iinet price comparison*
> 
> NBN: 20gig+20gig 12/1mbps + VOIP, $59.90 per month.
> 
> http://www.iinet.net.au/nbn/nbn-plan-residential.html
> 
> Naked DSL: 100gig (includes VOIP), $59.95 per month.
> 
> http://www.iinet.net.au/internet/broadband/naked-dsl/
> 
> At this end of the market, the NBN is clearly less value.




Firstly, iiNet naked DSL is only available to a small portion of the population in metro areas (ie: at ~350 of the 5,000 nationwide telephone exchanges with iiNet DSLAMs installed).


Secondly, iiNet don't offer a 100GB NBN plan making a direct comparison difficult. They do offer a 200GB plan on both naked and NBN though:

NBN: 100gig+100gig 12/1mbps w/ VOIP, $69.90 per month.

Naked DSL: 200gig (includes VOIP), $69.95 per month.

*...and at the high end, there's absolutely no comparison:*

NBN: 500gig+500gig 12/1mbps w/ VOIP, $89.90 per month.
NBN: 500gig+500gig *25/5*mbps w/ VOIP, $94.90 per month.
NBN: 500gig+500gig *50/20*mbps w/ VOIP, $104.90 per month.
NBN: 500gig+500gig *100/40*mbps w/ VOIP, $109.90 per month.

Naked DSL: 600gig (includes VOIP), *$119.95* per month.



*If you're concerned about the entry level, then check Exetel's NBN offerings:*
http://www.exetel.com.au/residential-fibre-pricing-mainland.php

- 50GB at 12/1 (includes VoIP) for $35.00 per month.
_Let's see you find any nationwide phone+broadband plan as cheap as that on the copper network....
_​
- 100GB at *25/5* (includes VoIP) for $50.00 per month.
_Downloads *3x faster* than average ADSL2 / 20% faster than max theoretical ADSL2 and uploads *5x faster* than max ADSL2, all for *$10 less* per month than iiNet's cheap naked DSL, let alone what people pay today on copper through Telstra._​
All NBN pricing is the same at any NBN location nationwide, whether it be rural, regional or metro.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Firstly, iiNet naked DSL is only available to a small portion of the population in metro areas (ie: at ~350 of the 5,000 nationwide telephone exchanges with iiNet DSLAMs installed).



That doesn't change the fact that it's better value for money than the NBN.



NBNMyths said:


> Secondly, iiNet don't offer a 100GB NBN plan making a direct comparison difficult.



Nonsense.

The comparison above is between 40gig/month (with a restriction) and 100gig/month for essentially the same monthly price.


----------



## DB008

NBNMyths said:


> Further to my post asserting that these are Optus cable rather than 4G results..... According to Optus they don't have a 4G network in Brisbane yet, making this result rather unlikely, wouldn't you say?
> https://www.optus.com.au/shop/networkcoverage/4G/WhereIs4G?sid=con:mob:net:hme:4g:btn::whereis





Courtesy of your mates over on Whirlpool.



> Proof of Optus 4G availability in Bris
> 
> Wednesday afternoon I was checking my phone at the Stock Exchange hotel in Brisbane CBD.
> 
> Inexplicably, the LTE icon was showing in place of the 3G icon, despite 4G not currently being offered by Optus in Brisbane. See the status bar in the attached photo.
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/2BSIt
> 
> I ran a speedtest then and there, and had speeds returned up to 43Mb/s download – a 4G equivalent. I ran two subsequent tests in the following minutes with similar results. Results of the tests are in the first photo attached.
> 
> After a moment I switched my phone off, and back on again. 3G icon and service was restored. I ran two more tests with more typical 3G speeds. These are shown in the attached photo. Once home I ran a wifi test as well, which still fell short of the mobile result earlier that evening.
> 
> Is this proof that 4G rollout in Brisbane CBD is well progressed? Could it have been activated for testing over a short period? I'm at a loss to explain otherwise how such speeds could have been achieved, and seeing the LTE icon means the iPhone was understanding it was connected to a 4G data network as well.




Picture from above quote;


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> That doesn't change the fact that it's better value for money than the NBN.




And it doesn't change the fact that its not widely available, even in exchanges where iiNet has DSLAMs because many of those DSLAMs are at capacity anyway.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> And it doesn't change the fact that its not widely available, even in exchanges where iiNet has DSLAMs because many of those DSLAMs are at capacity anyway.



Where's the choice for those who get better value for money from their existing service, but who will have to move to the NBN as it is rolled out ?


----------



## Smurf1976

How much use is all this speed in the real world?

In 1996 I opened an internet account with a then local company. I had a fancy new 28.8K modem which actually connected at about 21K most of the time. Slow but it worked, and it was all a bit of a novelty anyway.

Sometime later I got the 56K modem, which typically connected at about 45K in actual use. It was noticeably faster.

Then I went to broadband at 256K. Another very noticeable improvement.

Then iiNet upgraded this to 1.5M of their own accord. A minor benefit, but really only for watching You Tube videos etc.

Then they put me on ADSL2+. I've checked the speed, and it tests at 3.35M, but I have not noticed any practical benefit from the higher speed. None whatsoever. Zero. Zip. 

A check of iiNet's NBN info finds that the speed will be 12, 25, 50 or 100M depending on which plan I sign up for. I'll pick the cheapest, for the simple reason that if there has been no benefit in going from ADSL1 to ADSL2+ then there is unlikely to be any benefit in a further increase in connection speed. 

I must say that the way internet access is sold is somewhat strange. 

Imagine if you signed up to be able to use trains for $100 a month including 40 peak trips with a requirement to get off at each station and re-board the next train for any excess trips?  

Or if you signed up for 63A of electricity with 450 kWh / month peak and 350 kWh / month off-peak usage, with any excess usage resulting in the lights being limited to one at a time and the hot water cut back to luke warm?

Why don't we just pay for "internet" at the full available speed and then be charged for actual usage? Maybe I've missed something, but other utilities (electricity, gas etc) gave up on the idea of capacity charging for small customers long ago since, with the distributed nature of it all, it ends up ineffective as a means of managing peak demand anyway.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> Where's the choice for those who get better value for money from their existing service, but who will have to move to the NBN as it is rolled out ?




Choice?

Are you kidding?



Do you choose what street you drive on to get home?



Smurf1976 said:


> How much use is all this speed in the real world?
> 
> In 1996 I opened an internet account with a then local company. I had a fancy new 28.8K modem which actually connected at about 21K most of the time. Slow but it worked, and it was all a bit of a novelty anyway.
> 
> Sometime later I got the 56K modem, which typically connected at about 45K in actual use. It was noticeably faster.
> 
> Then I went to broadband at 256K. Another very noticeable improvement.
> 
> Then iiNet upgraded this to 1.5M of their own accord. A minor benefit, but really only for watching You Tube videos etc.
> 
> Then they put me on ADSL2+. I've checked the speed, and it tests at 3.35M, but I have not noticed any practical benefit from the higher speed. None whatsoever. Zero. Zip.




You obviously don't download anything or play games...the difference between 256K and ADSL2+  is night and day.

I just downloaded a little under 2 hours of quality TV programming in a little under 75 minutes, with 256K that would of taken 2 or 3 hours at least...i see the difference everyday.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> Do you choose what street you drive on to get home?



One paved in bitumen, not gold.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> One paved in bitumen, not gold.




Well now your going to get your telephony and internet via Fibre... aren't you lucky.


----------



## Smurf1976

So_Cynical said:


> I just downloaded a little under 2 hours of quality TV programming in a little under 75 minutes, with 256K that would of taken 2 or 3 hours at least...i see the difference everyday.



Unless I'm putting it onto some other device, I struggle to see the benefit in downloading 120 minutes of TV in anything under 120 minutes. If it downloads at least as fast as I can watch it, what's the actual benefit in downloading it more quickly?


----------



## So_Cynical

Smurf1976 said:


> Unless I'm putting it onto some other device, I struggle to see the benefit in downloading 120 minutes of TV in anything under 120 minutes. If it downloads at least as fast as I can watch it, what's the actual benefit in downloading it more quickly?




A bit like arguing, why have cars that can go faster than the speed limit...or why have 4 dinner plates when you only need one for dinner, why 2 phones when you can only use one at a time, or 6 pairs of socks...i could go on.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> That doesn't change the fact that it's better value for money than the NBN.
> 
> 
> Nonsense.
> 
> The comparison above is between 40gig/month (with a restriction) and 100gig/month for essentially the same monthly price.




So iiNet have 12 NBN plans. 11 out of 12 offer the same or better value than iiNet's own naked DSL plans. Yet the only one you're interested in is the single DSL plan that offers better value than the cheapest NBN plan? 

I think they have a* term for that....*



drsmith said:


> Where's the choice for those who get better value for money from their existing service, but who will have to move to the NBN as it is rolled out ?




There's no shortage of choice at all.

If you do happen to be part of the perhaps 0.1% of Australians using iiNet's cheapest naked DSL plan, and are concerned about being forced to pay $10 more per month for double the data volume, then you could always switch to another provider such as the Exetel plan I listed previously. Let me compare the iiNet naked DSL plan with the equivalent Exetel NBN plan, and you can tell us which is better value:

*iiNet Naked DSL: *100gig (DL and UL) with VoIP at max. 20/1Mbps, *$59.95 per month.

**Exetel NBN: *100gig (Uploads not counted) with VoIP, at 25/5Mbps, *$50.00 per month.*

_So Exetel's NBN plan gives unlimited upload volume, gives download speeds at least 25% faster (but probably over 100% faster) and upload speeds 500% faster. *All for $10 less per month.* _

Spin away....


----------



## white_goodman

take your agenda elsewhere, can Joe moderate posters pushing their agendas and only allow people to post who actually contribute to this forum?


----------



## dutchie

white_goodman said:


> take your agenda elsewhere, can Joe moderate posters pushing their agendas and only allow people to post who actually contribute to this forum?




I don't know who your talking about but..

Your kidding aren't you.

Freedom of speech????


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> Bugger me, some randoms have been uploading speed test screen shots from their '4G Mobiles' on the net....most are probably iPhone 5's.
> 
> Anyways, have a look at the speed some of them are getting...






NBNMyths said:


> Further to my post asserting that these are Optus cable rather than 4G results..... According to Optus they don't have a 4G network in Brisbane yet, making this result rather unlikely, wouldn't you say?
> https://www.optus.com.au/shop/networkcoverage/4G/WhereIs4G?sid=con:mob:net:hme:4g:btn::whereis






DB008 said:


> Courtesy of your mates over on Whirlpool.
> 
> 
> 
> Picture from above quote;




Let's assume for a moment that it's correct that Optus are currently testing their 4G in Brissy. All that does is reinforce the point about how impractical 4G is as a replacement for the fixed line. ie: Despite there being very, very few Optus 4G users in Brissy, the "150Mbps" network is only delivering 40Mbps. As I wrote previously, imagine what they'l get with a few thousand trying to share that 150Mbps! Such limitations are why there isn;t a single country or Telco in the World proposing to replace their urban fixed networks with wireless.

That aside, the original 96Mbps speedtest is still clearly not 4G. It's almost a technical impossibility. It's providing double the download speed of the 4G results, yet only 1/40th of the upload speed. It's also providing an almost impossibly low latency (ping) time of 16ms, when all the others are >30ms. Look at every other purported 4G speedtest you've posted, and none match the combination of high download/low upload/fast ping.

Finally, what has it got to do with the NBN anyway?


----------



## white_goodman

dutchie said:


> I don't know who your talking about but..
> 
> Your kidding aren't you.
> 
> Freedom of speech????




its a private forum, so freedom of speech CAN be thrown out the window, im talking bout people such as NBNMYTHS, who only come here to post on one thread, push a clear agenda for who knows why, its just murks the discussion. Similar to how on property forums spruikers arent allowed to post selling their respective 'products'.. just a thought.


----------



## Bill M

white_goodman said:


> its a private forum, so freedom of speech CAN be thrown out the window, im talking bout people such as NBNMYTHS, who only come here to post on one thread, push a clear agenda for who knows why, its just murks the discussion. Similar to how on property forums spruikers arent allowed to post selling their respective 'products'.. just a thought.




I find NBNMyths posts right on target. He gives you all the technical information, links, info on the rollout, costs of plans and just about anything to do with the NBN. His comments are very informative and welcome to those (like me) who don't know that much about where we are with the NBN rollout. I welcome his comments far more than those that have political agendas to push, I have no interest in politics and I say a big thank you for all the time and effort NBNMyths puts into this thread.


----------



## white_goodman

Bill M said:


> I find NBNMyths posts right on target. He gives you all the technical information, links, info on the rollout, costs of plans and just about anything to do with the NBN. His comments are very informative and welcome to those (like me) who don't know that much about where we are with the NBN rollout. I welcome his comments far more than those that have political agendas to push, I have no interest in politics and I say a big thank you for all the time and effort NBNMyths puts into this thread.




dont confuse me as being against what hes saying, im in a similar boat to you although i dont agree on everything he says. My point is where do we draw the line, if I had a brokerage business would you want me on here talking about that trying to get support, no matter how factual or false the things i was saying?


----------



## dutchie

white_goodman said:


> its a private forum, so freedom of speech CAN be thrown out the window, im talking bout people such as NBNMYTHS, who only come here to post on one thread, push a clear agenda for who knows why, its just murks the discussion. Similar to how on property forums spruikers arent allowed to post selling their respective 'products'.. just a thought.




White, would it not be better to have freedom of speech all the time, everywhere? 
Although I don't agree with the NBN I must concede that NBNMYTHS has been consistent with his praise of it and one must also concede he has at times provided positive and thought provoking material to the debate.
As far as spruiking is concerned he is the least of ASF worries.
In the end if you find his posts offensive then you can always put him on ignore. I am sure there are people here who are interested in what he has to contribute.

(Irrespective of NBNMYTHS postings I still think the NBN is an expensive, over the top, solution.)


----------



## white_goodman

I agree with everything you said Dutchie, just alerting to a possible slippery slope. Look at what happened over at 'propertyinvesting' forum, it got invaded by spruikers and now the forum is useless.


----------



## dutchie

white_goodman said:


> I agree with everything you said Dutchie, just alerting to a possible slippery slope. Look at what happened over at 'propertyinvesting' forum, it got invaded by spruikers and now the forum is useless.




I appreciate your concern.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Spin away....



The point is that there are examples of ISP's offering better value from their ADSL plans than from their NBN plans. That's not spin, that's fact.

One can pick and chose between ISP's as you suggest, but that's not the point I've raised.


----------



## NBNMyths

white_goodman said:


> dont confuse me as being against what hes saying, im in a similar boat to you although i dont agree on everything he says. My point is where do we draw the line, if I had a brokerage business would you want me on here talking about that trying to get support, no matter how factual or false the things i was saying?




Except I don't work for or have any connection to the NBN or anyone associated with it.


----------



## prawn_86

From a moderators perspective there is nothing long with NBNMyths posts to me. It's obvious it is a cuase he is passioante about, however he never directly directs people to his blog etc and it promotes discussion amongst the community.

Obviously it would be nice if he also commented in technology stock threads where he feels the NBN may have some form of impact in order to promote stock discussion also.


----------



## dutchie

prawn_86 said:


> From a moderators perspective there is nothing long with NBNMyths posts to me. It's obvious it is a cuase he is passioante about, however he never directly directs people to his blog etc and it promotes discussion amongst the community.
> 
> Obviously it would be nice if he also commented in technology stock threads where he feels the NBN may have some form of impact in order to promote stock discussion also.






Well he's never short the NBN.


----------



## NBNMyths

prawn_86 said:


> From a moderators perspective there is nothing long with NBNMyths posts to me. It's obvious it is a cuase he is passioante about, however he never directly directs people to his blog etc and it promotes discussion amongst the community.
> 
> Obviously it would be nice if he also commented in technology stock threads where he feels the NBN may have some form of impact in order to promote stock discussion also.




As much as I'd like to comment on stocks, the only shares I've ever owned were those received in the NRMA demutualisation, and I sold them soon after. I don't know enough about share trading, or even tech companies, to make an informed comment!

I have always been an Apple groupie though, and regret to this day ignoring the advice of my inner geek which told me to buy some Apple shares when they were US$7.00 back in the 90s.....


----------



## So_Cynical

white_goodman said:


> take your agenda elsewhere, can Joe moderate posters pushing their agendas and only allow people to post who actually contribute to this forum?




Oh take it easy on drsmith and Trawler, everyone Knows they have an agenda and a barrow to push, but really they do know harm...just a couple of overly conservative spruikers with arguments as wafer thin as a Noalition policy.


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> Oh take it easy on drsmith and Trawler, everyone Knows they have an agenda and a barrow to push, but really they do know harm...just a couple of overly conservative spruikers with arguments as wafer thin as a Noalition policy.




Hang on, that's a bit rough, if you look back through the posts I think you will find I was the first one to thank Myths for his informative posts.
Secondly, my barrow and I think drsmiths also, is the fact we have the internet and we're happy with it.
However we have to fork out for a new internet, that we don't require.
So what advantage is in this for me? none

What disadvantage is in this for me:
1. It is going to cost me more in direct and indirect taxes, to pay for its deployment.

2. There are things that currently are a one of cost, that will become an ongoing and increasing cost. eg free to  air t.v and commercial radio. At the moment I buy a t.v and an aerial, bingo you get entertainment.
The free to air stations would be stupid not to morph into cable t.v providers. Then they can charge the consumer rather than rely on advertising revenue. I am having to pay to give them the avenue to charge me 

3. There is an arguement for commerce and industry to have the NBN, also there are individuals out there that feel they need it. Well why shouldn't they pay for it? 
Why should I have to pay for it. It is a bit like the pink batt fiasco, I payed to put insulation into my roof and my daughters roof, why then did I have to subsidise tight **** landlords to put it in their rooves.

Your probably right, it is a waffer thin arguement, peoples right to choice allways is.


----------



## Smurf1976

So_Cynical said:


> A bit like arguing, why have cars that can go faster than the speed limit...or why have 4 dinner plates when you only need one for dinner, why 2 phones when you can only use one at a time, or 6 pairs of socks...i could go on.



Having multiple dinner plates or pairs of socks serves an actual purpose. It avoids having to constantly wash and re-use the same plate or socks.

Having 2 phones also serves a purpose. I can put them in reasonably convenient locations (assuming we're talking about fixed phones not mobile).

A better analogy would be hiring a semi trailer (and driver) in order to transport a single pallet of goods that could easily fit on a 1 tonne ute. There is no advantage in the larger vehicle, unless you consider using a larger vehicle to be an advantage in itself. Either way you still only move the one pallet, but the semi will cost far more than the ute in order to do so.

I could buy a full size farm tractor with mowing attachment and use it to mow a bit of grass it in the backyard if I really wanted to. It's a ridiculously over the top, but it's certainly possible.


----------



## drsmith

sptrawler said:


> Hang on, that's a bit rough, if you look back through the posts I think you will find I was the first one to thank Myths for his informative posts.




If he looked back through the posts, he'd find more than that.



white_goodman said:


> its a private forum, so freedom of speech CAN be thrown out the window, im talking bout people such as NBNMYTHS, who only come here to post on one thread, push a clear agenda for who knows why, its just murks the discussion. Similar to how on property forums spruikers arent allowed to post selling their respective 'products'.. just a thought.


----------



## DB008

Meet The CEO highlights with Mike Quigley, CEO, NBN Co

http://tv.unsw.edu.au/video/meet-the-ceo-highlights-with-mike-quigley-ceo-nbn-co1

(6 months old)

What do you guys think?


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> Meet The CEO highlights with Mike Quigley, CEO, NBN Co
> 
> http://tv.unsw.edu.au/video/meet-the-ceo-highlights-with-mike-quigley-ceo-nbn-co1
> 
> (6 months old)
> 
> What do you guys think?




Thanks for posting. I hadn't seen that interview, and it just reinforces my opinion of the bloke.


----------



## dutchie

NBN's commercial viability is a joke


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...bility-is-a-joke/story-e6frgd0x-1226506971773


----------



## noco

dutchie said:


> NBN's commercial viability is a joke
> 
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...bility-is-a-joke/story-e6frgd0x-1226506971773




Yes it was written by Kevin Morgan of the Australian.

Morgan was the ACTU member fo ALP leader Kim Beasley's advisory committee on telcommunications.

The whole set up has been a joke from day one.


----------



## NBNMyths

dutchie said:


> NBN's commercial viability is a joke
> 
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...bility-is-a-joke/story-e6frgd0x-1226506971773






noco said:


> Yes it was written by Kevin Morgan of the Australian.
> 
> Morgan was the ACTU member fo ALP leader Kim Beasley's advisory committee on telcommunications.
> 
> The whole set up has been a joke from day one.




Ahh yes, Kevin Morgan.

A man with no known qualifications in communications who describes himself as a "communications consultant", but who has no public resumÃ©, and no records or evidence that he has ever worked in the role he attributes to himself. Go ahead, look him up!

In fact, if you care to look, you'll see his *only* public work is dissing the NBN for News Ltd publications!

Perhaps he's embarrassed that the sale of Telstra as a vertical monopoly turned out to be an unmitigated disaster for consumers, shareholders and the country.

In the case of the quoted article, it falls apart like a house of cards as soon as you see that the entire article is based around a vastly incorrect figure. He claims that the NBN won't be viable because it will return "7%, which is only slightly more than 1 per cent above the long-term government bond rate".

What utter BS! Maybe Kevin should check some financial sites to see what the bond rate is. Me thinks big Kev has been to the same fact-checking school as Alan Jones.

Other figures and statements in the article are similarly rubbish.


----------



## drsmith

> Taxpayers don’t really have anything to do with NBN funding. It is users of the network who will pay to build it, whether they are taxpayers or not.






> The $27.5bn Government component of the NBN is funded by debt, through the issuing of Australian Government Bonds.




That debt is, and remains a taxpayer liability until it is repaid from returns from the project.

http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/how-are-we-paying-for-it/


----------



## Smurf1976

NBNMyths said:


> In the case of the quoted article, it falls apart like a house of cards as soon as you see that the entire article is based around a vastly incorrect figure. He claims that the NBN won't be viable because it will return "7%, which is only slightly more than 1 per cent above the long-term government bond rate".



I would argue that a public service shouldn't "return" anything above actual costs.

The notion that everything from roads to water has to make a "profit" is enriching a few whilst slowly but surely strangling everyone from consumers to manufacturers in the process. I'd much rather go back to actual public services as such, where the rates charged cover the actual costs and no more.


----------



## IFocus

drsmith said:


> That debt is, and remains a taxpayer liability until it is repaid from returns from the project.
> 
> http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/how-are-we-paying-for-it/





Just like any other infrastructure project of size, even if only 1/2 the expect return happens its small change for the replacement of the Telstra monopoly of which Costello and Howard are continually praised here for their brilliance in making surplus's by flogging the pup to everyday Mum/ Dad punters.


----------



## prawn_86

Smurf1976 said:


> I would argue that a public service shouldn't "return" anything above actual costs.
> 
> The notion that everything from roads to water has to make a "profit" is enriching a few whilst slowly but surely strangling everyone from consumers to manufacturers in the process. I'd much rather go back to actual public services as such, where the rates charged cover the actual costs and no more.




Hear hear. What do my taxes actually pay for these days? Roads, electricity, water, internet/communications are all privatised. Health is paid for with a seperate (Medicare) levy. Education is paid back through HECS. So where does my tax money go?


----------



## noco

Smurf1976 said:


> I would argue that a public service shouldn't "return" anything above actual costs.
> 
> The notion that everything from roads to water has to make a "profit" is enriching a few whilst slowly but surely strangling everyone from consumers to manufacturers in the process. I'd much rather go back to actual public services as such, where the rates charged cover the actual costs and no more.




Isn't Telstra a public service and pays a dividend of around 9%.


----------



## drsmith

IFocus said:


> Just like any other infrastructure project of size, even if only 1/2 the expect return happens its small change for the replacement of the Telstra monopoly of which Costello and Howard are continually praised here for their brilliance in making surplus's by flogging the pup to everyday Mum/ Dad punters.



In an economic sense, I'm not sure what you are saying.

Are you suggesting that it's more about Telstra than taxpayer money well spent ?


----------



## sptrawler

noco said:


> Isn't Telstra a public service and pays a dividend of around 9%.




No Telstra is no longer a public service and the 9% goes to shareholders.
I think what Smurph was alluding to was, it was much better when it was a public service and any profit was returned to the government.
Then they didn't have to tax you so much, ah the good old days.


----------



## sptrawler

IFocus said:


> Just like any other infrastructure project of size, even if only 1/2 the expect return happens its small change for the replacement of the Telstra monopoly of which Costello and Howard are continually praised here for their brilliance in making surplus's by flogging the pup to everyday Mum/ Dad punters.




Well at least Howard and Costello, got the accounts in surplus and set up the future fund with the proceeds.
Didn't Hawke and Keating float off assetts and still left office $90Billion in debt.


----------



## McLovin

sptrawler said:


> No Telstra is no longer a public service and the 9% goes to shareholders.
> I think what Smurph was alluding to was, it was much better when it was a public service and any profit was returned to the government.
> Then they didn't have to tax you so much, ah the good old days.




Technically, it still is a public service...
http://www.telstra.com.au/abouttelstra/commitments/uso/


----------



## sptrawler

McLovin said:


> Technically, it still is a public service...
> http://www.telstra.com.au/abouttelstra/commitments/uso/




To a degree that is true, but they are payed to provide the service and the other service providers have to chip in.
They technically are not a public service, since the future fund sold down its holding.
They have an obligation, due to the fact they are the only service provider, that has existing equipment throughout Australia.
Once the N.B.N has taken over the backbone infrastructure, one would think the onus would be on the government to take on the service obligation once again. LOL


----------



## DB008

Well, that didn't take long........for Google.

Remember this in July?



> Google Fiber to arrive this fall; $70 for gigabit service





Well, it has, and look at the speeds they are getting, 700Mbps *already*....




> *Google Fiber is live in Kansas City, real-world speeds at 700 Mbps*
> 
> After months of fanfare and anticipation, gigabit home Internet service Google Fiber finally went live on Tuesday in Kansas City. The search giant is offering 1 Gbps speeds for just $70 per month””significantly faster and cheaper than what any traditional American ISPs are offering.
> 
> "We just got it today and I’ve been stuck in front of my laptop for the last few hours," Mike Demarais, founder of Threedee, told Ars. "It’s unbelievable. I’m probably not going to leave the house."
> 
> He lives in a four-bedroom house run by "Homes For Hackers" on Kansas City’s Hanover Heights neighborhood, just on the state border with Missouri. The house has become one of the hubs for the KC Startup Village, an informal group of entrepreneurs who have clustered around homes immediately eligible for Google Fiber.
> 
> Meanwhile, Demarais said that on an Ethernet connection, he’s seen consistent Google Fiber speeds of 600 to 700 Mbps, with Wi-Fi topping out around 200 Mbps. Even at the slower wireless speeds, that’s more than an order of magnitude faster than what most Americans have at home.
> 
> http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/11/google-fiber-is-live-in-kansas-city-real-world-speeds-at-700-mbps/





Google Fibre


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> Well, that didn't take long........for Google.
> 
> 
> Google Fibre




Pretty awesome, huh?

I love this quote:

*"It’s unbelievable. I’m probably not going to leave the house."*


----------



## Julia

This is probably a very ignorant question.  I haven't taken any real interest in the NBN
Is the cabling being placed underground or is it attached or adjacent to electricity wires overhead?
(I'm thinking about how often power is cut in summer storms.)


----------



## drsmith

Julia said:


> This is probably a very ignorant question.  I haven't taken any real interest in the NBN
> Is the cabling being placed underground or is it attached or adjacent to electricity wires overhead?
> (I'm thinking about how often power is cut in summer storms.)



That might depend on whether the existing copper cable is underground or overhead.

In my area, both power and phone lines are overhead. If it ever comes to pass (and that's a BIG if for my area in my opinion), I cant see them cutting a trench through solid rock to lay that blue cable.


----------



## NBNMyths

Julia said:


> This is probably a very ignorant question.  I haven't taken any real interest in the NBN
> Is the cabling being placed underground or is it attached or adjacent to electricity wires overhead?
> (I'm thinking about how often power is cut in summer storms.)






drsmith said:


> That might depend on whether the existing copper cable is underground or overhead.
> 
> In my area, both power and phone lines are overhead. If it ever comes to pass (and that's a BIG if for my area in my opinion), I cant see them cutting a trench through solid rock to lay that blue cable.




About 70% underground.

They have an agreement with Telstra to use existing underground ducts etc and existing poles. So wherever the current phone is underground (and in new estates), the NBN will be under too. But if the current copper is overhead, so will the NBN be.


----------



## Julia

NBNMyths said:


> About 70% underground.



Thank you, NBNMyths
I wonder how that's calculated?  My street has underground but across this town of around 55,000 I'd guess 80% is still overhead.

If we're going to have such a supa dupa new internet connection, maybe it would have been good to have spent even more and put all the power underground to end lengthy power outages.


----------



## DB008

NBNMyths said:


> Pretty awesome, huh?




How come Google can/are rolling out 1Gb/s plans, and max we have on NBN currently is 100mb/s?

Or am l getting my Gb/mbit's stuff mixed up? l'm not a tech-head btw.


----------



## boofhead

DB008 said:


> How come Google can/are rolling out 1Gb/s plans, and max we have on NBN currently is 100mb/s?
> 
> Or am l getting my Gb/mbit's stuff mixed up? l'm not a tech-head btw.




NBN fibre will eventually offer that. The first install areas had NTU upgraded to handle it in Tasmania. Telstra made some noise about not offering plans in Tasmania until the upgrade was done.


----------



## DB008

boofhead said:


> NBN fibre will eventually offer that. The first install areas had NTU upgraded to handle it in Tasmania. Telstra made some noise about not offering plans in Tasmania until the upgrade was done.




But I'm sure that there is NBN available in other areas in Australia, why don't _they_ have 1gb/s _now_?


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> But I'm sure that there is NBN available in other areas in Australia, why don't _they_ have 1gb/s _now_?




Probably because it's really only just hit the volume rollout, and they wanted to get the primary 12, 25, 50 and 100 speeds working properly, both for themselves and the ISPs.

Google's advantage here is that they are controlling the whole thing and only building in one small city, while NBN Co are concurrently building in 200-odd locations across the country, with 121 points of interconnect between themselves and the 40-odd ISPs.

They haven't officially announced when the 250, 500 and 1000Mbps speeds will come on line, although I believe they'll start next year. I wouldn't expect them to be cheap. I hate to think what an ISPs cost will be to serve 1Gbps customers, especially the international links.


----------



## drsmith

Stephen Cnoroy and Malcolm Turnbull slug it out on Lateline.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-27/debate-on-national-broadband-network/4395756

With regard to NBN's rollout schedule, it's worded as planned to commence, at least for the 3 million households by June 30 2015.



> We have released the three year rollout plan for the National Broadband Network with construction planned to commence in over 1500 communities and 3.5 million premises throughout Australia through to 30th June 2015.
> 
> The three year rollout plan includes those areas where the network is active, where construction is currently underway and where construction will commence within the next three years.




From that statement, it's unknown when the 3 million connections will be completed.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/rollout/about-the-rollout.html


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> From that statement, it's unknown when the 3 million connections will be completed.
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/rollout/about-the-rollout.html



Found this in Rollout FAQ's.



> How long will the construction phase take? It is estimated that the average time from construction commencing to NBN services being available is 12 months.




This would suggest those 3 million households will be connected by June 30 2016, if all goes to plan. Stephen Conroy's figure for connections for June 30 2013 would obviously be up to a year later as well, based on the above.


----------



## maffu

Just a quick question about the NBN.

I checked my post code (2031) on the NBN roll out map, and there are no plans to build in the Coogee/Bondi/Randwick area. If it's not in the 3 year plan, does that mean they are not even considering building until after 2015?

This seems strange. Its such a dense area, and very wealthy, from a business perspective it would be the kind of area I would have thought would be most profitable, and best to service first to get positive cash flows generated early. I wonder how they did the cost/benefit analysis for the roll out, and why Kiama would have a better business case than Bondi.


----------



## drsmith

maffu said:


> Its such a dense area, and very wealthy, from a business perspective it would be the kind of area I would have thought would be most profitable, and best to service first to get positive cash flows generated early. I wonder how they did the cost/benefit analysis for the roll out, and why Kiama would have a better business case than Bondi.



I don't think positive cash flow was high on the government's list of objectives, at least in the short term.


----------



## NBNMyths

maffu said:


> Just a quick question about the NBN.
> 
> I checked my post code (2031) on the NBN roll out map, and there are no plans to build in the Coogee/Bondi/Randwick area. If it's not in the 3 year plan, does that mean they are not even considering building until after 2015?
> 
> This seems strange. Its such a dense area, and very wealthy, from a business perspective it would be the kind of area I would have thought would be most profitable, and best to service first to get positive cash flows generated early. I wonder how they did the cost/benefit analysis for the roll out, and why Kiama would have a better business case than Bondi.




The 5 mainland trial sites (eg: Kiama) represent 5 different terrain and housing types and were chosen back in 2009 from a shortlist of similar sites. The "high density" trial site is Brunswick in Victoria.

The rollout plan of the NBN (excluding the trial sites) is based around the locations of the Points Of Interconnect, where the ISPs connect to the NBN and take over the data. These are 121 locations around the country which were decided by the ACCC based on the locations of existing ISP infrastructure. Essentially, if you look at the rollout map and compare it to the ACCC's list, it begins at each POI and fans outwards from them.

The NBN is a nationwide project and also has a focus on improving regional services, so rather than start at just the metro POIs first, they have started at all of them.

Interestingly, the takeup of NBN services has been considerably faster in the more regional trial sites than the metro trial site.


----------



## drsmith

Expectctions vs progress,



> I regarded the NBN as an imperfect solution to these woes. Bring it on, I thought eyeing NBN Co’s map which indicated that my home would be one of the 317,000 homes hooked up the network by now. Yet, more than three years after the NBN was announced, I am still waiting for connection.
> 
> In my neck of the woods; a speck on the map in regional Australia, I was told that the NBN would be available in April this year. Then we were told it would be April 2013. Apparently, there are problems with construction; jurisdictional arguments of one type or another. A quick glance at the NBN map reveals that this revised target date for connection remains stuck in the ether.




And, this from one of the commenters,



> NBN Insider says:
> Tue 04 Dec 12 (12:00pm)
> I’m working on an NBN-related project for a large telecommunications company that shall remain un-named, so let’s call it T.
> 
> I’m seeing first-hand how badly behind schedule the NBN rollout is going. T is continually revising its expected connections downwards, resulting in NBN-related projects being deferred further and further into the future.
> 
> In the meantime, $80 a month on the NBN gets you 5 GB of data at 12 Mbps network speed. For the same price, I’m already getting 120 GB of data at 20 Mbps network speed. So if you already have cable or ADSL2, you will be spending the same amount of money for less data at a slower speed when the NBN disconnects your existing service.
> 
> Also in the meantime, T’s 4G wireless network is running at 40+ Mbps network speed, so guess where T is going to invest some of the $11 billion it’s getting from you and me (via Stephen Conroy) and compete against the NBN.




http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com...an/comments/the_slow_build_of_a_fast_network/


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Expectctions vs progress,
> 
> 
> 
> And, this from one of the commenters,
> 
> 
> 
> http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com...an/comments/the_slow_build_of_a_fast_network/




NBN Co revised their connection targets back in 2011, and are (from all reports) on target to meet those revised targets. They have been saying for quite some time now that they are running ~9 months behind on the fibre rollout due to the delay on the Telstra deal.

As for the "Insider's" comments, I'll just deal with the main bits:



> I’m seeing first-hand how badly behind schedule the NBN rollout is going. T is continually revising its expected connections downwards, resulting in NBN-related projects being deferred further and further into the future.




No, they aren't. NBN Co have only done one revision (in late 2011) and have stood by it ever since, including in their corporate plan released last month.



> In the meantime, $80 a month on the NBN gets you 5 GB of data at 12 Mbps network speed. For the same price, I’m already getting 120 GB of data at 20 Mbps network speed. So if you already have cable or ADSL2, you will be spending the same amount of money for less data at a slower speed when the NBN disconnects your existing service.




The "$80 for 5GB" NBN price is Telstra's bundle for phone+25Mbps NBN, not 12Mbps (Telstra don't even offer the 12Mbps NBN speed, only 25 and 100). And is *exactly* the same price they currently charge for ~20Mbps ADSL2+ and 30Mbps cable, for *exactly* the same 5GB download quota. 

Don't take my word for it, check the Telstra website for yourself.

Additionally, Telstra's NBN pricing is well above all the other alternatives. Who in their right mind would pay Telstra $80 for 5GB when they could pay Exetel $40 for 50GB?

I think the "insider" needs to get out more.




> Also in the meantime, T’s 4G wireless network is running at 40+ Mbps network speed, so guess where T is going to invest some of the $11 billion it’s getting from you and me (via Stephen Conroy) and compete against the NBN.




Telstra's 4G network is not achieving anything like 40Mbps in the real world, once there are a few people connected, and costs a bomb compared to the NBN:

50GB on NBN: $35/month (Exetel)
50GB on 4G: $360/month (Telstra)
50GB on 4G: $674/month (Optus)

With the average user's monthly download now hitting ~20GB/month, and growing at well over 50% every year how on earth is Telstra 4G going to compete with the NBN?


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> As for the "Insider's" comments, I'll just deal with the main bits:



I thought he might have been a long lost cousin, but clearly he's a black sheep.



NBNMyths said:


> NBN Co revised their connection targets back in 2011, and are (from all reports) on target to meet those revised targets. They have been saying for quite some time now that they are running ~9 months behind on the fibre rollout due to the delay on the Telstra deal.



It will be interesting to see what actually happens.

NBN's own documentation clearly states that the three year rollout plan includes those areas where the network is active, where construction is currently underway and where *construction will commence* within the next three years (see earlier post on this page).


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> It will be interesting to see what actually happens.




Some insight ?



> Senior construction sources involved in the NBN say that while the rollout was currently on track, they feared that holidays, potential labour shortages and tardy council approvals would mean the network builder would likely miss its highly publicised target of passing 341,000 premises with fibre optic cabling by June 2013.
> 
> One senior executive from a construction firm involved in the NBN said that, based on the current state of the rollout, NBN Co would fall short of that target by 20,000 to 30,000 premises.
> 
> "The NBN Co is absolutely obsessed with hitting this June 2013 target of passing homes with fibre," the executive said. "But the program is just too tight. Everything has to go right for NBN Co to achieve it, and that could happen, but normally it doesn't. A lot of NBN Co's credibility is riding on hitting those targets and they are threatening blue murder if it doesn't happen."




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-network-service/story-e6frgaif-1226534899142


----------



## dutchie

On schedule/ behind schedule, on budget/blow out in budget  ???

The bottom line.........

*Only one in four taking up National Broadband Network service *

www.theaustralian.com.au/business/i...-network-service/story-e6frgaif-1226534899142


BIG white elephant.


----------



## boofhead

25% takeup is reasonably good for something so new and considering many people have existing contracts. Also many people have been fed confusing information often fuelled by the federal coalition.

What takeup rate for something so relatively new do you consider to be acceptable?


----------



## DB008

drsmith said:


> Some insight ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The NBN Co is absolutely obsessed with hitting this June 2013 target of passing homes with fibre," the executive said. "But the program is just too tight. Everything has to go right for NBN Co to achieve it, and that could happen, but normally it doesn't. A lot of NBN Co's credibility is riding on hitting those targets and they are threatening blue murder if it doesn't happen."
Click to expand...



Sounds like Labor is also using this method for the budget + surplus side of things.


----------



## dutchie

boofhead said:


> What takeup rate for something so relatively new do you consider to be acceptable?




For something that is so good and costing us so much nothing short of 100% is acceptable.

Maybe, just maybe, they should have done some sort of assessment/evaluation/analysis beforehand.


----------



## Calliope

Don't worry. At any minute we will see NBNMyths galloping to the rescue of Quigley and Conroy with another bucket-load of spin.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Don't worry. At any minute we will see NBNMyths galloping to the rescue of Quigley and Conroy with another bucket-load of spin.




Happy to oblige!






dutchie said:


> On schedule/ behind schedule, on budget/blow out in budget  ???
> 
> The bottom line.........
> 
> *Only one in four taking up National Broadband Network service *
> 
> www.theaustralian.com.au/business/i...-network-service/story-e6frgaif-1226534899142
> 
> BIG white elephant.






dutchie said:


> For something that is so good and costing us so much nothing short of 100% is acceptable.





A takeup rate of 25% after 12 months is remarkably high.

As I've written ad-infinitum, the takeup of all new technology is slow in the beginning, no matter how good it is and how much we take it for granted in the not-too-distant future. Telephones, faxes, internet, broadband, mobile phones, computers, iPods etc are all the same. There's even a term to describe it. 

I'm sure you'd all agree that broadband is a staple of modern life.

Yet, the takeup of ADSL 18-months after Telstra completed their nationwide rollout was a paltry 3%.

The takeup of Optus HFC cable is currently only 20% after 10 years, in areas where it's available.


I'm curious, Dutchie, how would you have described ADSL in 2002, knowing only 3% of people had connected? A White Elephant? If you'd been in charge, would you have abandoned it, since it was obviously so unpopular?




> Maybe, just maybe, they should have done some sort of assessment/evaluation/analysis beforehand.




The KPMG implementation study forecast an 11% takeup after 12 months. The financials in the corp plan are based on that. So NBN Co are currently running at more than double their forecast takeup rate.


Sincere apologies if my facts are inconvenient to your preconceptions on the NBN.


----------



## DB008




----------



## dutchie

NBNMyths said:


> Happy to oblige!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A takeup rate of 25% after 12 months is remarkably high.
> 
> As I've written ad-infinitum, the takeup of all new technology is slow in the beginning, no matter how good it is and how much we take it for granted in the not-too-distant future. Telephones, faxes, internet, broadband, mobile phones, computers, iPods etc are all the same. There's even a term to describe it.
> 
> I'm sure you'd all agree that broadband is a staple of modern life.
> 
> Yet, the takeup of ADSL 18-months after Telstra completed their nationwide rollout was a paltry 3%.
> 
> The takeup of Optus HFC cable is currently only 20% after 10 years, in areas where it's available.
> 
> 
> I'm curious, Dutchie, how would you have described ADSL in 2002, knowing only 3% of people had connected? A White Elephant? If you'd been in charge, would you have abandoned it, since it was obviously so unpopular?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The KPMG implementation study forecast an 11% takeup after 12 months. The financials in the corp plan are based on that. So NBN Co are currently running at more than double their forecast takeup rate.
> 
> 
> Sincere apologies if my facts are inconvenient to your preconceptions on the NBN.





Facts are never an inconvenience to me.

Fact: If a study had been made pre 2002 and Australians were asked if they would adopt ADSL if it was available and it was shown that only 3% of people would connect in 18 months, I would say why bother.

Fact: If a study was also made for the NBN similar to the above with same results, I would say why bother.

How many people said they would connect to NBN if it was available before they started???


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Happy to oblige!



What about the rollout schedule ?

The article in The Australian above does suggest it is slipping.


----------



## DB008

Front pages of newspapers - China building NBN. Third of the cost. Not as fast.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> What about the rollout schedule ?
> 
> The article in The Australian above does suggest it is slipping.




No. Actually the article says it's running on time, but an unidentified source says it could *potentially* fall behind (by 20-30,000 out of the 341,000 target).

Tell you what though, if it's only running 5-10% behind then it's hardly a disaster!

Let's wait and see though, shall we?


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> I'm sure you'd all agree that broadband is a staple of modern life.
> 
> Yet, the takeup of ADSL 18-months after Telstra completed their nationwide rollout was a paltry 3%.
> 
> The takeup of Optus HFC cable is currently only 20% after 10 years, in areas where it's available.




The price of ADSL when it was introduced was HIGH and the uses were LOW

The price of NBN is EQUIVALENT and the uses are EQUIVALENT.

So the uptake should be high, as DSLAMS are removed and people are forced to use NBN instead of ADSL..

NBN will get a decent uptake, however, it still does not address the fact that backhaul will be a problem, and that for a household user, there are no current uses for it.

AND that the uses in the future will increase consumption, and decrease local employment.

2 examples of the latter are

1. DVD stores gone
2. Photo processing stores gone  (as the chinese take uploads from australia, PRINT the photos much more cheaply, and POST them to our houses much more cheaply than the current firms can)

I fail to see many small businesses that require better than ADSL2 to function, or any medium to large who do not already have access to internet that is viable.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> No. Actually the article says it's running on time, but an unidentified source says it could *potentially* fall behind (by 20-30,000 out of the 341,000 target).




Again, I'll quote from the article above.



> Senior construction sources involved in the NBN say that while the rollout was currently on track, they feared that holidays, potential labour shortages and tardy council approvals would mean the network builder would likely miss its highly publicised target of passing 341,000 premises with fibre optic cabling by June 2013.
> 
> One senior executive from a construction firm involved in the NBN said that, based on the current state of the rollout, NBN Co would fall short of that target by 20,000 to 30,000 premises.
> 
> "The NBN Co is absolutely obsessed with hitting this June 2013 target of passing homes with fibre," the executive said. "But the program is just too tight. Everything has to go right for NBN Co to achieve it, and that could happen, but normally it doesn't. A lot of NBN Co's credibility is riding on hitting those targets and they are threatening blue murder if it doesn't happen."




The senior executive from a construction firm involved in the NBN (the source which you describe as being unidentified) uses the word _*"would"*_, not "could *potentially*".



NBNMyths said:


> Tell you what though, if it's only running 5-10% behind then it's hardly a disaster!
> 
> Let's wait and see though, shall we?




If it were a publically listed company, I suspect investors would look past the glowing words in the first paragraph and consider more carefully the detail in the following two paragraphs. The resultant share price I suspect would reflect some discount to _*"everything going right"*_.

It's not the rollout schedule equivalent to a profit warning from the company yet, but that will come and like interest rate cuts, there's usually more than one.

That's what we will likely see. The writing is now clearly on the wall if you choose to look.


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> The price of ADSL when it was introduced was HIGH and the uses were LOW
> 
> The price of NBN is EQUIVALENT and the uses are EQUIVALENT.
> 
> So the uptake should be high, as DSLAMS are removed and people are forced to use NBN instead of ADSL..
> 
> NBN will get a decent uptake, however, it still does not address the fact that backhaul will be a problem, and that for a household user, there are no current uses for it.
> 
> AND that the uses in the future will increase consumption, and decrease local employment.
> 
> 2 examples of the latter are
> 
> 1. DVD stores gone
> 2. Photo processing stores gone  (as the chinese take uploads from australia, PRINT the photos much more cheaply, and POST them to our houses much more cheaply than the current firms can)
> 
> I fail to see many small businesses that require better than ADSL2 to function, or any medium to large who do not already have access to internet that is viable.




Yes, NBN takeup rate is essentially irrelevant since the copper will start being deactivated in 18 months.

Yes, for a typical household user today, there is little need for a 100/40 connection, as was the case for ADSL in 2002. However this will inevitably change in the future. It won't be long before cloud storage really takes off for both small business and consumers, and that's where the NBN will really come into its own, offering fast upload and download speeds, compared to FTTN (or even ADSL2) which can provide decent download speeds but pathetic upload speeds.

It's not true that SMEs that already need fast broadband can get it. Or at least get it at a _reasonable price_. It would currently cost me over $5,000 connection, plus over $1000 a month to get a 100/40 connection, while on the NBN I would get a free connection, and a service for $100 a month.

Backhaul is already being improved (Our overseas capacity will be 12x higher in 3 years compared to today, just counting already planned/underway upgrades). There is also a growing amount of local storage/caching making the overseas links less important.

It's a pity that the purchase of overseas content will take away some local jobs, but no matter how our broadband network is improved (ie the NBN or the coalition's FTTN plan), that outcome will be the same.

I don't think standard photo processing will go off shore to any great degree. It's pretty hard to beat Harvey Norman/Big W/K-Mart's 9c prints, especially when you add a few dollars for postage from China!


----------



## Calliope

The Chinese can give NBN a lesson in efficiency.



> IT may be a little slower but China's national broadband network will reach 10 times more households than Labor's rollout at less than one-third the price.
> 
> During the next three years, Beijing plans to replace the existing copper wire network that serves the nation's 150 million households with internet access with a fibre-to-the-home broadband network - the same technology used by Labor's National Broadband Network.
> 
> The plan shares striking similarities with the NBN but is so far costing China's state-owned telcos only $10 billion.
> 
> Labor's NBN will cost $37.4bn, with plans to reach 12.2 million households across the country by 2021.
> 
> Chinese authorities aim for speeds reaching 20 megabits per second in city areas by 2015, and 4Mbps in developing regions.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...the-cost-of-ours/story-e6frgaif-1226535736511


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> The Chinese can give NBN a lesson in efficiency.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...the-cost-of-ours/story-e6frgaif-1226535736511




sarcasm

Wow, who would have thought you could do things in China so cheaply. If only the rest of the World knew about this fact, companies could start offshoring their manufacturing operations there. Oh, hang on.....

/sarcasm



Well, I suppose when you're paying the workers $1 a day, and the equipment is being supplied by the quasi-state owned company, then you're always going to get a bargain!

So should NBN Co start paying their contractors $1/day, or just import workers from China?


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> So should NBN Co start paying their contractors $1/day, or just import workers from China?




Sarcasm.  As a government-biased spin doctor surely you know that when the dead hand of a Labor government and the Conroys and the Quigleys get their bureaucratic hands on a major project, there are bound to be massive cost and time over-runs.

Perhaps you should turn your expertise to whitewashing the Gillard/Wilson/AWU scandals.


----------



## finnsk

My dad has fiber network where he is living with unlimited download and unlimited voip service to landline (Denmark) costing approx. $35.00/month.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Sarcasm.  As a government-biased spin doctor surely you know that when the dead hand of a Labor government and the Conroys and the Quigleys get their bureaucratic hands on a major project, there are bound to be massive cost and time over-runs.
> 
> Perhaps you should turn your expertise to whitewashing the Gillard/Wilson/AWU scandals.




I think you'll find that Mr Quigley is a highly successful and respected businessman in the telecommunications arena. 

I have no interest in Conroy/Gillard/AWU etc. Personally, I'd prefer if we got Kev back.

Although given that the Lib's last two orchestrated witch-hunts (ie utegate and slipper) have turned out to be less than stellar, I'm not holding my breath for this one to come to anything either.


----------



## Aussiejeff

NBNMyths said:


> I think you'll find that Mr Quigley is a highly successful and respected businessman in the telecommunications arena.
> 
> I have no interest in Conroy/Gillard/AWU etc. Personally, I'd prefer if we got Kev back.
> 
> Although given that the Lib's last two orchestrated witch-hunts (ie utegate and slipper) have turned out to be less than stellar, I'm not holding my breath for this one to come to anything either.




You could try holding your breath till the next election.

The future of NBN may become clearer then....


----------



## NBNMyths

Aussiejeff said:


> You could try holding your breath till the next election.
> 
> The future of NBN may become clearer then....





Indeed. Although, the coalition's NBN position has moved considerably over the last few years.

In 2007, they said that Labor's (then) 12Mbps FTTN plan was a waste of money.

In 2009 they said that the new FTTP NBN was a huge waste of money.

In 2010 they didn't have any detailed policy, just a vague outline.

In early 2011 they said they would scrap the NBN and replace it with 12Mbps FTTN (Yes, that's the same system they said was a waste of money in 2007) built by the private sector.

By late 2011, Turnbull was hinting at 40-80Mbps FTTN, mostly by the private sector.


Now, we've got them saying they will continue the fibre NBN rollout until all existing contracts are complete. They will also continue the regional wireless and rural satellite portions of the NBN. Once the existing fibre rollout contracts are complete they'll still use FTTP in new estates but scale back existing areas to FTTN, but continue to have it govt-built by NBN co.

With over 60 countries now doing FTTP, I suspect that by 2016 when the existing NBN contracts are complete, it will be patently obvious (even to Turnbull) that FTTN is well past obsolescence, and if fibre doesn't continue then it will soon be apparent that FTTN is not up to the job.


----------



## moXJO

NBNMyths said:


> Indeed. Although, the coalition's NBN position has moved considerably over the last few years.
> 
> In 2007, they said that Labor's (then) 12Mbps FTTN plan was a waste of money.
> 
> In 2009 they said that the new FTTP NBN was a huge waste of money.
> 
> In 2010 they didn't have any detailed policy, just a vague outline.
> 
> In early 2011 they said they would scrap the NBN and replace it with 12Mbps FTTN (Yes, that's the same system they said was a waste of money in 2007) built by the private sector.
> 
> By late 2011, Turnbull was hinting at 40-80Mbps FTTN, mostly by the private sector.
> 
> 
> Now, we've got them saying they will continue the fibre NBN rollout until all existing contracts are complete. They will also continue the regional wireless and rural satellite portions of the NBN. Once the existing fibre rollout contracts are complete they'll still use FTTP in new estates but scale back existing areas to FTTN, but continue to have it govt-built by NBN co.
> 
> With over 60 countries now doing FTTP, I suspect that by 2016 when the existing NBN contracts are complete, it will be patently obvious (even to Turnbull) that FTTN is well past obsolescence, and if fibre doesn't continue then it will soon be apparent that FTTN is not up to the job.




Even though I think the contracts were a rip off, Libs should be supporting this imo. I just don't have much faith in labor managing this very well.


----------



## NBNMyths

moXJO said:


> Even though I think the contracts were a rip off, .....




On what do you base that assessment?


----------



## moXJO

NBNMyths said:


> On what do you base that assessment?




Some of the conditions relating to the union labor. I'd have to dig up where I saw it in the contract again.


----------



## drsmith

More trouble at the top ?

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...nstruction-chief/story-e6frgaif-1226554691246


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> More trouble at the top ?
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...nstruction-chief/story-e6frgaif-1226554691246




I'd say the external politics has been the killer.

Considering how little occurred with the free market over the Howard years the NBN is a breath of fresh air in terms of infrastructure in Australia.

I don't understand the angst towards it.

If you were offered a brand new car, for no increase in the costs of your currnt car, would you say no?

Basicaly that's what's happening witht he NBN.  You're getting a MASSIVE upgrade to your internet connection, and I'd say with a reasonable level of confidence that you will find you NBN internet connection will be faster and CHEAPER than what you currently get.

Any SME against the NBN have been conned by the LNP.  I work for an ISP and am amazed at what we charge for services.  I would say as NBN is rolled out what we charge will drop by up to 75% depending on the location - the further from the capital city center the bigger the price drop and the far larger increase in bandwidth we'll be able to provide.  Oh the joy of not having to deal with a Telstra that drives me to drink some days!

Now if bloody Howard hadn't sold a vertically integrated tel$ra then we'd probably not be having this conversation!  Then again the ALP started the whole sorry mess by merging Telecom and OTC.  Would have been far smarter to have set up OTC as a direct competitor along with cable and wireless supported optus.  The the whole HCF debacle mightn't have occurred too.  So much for Bullturn's free market.


----------



## matty77

sydboy007 said:


> If you were offered a brand new car, for no increase in the costs of your currnt car, would you say no?




Really its free is it? Wow..

In fact it is costing more, the real scenario would be:

You pay tax to the car company and they use that money to design a new car with something that you don't need but is new, then charge you the same amount as you were paying for your previous car (which was fine by the way)

So yeah its costing us money, you just dont see it as its being paid out of our tax (or national debt) or whatever.

The NBN is a big white elephant, its a pity the average labor supporter is too stupid to see it, and now our kids will be paying for it for years to come..

Oh 4G? its pretty fast..


----------



## sydboy007

matty77 said:


> Really its free is it? Wow..
> 
> In fact it is costing more, the real scenario would be:
> 
> You pay tax to the car company and they use that money to design a new car with something that you don't need but is new, then charge you the same amount as you were paying for your previous car (which was fine by the way)
> 
> So yeah its costing us money, you just dont see it as its being paid out of our tax (or national debt) or whatever.
> 
> The NBN is a big white elephant, its a pity the average labor supporter is too stupid to see it, and now our kids will be paying for it for years to come..
> 
> Oh 4G? its pretty fast..




When did I say free?

As for paying tax, with the rollout ramping up as planned it wont be more than a few years before the NBN is generating the kind of revenue that starts paying of the debt used to start it.

My family down in Kiama are saving over 50% on what they used to pay for far inferior ADSL.

As for business, I can say 100% that waht the NBN will offer is going to save so much money, and improve the competitiveness of any SME who adopt and adapt to the internet age, it will truly be a revolution.

We are currently leasing a very old worn out car.  The copper in some areas is 50+ years old.  We are being offered a brand new car for the same lease payments.  You'd have to be crazy to say no.


----------



## NBNMyths

matty77 said:


> Really its free is it? Wow..
> 
> In fact it is costing more, the real scenario would be:
> 
> You pay tax to the car company and they use that money to design a new car with something that you don't need but is new, then charge you the same amount as you were paying for your previous car (which was fine by the way)
> 
> So yeah its costing us money, you just dont see it as its being paid out of our tax (or national debt) or whatever.
> 
> The NBN is a big white elephant, its a pity the average labor supporter is too stupid to see it, and now our kids will be paying for it for years to come..





What a load of rubbish. White elephant, huh? Were you around in 1909? http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/19571372

The NBN is not being funded from tax revenue, it's being funded from debt (the issue of bonds, to be precise), which will subsequently be repaid from user revenue (not taxation revenue). That's what the usage fees of the NBN are for.

This is exactly the same funding model that was used for the current copper network, and pretty much every other user-pays infrastructure project, be it public or private.



> Oh 4G? its pretty fast..




Surely you're not serious. Why would anyone in their right mind choose a 4G mobile connection *in lieu of* an NBN connection? Maybe you're unaware of the cost differences:

*50GB on the NBN: $35 per month* (including a phone service and 10c calls, via Exetel)

*50GB on Telstra 4G: $360 per month* (no phone service included)

*50GB on Optus 4G: $675 per month* (no phone service included)

Note that an average Australian ADSL/cable connection consumes 19GB per month (as at June 2012), increasing at ~50% every 6 months. The average usage should hit 50GB in about 12 months time.


Also note that far from becoming cheaper, both Telstra and Optus recently increased their mobile broadband pricing by 10%. Vodafone announced the end of free social network browsing, and started charging by the MB instead of the kB. (meaning loading the Google search page, for example, will cost the user 1MB from their data allowance instead of ~30kB).


Mobile broadband is complementary to fixed broadband, not alternative. That's why there isn't a single country or telco in the World replacing their urban fixed networks with wireless. Conversely, there are 60 countries where FTTP is being rolled out to one degree or another.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> The NBN is not being funded from tax revenue, it's being funded from debt (the issue of bonds, to be precise), which will subsequently be repaid from user revenue (not taxation revenue). That's what the usage fees of the NBN are for.



Government debt is a liability owed by the taxpayer, so whether it's funded directly by the taxpayer or borrowings, it ultimately makes no difference.

The main issue here is that this back of the envelope plan B was never subject to a cost-benefit analysis. It was never weighed up against other demands for government dollars. With this project, we are reliant purely on the judgement of politicians to spend taxpayer dollars wisely without any critical analysis. This is never good, but recent history inspires even less confidence.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> Government debt is a liability owed by the taxpayer, so whether it's funded directly by the taxpayer or borrowings, it ultimately makes no difference.




What a nonsense.



drsmith said:


> The main issue here is that this back of the envelope plan B was never subject to a cost-benefit analysis. It was never weighed up against other demands for government dollars. With this project, we are reliant purely on the judgement of politicians to spend taxpayer dollars wisely without any critical analysis. This is never good, but recent history inspires even less confidence.




A 10 year back of the envelope plan  i love how you guys just completely ignore reality, completely ignore history and treat these decisions as somehow instant, i suppose you have to do that in order to shift the blame/throw mud in the direction you want to. 


 Broadband Advisory Group 2003 (Howard)
 Telstra Copper Upgrade Plans 2005 (Howard)
 Broadband Connect Policy & OPEL Networks 2006/07 (Howard)
 G9 Consortium 2006/7 (Howard)
 Creation of NBN Co April 2009 (Rudd)


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> What a nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
> A 10 year back of the envelope plan  i love how you guys just completely ignore reality, completely ignore history and treat these decisions as somehow instant, i suppose you have to do that in order to shift the blame/throw mud in the direction you want to.
> 
> 
> Broadband Advisory Group 2003 (Howard)
> Telstra Copper Upgrade Plans 2005 (Howard)
> Broadband Connect Policy & OPEL Networks 2006/07 (Howard)
> G9 Consortium 2006/7 (Howard)
> Creation of NBN Co April 2009 (Rudd)




So Cynical, there numerous examples of this government going of half cocked on a hair brained plan.
As DrSmith is suggesting, this could still be added to the list of failures.
Highlighting that the Howard government was thorough with its analysis does not mean Labor took any notice.
The asylum seeker issue has proven they chose to make policy on the run, rather than adopt and adapt working policy.
Most of the policy they have introduced has lacked vision and is in no way Nation building.IMO
I understand you may see it differently and the NBN may put us at the forefront of something, I'm yet to have someone tell me what it will be.
Meanwhile we slide down the industrialised scale toward the bulk mining pit, joining South America and South Africa.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> So Cynical, there numerous examples of this government going of half cocked on a hair brained plan.
> As DrSmith is suggesting, this could still be added to the list of failures.
> Highlighting that the Howard government was thorough with its analysis does not mean Labor took any notice.
> The asylum seeker issue has proven they chose to make policy on the run, rather than adopt and adapt working policy.
> Most of the policy they have introduced has lacked vision and is in no way Nation building.IMO
> I understand you may see it differently and the NBN may put us at the forefront of something, I'm yet to have someone tell me what it will be.
> Meanwhile we slide down the industrialised scale toward the bulk mining pit, joining South America and South Africa.




I'd say probably Germany is the only rich country where manufacturing would be a high level of GDP.  Pretty much the rich world moved on to post industrial societies over the last 20 years.

The good companies have adapted, the ones that could only survive behind tarrif walls have died off in Australia.

I'll use Codan as a great example of what Aussie ingenuity can achieve with the right management and staff.

A boom in amateur prospecting has made Africa one of Codan’s fastest growing markets and McGurk (CEO) hadn't authorised any discounting for his highly demanded product.

When they investigated the discounting claims, they discovered a product that was identical in every way, right down to the logo. A Chinese manufacturer had reverse engineered Codan’s metal detectors and had started exporting to Africa.

Here is where the story gets interesting. The company has taken a number of steps to protect its IP but rather than tie itself up in legal wrangling, Codan has hit these counterfeiters where it hurts most. The manufacturing process that McGurk has introduced is so efficient that they've undercut their competitors on price. So much so that their Chinese rivals threw in the towel and asked to make a deal. Codan does use contract manufacturing in Malaysia, but it is the techniques developed at its plant in Adelaide that has allowed it to outfox its Chinese competitors. 

As for our LNG exports, James Fazzino (CEO of Incitec Pivot) makes a critical observation: by exporting our gas supplies as LNG we are increasing its value three to four times. If we exported that natural gas as advanced chemicals, we could grow that value to 20 times. 

Generally I'll take the higher end IP that produces high returns over low end manufacturing that is a race to the cheapest.

I was listening to a pod cast a few months back over how the NBN had changed business in Willunga - http://tinyurl.com/bcd8soj.  Have a listen as it's not a cheer leading for the NBN, but it does give a few real world examples of how businesses have benefited from being able to access CHEAP FAST broadband.

I'm starting to think that IF the NBN is completed that property prices in the Capital cities may stagnate or fall and property n the larger regional cities and towns will increase as people can live where they like, not just purely for work.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Government debt is a liability owed by the taxpayer, so whether it's funded directly by the taxpayer or borrowings, it ultimately makes no difference.
> 
> The main issue here is that this back of the envelope plan B was never subject to a cost-benefit analysis. It was never weighed up against other demands for government dollars. With this project, we are reliant purely on the judgement of politicians to spend taxpayer dollars wisely without any critical analysis. This is never good, but recent history inspires even less confidence.




* Turbull says he can build the LNP FTTN cheaper - No CBA done, fully costed policy claim withdrawn within days of claim being made.

* Turnbull says the LNP FTTN can be built faster, whilst saying the Govt should have done a CBA and he will as well.  How long does a CBA take to complete?  Hasn't Turnbull prejudged what the CBA will show as the most cost effective network to build?

* Turnbull talks about speed of 80Mbs with VDSL yet then goes on to talk about node to house cable distances of 1Km or more - either he's incompetent as at around 600M you will find it difficult to provide 80Mbs, or he's being rather dishonest.

So I ask, how do you have a plan that is cheaper and faster when you can't define ANY of the major costs components, when you give Telstra the biggest whip hand there could be.  How do you go into negotiations with Telstra and they know YOU have to make a deal as they already have a fully legally binding contract.  Every day of delay for Bullturn is going to see him look worse and worse in the media.  Telstra shareholders rejoice, taxpayers weep.

I would say Mike Quigley has already shown a very keen eye to maximising the tax payer $$$ by cancelling the original contract bids when he saw the contracting firms all putting in over the top bids - way to go private enterprise!  Current contracts seem to be providing good value for the tax payer.  Do you have any examples of the way the NBN rollout is occurring to support your worries?

NBN is I pay for XXX speed and that is what I get.  FTTN is an increase of the UP TO we currently have.

Oh and Mr Turnbull, how much of the copper network will need to be replaced as you roll out the FTTN?  From my expeirence, I'd hazzard around the 30% mark.  How will you upgrade the HCF network to cope with 3-5 times the current number of users as well as provide access to MDUs that both Telstra and Optus have chosen to never connect via HCF?

Another HUGE issue with the FTTN is that Telstra has good records of your cable pair details from the exchange to the pillar.  Their records of the pair from the pillar to your house are very very poor as each time there's a line fault and a tech has moved your line to a new pair, the records haven't been updated.  So the whole process of cutting your line off at the pillar and connecting it to the node is going to be a hugely labour intensive and time consuming process to match up each exchange main pair to each pillar to house pair.

Faster and cheaper.  Yes Mr Kerrigan, he's definitely DREAMING!


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Government debt is a liability owed by the taxpayer, so whether it's funded directly by the taxpayer or borrowings, it ultimately makes no difference.




Of course it makes a difference. The NBN will pay back its own debt, unlike typical government spending.

The only scenario where "it makes no difference" would be if the NBN was cancelled prior to completion (and would therefore not generate sufficient revenue to repay debt) or;

The assumed figures on cost and takeup were completely inaccurate. This is so far proving to be unlikely, and even if there were to be a massive blowout in costs (say 100%), then the revenue earned from the NBN would still mean the liability to taxpayers would be a fraction of the cost to build it, making it "different" to other Govt expenditure.




> The main issue here is that this back of the envelope plan B was never subject to a cost-benefit analysis. It was never weighed up against other demands for government dollars. With this project, we are reliant purely on the judgement of politicians to spend taxpayer dollars wisely without any critical analysis. This is never good, but recent history inspires even less confidence.




I love the oft-repeated "back of the envelope" BS, which has no basis in reality. I guess if you say it often enough it becomes the truth. 

The NBN is most certainly not based "purely on the judgement of politicians", and was in fact the recommendation of many telecommunication experts and the panel set up to assess the NBN Mk1. FTTP is the future of telecommunications, which is a fact apparently known to companies like Google, MS, Intel and hundreds of telecom companies around the World. But alas, not yet to conservative luddites.


As for CBA, let me repeat (once more) the argument why it's utterly worthless:

The NBN is an enabling technology. It is *impossible* to value the benefits of building it, because we don't know what most of the benefits will be. One could only guess about developments for the next 5 or 10 years, let alone the next 50 years. Any CBA would therefore be completely inaccurate.


To illustrate my point, I suggest you do a CBA for the copper telephone network rollout, valuing _*only* the uses/benefits that were known in (say) 1910._ 

Let me know if the per-capita cost (which is about the same as the NBN, adjusted) would be worth it, considering the only use would be basic person-person voice communications.


If you don't think that's a valid argument/analogy, please explain why not.


----------



## FlyingFox

NBNMyths said:


> .....
> As for CBA, let me repeat (once more) the argument why it's utterly worthless:
> 
> The NBN is an enabling technology. It is *impossible* to value the benefits of building it, because we don't know what most of the benefits will be. One could only guess about developments for the next 5 or 10 years, let alone the next 50 years. Any CBA would therefore be completely inaccurate.
> 
> ....




I wouldn't say completely inaccurate but I agree that they would be very inaccurate. Some of the things that the NBN will enable have appeared while its was still on the drawing board. Look at cloud computing. A NBN type network can fundamentally change the way we view and use computing resources. I believe this gives Australia a strong competitive advantage and productivity gains.

While some of it maybe be possible with a ADSL connection, others require too much bandwidth.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Of course it makes a difference. The NBN will pay back its own debt, unlike typical government spending.
> 
> The only scenario where "it makes no difference" would be if the NBN was cancelled prior to completion (and would therefore not generate sufficient revenue to repay debt) or;
> 
> The assumed figures on cost and takeup were completely inaccurate. This is so far proving to be unlikely, and even if there were to be a massive blowout in costs (say 100%), then the revenue earned from the NBN would still mean the liability to taxpayers would be a fraction of the cost to build it, making it "different" to other Govt expenditure.



Until it pays it back, if it pays it back, it is still a liability to the taxpayer. This is fundamentally no different to a home loan being a liability to the home owner until it is paid out.

There is still the question of whether the money would have been better spent on other projects ot put another way, a comparison of relative return of investment on other projects.



NBNMyths said:


> I love the oft-repeated "back of the envelope" BS, which has no basis in reality. I guess if you say it often enough it becomes the truth.



It certianly wasn't the vision the Labor government started with. It was born out of the failure of their original FTTP model.



NBNMyths said:


> The NBN is most certainly not based "purely on the judgement of politicians", and was in fact the recommendation of many telecommunication experts and the panel set up to assess the NBN Mk1. FTTP is the future of telecommunications, which is a fact apparently known to companies like Google, MS, Intel and hundreds of telecom companies around the World. But alas, not yet to conservative luddites.
> 
> As for CBA, let me repeat (once more) the argument why it's utterly worthless:
> 
> The NBN is an enabling technology. It is *impossible* to value the benefits of building it, because we don't know what most of the benefits will be. One could only guess about developments for the next 5 or 10 years, let alone the next 50 years. Any CBA would therefore be completely inaccurate.
> 
> To illustrate my point, I suggest you do a CBA for the copper telephone network rollout, valuing _*only* the uses/benefits that were known in (say) 1910._
> 
> Let me know if the per-capita cost (which is about the same as the NBN, adjusted) would be worth it, considering the only use would be basic person-person voice communications.
> 
> If you don't think that's a valid argument/analogy, please explain why not.



With regard to comparisons between the copper network and the NBN, the copper network to communication was like the development of motorised vehicles to transport whereas the NBN is an upgrade. 

The upgrade is generally supreceeded with another upgrade in a far shorter timeframe than the original innovation. Who knows how the communications landscape will look in 50 years. 

One cannot rely on the hope of what miay or may not happen in the longer term to avoid comparisons against other government expenditures. To do so is a recepie for poor expenditure outcomes.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Until it pays it back, if it pays it back, it is still a liability to the taxpayer. This is fundamentally no different to a home loan being a liability to the home owner until it is paid out.
> 
> There is still the question of whether the money would have been better spent on other projects ot put another way, a comparison of relative return of investment on other projects.
> 
> 
> It certianly wasn't the vision the Labor government started with. It was born out of the failure of their original FTTP model.
> 
> 
> With regard to comparisons between the copper network and the NBN, the copper network to communication was like the development of motorised vehicles to transport whereas the NBN is an upgrade.
> 
> The upgrade is generally supreceeded with another upgrade in a far shorter timeframe than the original innovation. Who knows how the communications landscape will look in 50 years.
> 
> One cannot rely on the hope of what miay or may not happen in the longer term to avoid comparisons against other government expenditures. To do so is a recepie for poor expenditure outcomes.




* unless we stop using the internet the NBN will pay itself off.  Could it take longer than planned, maybe, but the fees will pay the debt off.

* Telstra's intransigence meant the ALP had to go all out for a FTTP network otherwise Telstra would have caused massive delays and the cost would have been prohibitive.

* While the NBN is an upgrade, the beauty of Fiber is there is no known limit to the bandwidth a single fiber strand can handle.  We've moved from 1 to 10 to 100 GBS per wavelength.  Dense Wave Division Multiplexing means at 10GBS you can fit 80 wavelengths down 1 fiber.  The Southern Cross cable system is currently upgrading some fibers to 40GBs gear, and in the middle of the year will start using some 100GBs gear as well.  Increasing total bandwidth with minimal cost.  No other technology even at the very earliest stages of development can compete with fiber.  Wireless certainly can't.

* I would argue that because the borrowings for the NBN wll be funded by the income of the network, that the construction in no way inhibits the Govt from funding other infrastructure.  Also there would be little overlap on a lot of the staff for the NBN rollout compared to say building a hospital or road.


----------



## orr

drsmith said:


> With regard to comparisons between the copper network and the NBN, the copper network to communication was like the development of motorised vehicles to transport whereas the NBN is an upgrade.




God where do your even start with this drivel. One point might be; the fly ridden pestilent reminisce of a pre industrialised agrarian culture that had managed to crawl with glacial speed over a couple of millennia  to the point, of, considering a peddle powered mechanical sewing device in the homes of a tiny fraction of the worlds population was the zenith of  modern achievement... And then the introduction of motorised transport and in a few short decades *mass production* of said transport and then the hundred years till now.... OH ooops now I've seen my error, It's been basically the same progression as of the last couple of thousand of years.

I've watched with delicious interest the unfolding of this thread and have admired the surgical and incredibly  patient demolition of those who for ideological reasons have no interest in progressing positive development in this country. All power to your arm boys. The tiller steering of that first Benz? Only history will tell us where we are in the comparative time lines drawn by our _'oh so wise'_ doctors pronunciation. Or Maybe he'd care, oracle like, to enlighten us all?


----------



## drsmith

orr said:


> God where do your even start with this drivel. One point might be; the fly ridden pestilent reminisce of a pre industrialised agrarian culture that had managed to crawl with glacial speed over a couple of millennia  to the point, of, considering a peddle powered mechanical sewing device in the homes of a tiny fraction of the worlds population was the zenith of  modern achievement... And then the introduction of motorised transport and in a few short decades *mass production* of said transport and then the hundred years till now.... OH ooops now I've seen my error, It's been basically the same progression as of the last couple of thousand of years.
> 
> I've watched with delicious interest the unfolding of this thread and have admired the surgical and incredibly  patient demolition of those who for ideological reasons have no interest in progressing positive development in this country. All power to your arm boys. The tiller steering of that first Benz? Only history will tell us where we are in the comparative time lines drawn by our _'oh so wise'_ doctors pronunciation. Or Maybe he'd care, oracle like, to enlighten us all?



None of the above addresses any sort of financial comparison against other uses for government monies.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> As for CBA, let me repeat (once more) the argument why it's utterly worthless:
> 
> The NBN is an enabling technology. It is *impossible* to value the benefits of building it, because we don't know what most of the benefits will be. One could only guess about developments for the next 5 or 10 years, let alone the next 50 years. Any CBA would therefore be completely inaccurate.
> 
> 
> To illustrate my point, I suggest you do a CBA for the copper telephone network rollout, valuing _*only* the uses/benefits that were known in (say) 1910._
> 
> Let me know if the per-capita cost (which is about the same as the NBN, adjusted) would be worth it, considering the only use would be basic person-person voice communications.
> 
> 
> If you don't think that's a valid argument/analogy, please explain why not.



The difficulty I have with the above analogy is that it would be comparing something that is known (1910 to today) to something that is unknown. in that sence at least, there's an element of trust me and hence risk.

The best decisions are generally those that are weighed against tangable pros and cons. Beyond that, it's luck. It may be difficult to do a cost benefit analysis, but that doesn't justify not doing it. 

If the project is completed, the government may well pay off the associated borrowings but then it is setting it up as a monolopy.


----------



## Smurf1976

sydboy007 said:


> I would argue that because the borrowings for the NBN wll be funded by the income of the network, that the construction in no way inhibits the Govt from funding other infrastructure.  Also there would be little overlap on a lot of the staff for the NBN rollout compared to say building a hospital or road.




That comment plus this whole thread sounds incredibly like the arguments for setting up the state electricity authorities many years ago. They worked quite well until economists stuck their fingers in the pie and pushed costs through the roof via their failed ideologies.

Most things we now use electricity for were unforeseen back when it started. When Duck Reach power station was switched on in 1895 I'm pretty sure that nobody had thought of the need to provide power for computers. For that matter, even broadcast radio and household refrigerators were future technologies back then. Same with the internet. Even in the mid-1990's when people started to connect I don't recall anyone predicting the demise of video rentals due to online downloading. 

On the other side of the debate however is wireless. Like many I remember when employers started worrying about employees use of the internet, both due to its' time wasting abilities and potential legal issues for the company associated with certain content. And so an assortment of filters, personal use time limits, monitoring and so on were introduced by many employers. It's all completely pointless now of course given that half the workforce has access to the internet sitting right there in their own pocket. 

My personal expectation is that we're heading to a situation where bulk data goes via fibre. That's how movies will be downloaded etc for the foreseeable future. But in terms of time spent using devices, there's a readily apparent trend toward mobile devices for situations where the time versus data ratio is lots of time and little data. Facebook is a classic example of such a situation where mobiles leave fixed computers for dead.


----------



## bellenuit

What I find peculiar about this "it will pay for itself" argument is that it may not be the case that it will pay for itself. 

It would imply that whether the overall cost is $20B, $40B or $100B, there will be no impact on government debt. But that is nonsense. Paying for itself implies certain assumptions regarding costs to build, service charges (to the wholesaler, which ultimately flow to the consumer) and take up rates by the consumer. If building costs grow substantially, then those costs will have to be passed on to the consumer, which will depress take up rates. It is possible that if building costs of the NBN reach a certain level, it may be impossible to pay off the service, as there will not be enough consumers willing to take up the service at the increased service charges. Demand is not inelastic, when there are alternative offerings (although trying to make the NBN a monopoly is an attempt to stifle others offering a competing service). 

Increases in building costs of the NBN cannot simply be offset by assuming income to the NBN can be increased to compensate. There will be a point where the model breaks down and will require the government to provide assistance from consolidated revenue.


----------



## sydboy007

bellenuit said:


> What I find peculiar about this "it will pay for itself" argument is that it may not be the case that it will pay for itself.
> 
> It would imply that whether the overall cost is $20B, $40B or $100B, there will be no impact on government debt. But that is nonsense. Paying for itself implies certain assumptions regarding costs to build, service charges (to the wholesaler, which ultimately flow to the consumer) and take up rates by the consumer. If building costs grow substantially, then those costs will have to be passed on to the consumer, which will depress take up rates. It is possible that if building costs of the NBN reach a certain level, it may be impossible to pay off the service, as there will not be enough consumers willing to take up the service at the increased service charges. Demand is not inelastic, when there are alternative offerings (although trying to make the NBN a monopoly is an attempt to stifle others offering a competing service).
> 
> Increases in building costs of the NBN cannot simply be offset by assuming income to the NBN can be increased to compensate. There will be a point where the model breaks down and will require the government to provide assistance from consolidated revenue.




18 months after the NBN goes live in an area the copper network is switched off if there is fiber in the area.  Are you suggesting that when this occurs there will be less people using broadband than before the cut over?

So far I've not seen any evidence that there is a cost blowout in the construction of the project.  Yes it's early days, but so far so good, and I'm sure Limited News would have been running front page articles should there be even the remotest hint of this.

So yes, in theory shoudl the costs blow out enough then it may be difficult to pay the debt off, but to use a what if that so far has no basis in reality is really grasping at straws.  The Govt has appointed some competent senior management, and i can assure you that anyone applying for a job at NBN is doing so because they believe in the project and have the kind of commitment most companies can only dream of getting from their staff.

I'm looking forward to seeing what the naysayers have to say when the project is rolled out and the economic benefits are easy to see.

If the economy is slowing as badly as the LNP are making out, well I would argue the NBN is going to have an easy time playing off the various contracting firms against each other as there wont be much else on offer.


----------



## So_Cynical

sptrawler said:


> So Cynical, there numerous examples of this government going of half cocked on a hair brained plan.
> As DrSmith is suggesting, this could still be added to the list of failures.




The one big difference is that Labor did it, stopped talking, stopped trying to get something done for nothing, stopped blaming everyone else and just did it...took the bold steps, accepted the political risk and did it.



drsmith said:


> With regard to comparisons between the copper network and the NBN, the copper network to communication was like the development of motorised vehicles to transport whereas the NBN is an upgrade.




Seriously...light speed is not an upgrade.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> Seriously...light speed is not an upgrade.



It's not the industrial revolution either.


----------



## DB008

sydboy007 said:


> I'm looking forward to seeing what the naysayers have to say when the project is rolled out and the economic benefits are easy to see.





Interesting....




> *Kansas City has become the center of tech startups thanks to Google Fiber*
> 
> The Associated Press is reporting that thanks to Google's Fiber service, it has turned Kansas City into a huge attraction for tech startups who want to jump onto the fastest Internet access in the US. The AP has reported that several startups have popped up in Kansas City, "working on their ideas for the next high-tech startup".
> 
> The AP cites one startup residence, which has been called the "Home for Hackers" that provides entrepreneurs "a deal that allows them to live rent-free for up to three months "while they develop their business plans". The Home for Hackers has three spots specifically reserved for entrepreneurs and an additional bedroom set up for "fiber tourists who want a place for a day or two where they can download anything faster than they could elsewhere."
> 
> http://www.tweaktown.com/news/27914/kansas_city_has_become_the_center_of_tech_startups_thanks_to_google_fiber/index.html#3j3VtzWDfvczXhPi.99


----------



## sydboy007

DB008 said:


> Interesting....




If the NBN rollout is canned by the LNP, I can assure you that properties that have fiber are going to gain in value to suburbs relegated to ADSL or wireless.

Oh, has anyone asked Mr Turnbull where he plans to set up the roughly double extra wireless base stations he is proposing?  Considering the grief the NBN is getting in some areas I would expect the problem to magnify under the LNP


----------



## Julia

sydboy007 said:


> The Govt has appointed some competent senior management, and i can assure you that anyone applying for a job at NBN is doing so because they believe in the project and have the kind of commitment most companies can only dream of getting from their staff.



That will be why so many of their senior executives have abruptly resigned, I suppose?  Commitment.


----------



## sptrawler

In the end the NBN won't cost anything, because the government of the day will sell it off (again)
Then they will charge gst on services provided.
Then the newly floated company, that has a monopoly on backbone infrastructure. 
Will complain to the government, they can't make a profit at the current access prices.
The government will set up a committe to investigate pricing, they will recomend access prices need to be increased to allow the NBN company to make a reasonable return on capital. lol
Doesn't it just crack you up, the only winners are big business, that get bling speed internet to move mass data and mum and dad pay for it.lol 
Nothing like a democracy, to tell people what they have to do.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> It's not the industrial revolution either.




Well you can only have one industrial revolution, the NBN is an enabler for the digital revolution, and that's a real revolution, a revolution that is still under way, some distance/time will be required to really appreciate the enormity of the digital revolution.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> Well you can only have one industrial revolution, the NBN is an enabler for the digital revolution, and that's a real revolution, a revolution that is still under way, some distance/time will be required to really appreciate the enormity of the digital revolution.



Perhaps it would stand up to a CBA then.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> Perhaps it would stand up to a CBA then.




And you measure the benefits how? 

I was watching a program on tv the other night about power, the guy that invented the first mobile steam engine (truck) didn't get rich and didn't have a patent, the invention was maybe 20 or 30 years ahead of its time, a CBA at the time wouldn't of even considered this invention.

A CBA would of come to the conclusion that it was cheaper and easier to continue using horses, the infrastructure was all there, the skills all there and the cost of developing 1 million miles of road would of made the travelling steam engine uneconomic...the steam truck didn't stand a chance but we all know how that turned out.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> And you measure the benefits how?
> 
> I was watching a program on tv the other night about power, the guy that invented the first mobile steam engine (truck) didn't get rich and didn't have a patent, the invention was maybe 20 or 30 years ahead of its time, a CBA at the time wouldn't of even considered this invention.
> 
> A CBA would of come to the conclusion that it was cheaper and easier to continue using horses, the infrastructure was all there, the skills all there and the cost of developing 1 million miles of road would of made the travelling steam engine uneconomic...the steam truck didn't stand a chance but we all know how that turned out.



I'll take that as a no.


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> And you measure the benefits how?
> 
> I was watching a program on tv the other night about power, the guy that invented the first mobile steam engine (truck) didn't get rich and didn't have a patent, the invention was maybe 20 or 30 years ahead of its time, a CBA at the time wouldn't of even considered this invention.
> 
> A CBA would of come to the conclusion that it was cheaper and easier to continue using horses, the infrastructure was all there, the skills all there and the cost of developing 1 million miles of road would of made the travelling steam engine uneconomic...the steam truck didn't stand a chance but we all know how that turned out.




Yes and at the moment you are using up a lot of bandwidth, watching your free to air t.v and we all know how that is going to end up. Duh
There is an old saying " Be carefull what you wish for". lol

Talk about pay for the rod to beat your own back.


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> I was watching a program on tv the other night about power, the guy that invented the first mobile steam engine (truck) didn't get rich and didn't have a patent, the invention was maybe 20 or 30 years ahead of its time, a CBA at the time wouldn't of even considered this invention.
> .





I love your wide eyed childlike enthusiasm. 
However when the NBN is in place the free to air t.v you love watching, won't happen. It will be the first casualty.lol
Why, when the government has spent so much money putting in the NBN, would it not sell off the free to air spectrum?
There would be no vallid reason the t.v stations couldn't transmit over the optical system.
All of a sudden free to air t.v becomes a payg download, the funny thing is you paid to put it in. 
Just another consumer tax.lol

As I have said before, i would have prefered to have seen the money spent on transporting water down from the north to irrigate and make a food bowl. But maybe I'm idealistic.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> I'll take that as a no.




So i guess your a horse and cart kinda guy and i like a little steam...good luck with the horse and cart.


----------



## sydboy007

Julia said:


> That will be why so many of their senior executives have abruptly resigned, I suppose?  Commitment.




Do you think the LNP have treated Mike Quigley with respect?  Their hounding of him over his days at Alcatel was disgusting IMO.

As for the others leaving, I can't really blame them.  The LNP have politicised the construction of the network to such a degree that anyone at the top level of management would have to feel under enormous pressure, over and above the usual level of pressure of managing such a HUGE project.

People don't realise, but this is a world first.  Rolling out a FTTP network on this scale has NEVER been done before.  It should be seen as a Habour Bridge or Snowy River project.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> I love your wide eyed childlike enthusiasm.
> However when the NBN is in place the free to air t.v you love watching, won't happen. It will be the first casualty.lol
> Why, when the government has spent so much money putting in the NBN, would it not sell off the free to air spectrum?
> There would be no vallid reason the t.v stations couldn't transmit over the optical system.
> All of a sudden free to air t.v becomes a payg download, the funny thing is you paid to put it in.
> Just another consumer tax.lol
> 
> As I have said before, i would have prefered to have seen the money spent on transporting water down from the north to irrigate and make a food bowl. But maybe I'm idealistic.




Channel 10 is nearly bankrupt.  Channel 9 has to force a deal on its creditors to not go bankrupt.  Channel 7 has question marks over its performance.  I know I watch less TV these days than I used to because I've getting a lot more info on the internet.

Maybe all the FTA channels will end up being distributed over the NBN.  Could be the smart thing to do.  I would assume we're talking 20ish years in the future??  By then we'll be using IP V6, pretty much every electronic device will be internet enabled.  I've got no problem deploying the scarce spectrum to mobile broadband applications.

As for moving water down from up north, not sure how viable that will be in the long term.  Where are you going to create the food bowl? Please don't hold up the Ord River irrigation scheme as something to aspire to.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Do you think the LNP have treated Mike Quigley with respect?  Their hounding of him over his days at Alcatel was disgusting IMO.
> 
> As for the others leaving, I can't really blame them.  The LNP have politicised the construction of the network to such a degree that anyone at the top level of management would have to feel under enormous pressure, over and above the usual level of pressure of managing such a HUGE project.



Why would the senior management be worried about the LNP ?

Their job after all is to build it and not concern themselves about partisan politics, from either side.



sydboy007 said:


> People don't realise, but this is a world first.  Rolling out a FTTP network on this scale has NEVER been done before.  It should be seen as a Habour Bridge or Snowy River project.




You've presented some good and thought provoking arguments supporting this project, but this to me is not one of them. In terms of scale, the Great Eastern was a world first as was the French attempt to build the Panama Canal.

Donning a bi-partisan hat for a moment, I hope Labor have got it right as I prefer not to see taxpayers money wasted. What ultimately worries me though is the balance between the vision and critical financial anlaysis.


----------



## sptrawler

Most of Northern Australia is very fertile soil, it is the lack of reliable water, that is the issue. 
In W.A they have had great results at Camballin, it was wound up because of flooding in  the wet season. 
Canarvon is a great source of fruit. Wiluna oranges were grown with great success.
As for the Ord the Chinese didn't hesitate buying into the latest release of land.
Everyone acknowledges the world faces a food shortage, meanwhile we have a huge untapped area of farmable land.
It is going to be hard to build a future Australia, with everyone wanting to sit on their bums in the southern cities. While the north of the continent is under utilised and populated by fifo workers living in dongas.


----------



## NBNMyths

Julia said:


> That will be why so many of their senior executives have abruptly resigned, I suppose?  Commitment.




Yes, all _three_ of them......Oh, hang on. Over a 2 year period one retired at age 61, one resigned and one was made redundant.

I hope the CEO turns the light out as he leaves, since with three people gone, there must be nobody left.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> Most of Northern Australia is very fertile soil, it is the lack of reliable water, that is the issue.
> In W.A they have had great results at Camballin, it was wound up because of flooding in  the wet season.
> Canarvon is a great source of fruit. Wiluna oranges were grown with great success.
> As for the Ord the Chinese didn't hesitate buying into the latest release of land.
> Everyone acknowledges the world faces a food shortage, meanwhile we have a huge untapped area of farmable land.
> It is going to be hard to build a future Australia, with everyone wanting to sit on their bums in the southern cities. While the north of the continent is under utilised and populated by fifo workers living in dongas.




Will be interesting to see how they deal with the pest issues that bedeviled the Ord in it's early stages.

I'd also argue that mosqito born illness are going to flourish as the hotter and wetter climate increase the range and lenght of time for their breeding.

Dengue fever was unknown 50 years ago, and now it's a global wide issue.  Nasty virus too.  has 4 strains, and gaining immunity to one leaves you far more susceptible to the others.

Maybe we can build cities up there, but speak to those living in Darwin about what it's like to constantly live in high humidity and high temperatures.  Not many of us can cope with that.

As for the Chinese buying into the Ord, I'd say it's just about as much to learn about modern intensive farming practices from a country that has some of the highest cropping yields in the world, than about the land itself.

Anywho, if anyone thinks the current broadband infrastructure is up to standard in Australia, then you must live in a pretty good area, as I know of only 1 friend who has a speed higher than my 12Mbs, and most would be happy to be able to get a reliable 6Mbs connection.

At least with the NBN you WILL get the speed you pay for, companies WILL be able to design services based around minimum speeds for large customer bases.

Baring a blowout in construction costs - so far no indication this is occurring - what is the issue?  If you use the internet now you will pay the same, or even less than you currently do.  It's like a mobile phone plan.  Every 2 years you get a new phone for about the same amount of money as what you currently pay on contract.  Now we're building a fiber network that will have cables able to support the network till I don't know when, but am sure  I'll have fallen off me perch long before then.


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> Will be interesting to see how they deal with the pest issues that bedeviled the Ord in it's early stages.
> 
> I'd also argue that mosqito born illness are going to flourish as the hotter and wetter climate increase the range and lenght of time for their breeding.
> 
> Dengue fever was unknown 50 years ago, and now it's a global wide issue.  Nasty virus too.  has 4 strains, and gaining immunity to one leaves you far more susceptible to the others.
> 
> Maybe we can build cities up there, but speak to those living in Darwin about what it's like to constantly live in high humidity and high temperatures.  Not many of us can cope with that.
> 
> As for the Chinese buying into the Ord, I'd say it's just about as much to learn about modern intensive farming practices from a country that has some of the highest cropping yields in the world, than about the land itself.
> 
> Anywho, if anyone thinks the current broadband infrastructure is up to standard in Australia, then you must live in a pretty good area, as I know of only 1 friend who has a speed higher than my 12Mbs, and most would be happy to be able to get a reliable 6Mbs connection.
> 
> At least with the NBN you WILL get the speed you pay for, companies WILL be able to design services based around minimum speeds for large customer bases.
> 
> Baring a blowout in construction costs - so far no indication this is occurring - what is the issue?  If you use the internet now you will pay the same, or even less than you currently do.  It's like a mobile phone plan.  Every 2 years you get a new phone for about the same amount of money as what you currently pay on contract.  Now we're building a fiber network that will have cables able to support the network till I don't know when, but am sure  I'll have fallen off me perch long before then.




As I have said on numerous occassions, there is nothing wrong with the NBN concept. 
It is just I personaly feel, at this point in time, the money could have been spent on more productive infrastructure.
I accept I could be wrong, time will tell. Maybe we will lead the world with cutting edge technology, maybe our schooling system will produce better results.

As for people not wanting to live in the North, they had better get over themselves. There is one thing for sure, if we don't populate and develop it, it will only be a matter of time before someone else does.
As the worlds population grows and the food shortage takes hold, countries will look further afield.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Why would the senior management be worried about the LNP ?
> 
> Their job after all is to build it and not concern themselves about partisan politics, from either side.
> 
> 
> 
> You've presented some good and thought provoking arguments supporting this project, but this to me is not one of them. In terms of scale, the Great Eastern was a world first as was the French attempt to build the Panama Canal.
> 
> Donning a bi-partisan hat for a moment, I hope Labor have got it right as I prefer not to see taxpayers money wasted. What ultimately worries me though is the balance between the vision and critical financial anlaysis.




Because they have been attacked politically by the LNP.  The whole NBN rollout has been politicised.  Question the project itself yes, but don't attack the integrity of the people doing the work.

Maybe I have a bias since I work in the IT world, but I also have direct experience with just how worn out the current copper network is.  To me doing nothing is not an option, because most of Asia and the USA and the emerging world will overtake us in the next 10-15 years.

The LNP FTTN to me is a huge waste of money, and there is so little detail provided by them.  I can understand you can't give a fully costed plan, but they should be able to provide a summary of:

* how many nodes 
* will the nodes require aircon or have milspec equipment able to handle 70 deg temps
* maximum cable length
* number of wireless base stations and locations that they will support
* what contractual negotiations they will need to undertake with Telstra
* What issues they think the ACCC will raise

I would argue that the LNP FTTN network would be a huge waste of money as it would have little economic value for the tax payer, would require endless subsidies in rural areas, and will most likely entrench Telstra as the dominant force for decades.

From everything I've been able to find out about how the project is running, it has a highly competent group of people managing the broad scope of the project, along with competent levels below them ensuring the day to day operations are running well.

If anything the ALP are to be applauded for letting the NBN get on with the job and not micro managing them and getting in the road of the people who know what they're doing and how best to achieve results.

I would argue that so far the number of people signing up to the higher end plans is boding well for the NBNs finances.  If the trend continues it looks like the project will be able to pay off the debt faster and / or drop prices faster than currently planned, due to the higher ARPU being earned.  SMEs in Willunga were taking up the 100/40 plans because of the minimal price difference to lower speed plans, and the fact they can do everything instantly now.  I can see it revolutionising things in the home user space, but to me the truly outstanding feature of the NBN will be to provide the SME market with broadband access that has really been only in the realm of the largest of companies due to the cost and limited areas it is offered.  If the SME community is not saving a couple of billion a year on their communications (broadband and phone) by the time the NBN is completed, then they seriously need to hire some decent IT staff or bring in a consultant to show them where they're going wrong.


----------



## Bill M

sydboy007 said:


> If anything the ALP are to be applauded for letting the NBN get on with the job and not micro managing them and getting in the road of the people who know what they're doing and how best to achieve results.
> 
> I would argue that so far the number of people signing up to the higher end plans is boding well for the NBNs finances.  If the trend continues it looks like the project will be able to pay off the debt faster and / or drop prices faster than currently planned, due to the higher ARPU being earned.  SMEs in Willunga were taking up the 100/40 plans because of the minimal price difference to lower speed plans, and the fact they can do everything instantly now.  I can see it revolutionising things in the home user space, but to me the truly outstanding feature of the NBN will be to provide the SME market with broadband access that has really been only in the realm of the largest of companies due to the cost and limited areas it is offered.  If the SME community is not saving a couple of billion a year on their communications (broadband and phone) by the time the NBN is completed, then they seriously need to hire some decent IT staff or bring in a consultant to show them where they're going wrong.




+1 The sooner they bring it into my area the better. A lot of good posts from you on this, cheers.


----------



## sptrawler

Bill M said:


> +1 The sooner they bring it into my area the better. A lot of good posts from you on this, cheers.





Yep, +1 I just don't see how you 250,000 guys in I.T are going to support us guys on a pension.

Otherwise a lot of great posts, love your enthusiasm, hope it pays the bills.


----------



## Julia

NBNMyths said:


> Yes, all _three_ of them......Oh, hang on. Over a 2 year period one retired at age 61, one resigned and one was made redundant.



Three senior people over just two years is significant.


----------



## dutchie

Suits the twit right down to the ground.


----------



## sydboy007

dutchie said:


> View attachment 50570
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Suits the twit right down to the ground.




Considering the LNP gave us:

Senator Luddite - oops Alston

then Helen Coonan, who was never the brightest lamp in the tanning bed,

and now the right Honourable Earl of Wentworth Malcom T who twittered to someone question his FTTN network with the following response:

_so if you believe that I guess you believe Santa brought you your presents on a sleigh with reindeers, right?_

So, bag Conroy as much as you like, but he's prob the least worst out of the lot.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> If anything the ALP are to be applauded for letting the NBN get on with the job and not micro managing them and getting in the road of the people who know what they're doing and how best to achieve results.



I hope you are right, but when I read that, it was red underpants that came to mind.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

It's being rolled out in Townsville in to only basket weaving Labor suburbs such as Mundingburra and Aitkenvale.

Even the James Cook University and Townsville Hospital won't have access for years.

gg


----------



## DB008

Garpal Gumnut said:


> It's being rolled out in Townsville in to only basket weaving Labor suburbs such as Mundingburra and Aitkenvale.
> 
> Even the James Cook University and Townsville Hospital won't have access for years.
> 
> gg




I put this to Sydboy007 via PM.

Wouldn't you want the maximize your ROI on such a big investment by rolling out in the most populated/dense areas first? Get larger uptake rates and start getting some cash back ASAP to pay down debt?


----------



## So_Cynical

DB008 said:


> I put this to Sydboy007 via PM.
> 
> Wouldn't you want the maximize your ROI on such a big investment by rolling out in the most populated/dense areas first? Get larger uptake rates and start getting some cash back ASAP to pay down debt?




NBN - *National* Broadband Network

Big picture guys, National.


----------



## DB008

So_Cynical said:


> NBN - *National* Broadband Network
> 
> Big picture guys, National.




Yes. I know.

Please re-read my question. ROI, ~35 Billion dollar project, pay down debt, large cities, sign up lots of people fast.


----------



## CanOz

DB008 said:


> Yes. I know.
> 
> Please re-read my question. ROI, ~35 Billion dollar project, pay down debt, large cities, sign up lots of people fast.




LOL @ DB008....remember mate...this is P-O-L-I-T-I-C-A-L...got nada to do with business sense...otherwise someone would have done it already!!

I cannot believe Australia's BB network is worse than China's still!! That is shameful!!

Canada has had High Speed iNet for over a decade!!:frown:

CanOz


----------



## sptrawler

CanOz said:


> LOL @ DB008....remember mate...this is P-O-L-I-T-I-C-A-L...got nada to do with business sense...otherwise someone would have done it already!!
> 
> I cannot believe Australia's BB network is worse than China's still!! That is shameful!!
> 
> Canada has had High Speed iNet for over a decade!!:frown:
> 
> CanOz



They also have a great pension scheme and the majority of the population are located on the U.S border.
Therefore the logistics of growing a population of 33million, as a pimple on the backside of the U.S, can in no way be compared to Australia as an island.
If you were welded to the bum of China, I don't think you would be doing so well.


----------



## Smurf1976

DB008 said:


> I put this to Sydboy007 via PM.
> 
> Wouldn't you want the maximize your ROI on such a big investment by rolling out in the most populated/dense areas first? Get larger uptake rates and start getting some cash back ASAP to pay down debt?



1. It's national.

2. The regional focus early on if of political importance.

3. It was inevitable that the first part would be in a region, Tasmania, since the network was already partly built there by the electricity industry (which had ideas of competing directly against Telstra and had gone as far as having a communications business and a modest fibre network actually in operation) before the Australian Government came up with the NBN concept and acquired the assets. It's a bit hard politically to start with a few towns in Tas, then do Sydney and Melbourne, then come back and do the rest of the country.


----------



## sptrawler

Smurf1976 said:


> 1. It's national.
> 
> 2. The regional focus early on if of political importance.
> 
> 3. It was inevitable that the first part would be in a region, Tasmania, since the network was already partly built there by the electricity industry (which had ideas of competing directly against Telstra and had gone as far as having a communications business and a modest fibre network actually in operation) before the Australian Government came up with the NBN concept and acquired the assets. It's a bit hard politically to start with a few towns in Tas, then do Sydney and Melbourne, then come back and do the rest of the country.




Smurph, as you know, it is going to be a never ending disaster. The cost of trying to retrofit and keep up with new roll out is mind boggling. 
The best we can hope for is they pull the plug on the retrofit untill the copper breakdown demands it.
Redirect funding to install NBN to CBD's and industrial areas.IMO


----------



## boofhead

Does the hospital or universify have direct negotiating abilities or tied to what government departments decide? What about their existing contracts? I know in Tasmania the public schools were not using NBN because of the education department here having Telstra contract.


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> It's being rolled out in Townsville in to only basket weaving Labor suburbs such as Mundingburra and Aitkenvale.




I would have thought you'd have learned that posting demonstrably false info in this thread is not going to do you any favours:




Seems that there's not much of Townsville that isn't either under construction already, or contracted.... 




> Even the James Cook University and Townsville Hospital won't have access for years.
> 
> gg




Both the hospital and the Uni already have fibre connections.


----------



## Knobby22

Wish I was getting it in my area. Lucky Townsville.


----------



## sydboy007

the day in the life of a syboy

3 hours out of 8 trying to get Telstra to do what they're supposed to do

Issue in Suburban Sydney for a customer who has a line so unstable it's basically useless.  Constant errors on their modem.

Now when logging a fault with Telstra their system does a test, and it surely shows there's an open circuit or short on the line, yet I deal with Telstra "testers" who tell me there's nothing wrong with the line.  Must be the customer modem they say.  Try to get them to understand that we have supplied the customer with a business grade industrial modem recently so very unlikely to be the modem.

So Telstra technician attends the fault...maybe.  Never presents himself to the customer, closes the fault without calling me as NFF..yes that was the sum total of his comments in the case, and Telstra have the hide to try and bill my company for an incorrect callout fee.

So then I have to log a new case. Telstra is the ONLY company I have ever dealt with that can close a fault without confirming the service has restored, and then when you call back for an update they force you to open a new case and treat it as if the clock for restoration has just started ticking.

Sum total of an hour on the phone and online.

Then I have to deal with an issue over in Derby WA.  Once again, Telstra tech closes fault, though this time he did find an issue and moved us on to a new main cable pair.  Prob is he never called my group and customer still not working.

Once again I have to raise a new case with Telstra then spend 45 minutes going through escalations group to testers.  Tester is adamant that the customer modem is not correctly configured.  Tell him sorry, but the customer has no access to the modem, couldn't change the config.  He is still adamant that it's a modem issue since he doesn't see any authentication request coming from the modem.  I'm like, well if the line is faulty, then could the auth request make it through.  Some silence as he parses that question.  Told he will do some further checking.  A while later another tester calls up, and I go through the same rigmarole - another 20 minutes of wasted time.

Then we have a fault in the city for a customer.  Our tech has tested the line with 14V of foreign voltage.  Line is basically useless because of this.  Now this is a standard fault criteria for Telstra.  Only issue is that to see it you have to disconnect the line from the customer and exchange sides.  Telstra in their wisdom have dumbed down their workforce so severely that they only have a small number of level 2 field techs who are able to do this.  

Now it gets even better.  Telstra tell me I have to raise an interference investigation to get this sorted out.   After a long circular process whereby I cannot get them to understand that if I do this, it will not be treated as an interference condition as I have a standard fault condition.  Then it's like I have to send my field tech back to do a complete line test - TDR - that generally takes 1.5 hours because they have to fully isolate the line and run the tests.

Now the real kicker is an interference investigation is a customer paying service.  Even if Telstra do find an issue in their network, the customer has to pay for the privilege of it, purely because Telstra don't have enough qualified staff to do the work.  Oh and it takes 5 working days for a tech to attend these kinds of faults too.

Oh, nearly forgot about the customer who's on a Telstra DSLAM that is congested.  Told by their helpdesk tough.  After speaking to our Telstra account manager we then have to go via the online Telstra system to raise a complaint.  Telstra have 5 working days - not including the day of entry - to respond to the complaint with a reference number.  They will then endevour to respond in some fashion within 20 working days after they have assigned a reference to the complaint.

So this is the current state of play within the Telecommunications market.  Anyone who thinks the above is unusual, I can assure you hand on heart that these are nothing particularly outlandish from Telstra.  I still laugh when one of our field techs met a Telstra tech to do some cooperative testing.  He connected his multimeter to the line and earthed it on a plastic pipe nearby.  Our FT asked him what he was doing and the Telstra FT condescendingly told him he was earthing his multi meter to do a test.  Our field tech then had to give him a brief lesson on how electricity works, and when it doesn't.

So, if you think this is the way the Australian Telecommunications industry should continue to operate, then by all means support the NOBN offered by Malcom T, but just accept that Australia will loose the race to attract the talent and investment that will come from having the first truly national ubiquitous fiber network in the world!


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> I would have thought you'd have learned that posting demonstrably false info in this thread is not going to do you any favours:
> View attachment 50576
> 
> 
> Seems that there's not much of Townsville that isn't either under construction already, or contracted....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Both the hospital and the Uni already have fibre connections.







Your map, if you knew Townsville, proves my point.

The early giveners are suburbs full of ALP hacks, doctors ' wives and ALP basket weavers.

Next on line are rich and influential pockets/suburbs.

Third last are working Australian families.

Second last are Indigenous areas.

Last of all those suburbs who vote Liberal. 

It is an utter disgrace. A wasteful use of taxpayers money.


gg


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> the day in the life of a syboy



Is this a working day ?


----------



## MrBurns

sydboy007 said:


> the day in the life of a syboy
> 
> !




Thats how they make profit, another 5c up for TLS today so you can stay on hold , thanks and this call may be recorded


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> So, if you think this is the way the Australian Telecommunications industry should continue to operate, then by all means support the NOBN offered by Malcom T, but just accept that Australia will loose the race to attract the talent and investment that will come from having the first truly national ubiquitous fiber network in the world!




What I can't understand, is why you think it will be any better dealing with the new service provider, once it is privatised. Again.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> What I can't understand, is why you think it will be any better dealing with the new service provider, once it is privatised. Again.




I suppose we'll wait for another LNP Govt to see the cookie jar is full of a tasty asset to sell off.  Bet they'll add the lovely vertical integration of a Telstra and let them go full retail.

The great thing about the NBN is they're not retail, and my life is so much easier for NBN faults.

Do I see the customer modem mac on our NNI port?

Yes - then prob on my side of the fence

NO - then NBN needs to fix it.

Howard needs to be SHOT for selling off Telstra the way he did.  Retail should have been sold, whith network / wholesale kept in public hands, or sold off as a separate entity.  I would argue the way things stand that consumers and business especially, have been right royal shafted that the sale price has been lost in higher charges.


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Your map, if you knew Townsville, proves my point.
> 
> The early giveners are suburbs full of ALP hacks, doctors ' wives and ALP basket weavers.
> 
> Next on line are rich and influential pockets/suburbs.
> 
> Third last are working Australian families.
> 
> Second last are Indigenous areas.
> 
> Last of all those suburbs who vote Liberal.
> 
> It is an utter disgrace. A wasteful use of taxpayers money.
> View attachment 50576
> 
> 
> 
> gg




I wouldn't normally go to so much trouble, but given your history of demonstrably false posts, I thought I'd check the last Townsville federal results by polling place. You can find them here:
http://results.aec.gov.au/15508/Website/HouseDivisionTcpByPollingPlace-15508-165.htm

So according to your claim, the first areas (purple and orange) are ALP areas, while the last are Liberal voters.

Alas, according to the last election results the Aitkinvale booth (the purple area) was won by the LNP candidate 51-49.
The other suburb covered in the first purple segment was Mundingburra South, which was won by the ALP 50.1-49.9.
And the third purple area is a new estate in Annandale, which was won by LNP 60-40.

_So overall slightly leaning towards the LNP._

The (orange) areas currently under construction seem rather evenly split between ALP and LNP voters:
Cranbrook (Won by LNP 55-45)
Townsville CBD (won by LNP 54-46)
South Townsville (Won by ALP 52-48)
Pimilco (Won by ALP 51-49)


*Could it be that the rollout was based on the location of the POI (determined by the ACCC in May 2010), and that the rollout fans out from that POI across the area? 

Or is it far too obvious that someone would roll a cable network outwards from the connection point to the areas served by that connection point?* 

Or perhaps the electrical and optical engineers at NBN Co studied the electoral boundaries before they designed their network, and plotted a course around the LNP areas? If they did, then they'd better go back to school because they did a rather poor job of it.


----------



## So_Cynical

NBNMyths said:


> I wouldn't normally go to so much trouble, but given your history of demonstrably false posts, I thought I'd check the last Townsville federal results by polling place. You can find them here:
> http://results.aec.gov.au/15508/Website/HouseDivisionTcpByPollingPlace-15508-165.htm




GG is politically motivated, claims to be a swing voter, someone who is not party political, claims to have voted Labor....im guessing perhaps once when left in no doubt as to the total corruption of the joh beilke peterson dictatorship.

Just another example of the near total lack of credibility that the ASF right has.


----------



## albaby

"Just another example of the near total lack of credibility that the ASF right has."SO_C why  lump all the right in one basket?I for one would be far to the right of GG.  I wouldn't stop the boats, I would sink them for example,having said that I totally support the NBN. Cheers Al.


----------



## sydboy007

Anyone who thinks Bullturns line of Private enterprise rolling out a broadband network needs to compare Telstra Velocity prices to the NBN and see what private enterprise sees as an adequate return on their investment.

I laught at the fact that if Mr Abbott could admit he's bene wrong about the NBN and that he would fully support the current project that he would probably seal his victory later this year.

As it stands I think between his NoBN and crazy paid paternity leave policy he's scaring off enough voters to make his victory less assured.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

So_Cynical said:


> GG is politically motivated, claims to be a swing voter, someone who is not party political, claims to have voted Labor....im guessing perhaps once when left in no doubt as to the total corruption of the joh beilke peterson dictatorship.
> 
> Just another example of the near total lack of credibility that the ASF right has.




I'll reply to you first, SC, and then to NBNMyths, who at least has some credibility with me.

For some reason I push your buttons, in a negative way. I apologise for that.

I find some of your posts useful, but you should save some of the tar with which you brush others for yourself.

I have said that some years ago I voted Labor. 

I am a committed supporter of the LNP.

I do not pore over your posts trying to guess your voting intentions, but I fear for any party you would belong to or join, as you are a Tonto.

I have many Labor mates, and folk like you would be surprised at the sharing of views and work for the common good that goes on daily between ALP and LNP members

You need to grow up or at least come in to the 21st century, where the political landscape is more clear, than in your simplistic Left/Right universe.

You are a muggle.

gg


----------



## So_Cynical

Garpal Gumnut said:


> You are a muggle.
> 
> gg




You are a red neck.

Enough said.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> I wouldn't normally go to so much trouble, but given your history of demonstrably false posts, I thought I'd check the last Townsville federal results by polling place. You can find them here:
> http://results.aec.gov.au/15508/Website/HouseDivisionTcpByPollingPlace-15508-165.htm
> 
> So according to your claim, the first areas (purple and orange) are ALP areas, while the last are Liberal voters.
> 
> Alas, according to the last election results the Aitkinvale booth (the purple area) was won by the LNP candidate 51-49.
> The other suburb covered in the first purple segment was Mundingburra South, which was won by the ALP 50.1-49.9.
> And the third purple area is a new estate in Annandale, which was won by LNP 60-40.
> 
> _So overall slightly leaning towards the LNP._
> 
> The (orange) areas currently under construction seem rather evenly split between ALP and LNP voters:
> Cranbrook (Won by LNP 55-45)
> Townsville CBD (won by LNP 54-46)
> South Townsville (Won by ALP 52-48)
> Pimilco (Won by ALP 51-49)
> 
> 
> *Could it be that the rollout was based on the location of the POI (determined by the ACCC in May 2010), and that the rollout fans out from that POI across the area?
> 
> Or is it far too obvious that someone would roll a cable network outwards from the connection point to the areas served by that connection point?*
> 
> Or perhaps the electrical and optical engineers at NBN Co studied the electoral boundaries before they designed their network, and plotted a course around the LNP areas? If they did, then they'd better go back to school because they did a rather poor job of it.




Thanks NBNMyths,

Now that I know what I am, I should thank you.

I find personal comments unbecoming and will not accuse you of being a muggle, though you portray some of the characteristics of same.

Annandale does not appear purple on your map.

It displays some ignorance on your part of Townsville topography.

I can assure you, and anyone in Townsville will agree, that the NBN has been first rolled out to upper class ALP voters, enclaves such as Mundingburra and Pimlico where doctors wives and mid to upper level public servants live.

Also booths in Townsville bear little resemblance to the demographics of voters.

Annandale, full of working families who vote LNP in Dawson ( based on Mackay, which has an LNP member George Christensen, Annandale being the most northern booth ) has been excluded from the NBN in the foreseeable future.

Look at the bloody map again, or come and visit.

gg


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

So_Cynical said:


> You are a red neck.
> 
> Enough said.




Agree, you say too much.

Tonto.

gg


----------



## medicowallet

Having worked at the townsville hospital and at the mater hospital, and having lived in Townsville for some time, I have a little understanding of where the "doctor's wives" live (especially those of the Mater doctors).

Also, the last STATE election saw a massive swing to LNP, and this is of relevance to a point, but also historically in Townsville, before the last election, Peter Lindsay (federal) had a large following, and Labor struggled against him. 

http://results.aec.gov.au/13745/Website/HouseDivisionTcpByPollingPlace-13745-165.htm  shows the 2007 election, and although the NBN is a federal initiative, I think that the massive support Labor historically receives from Townsville is also relevant in this argument.

Therefore I agree in essence with GGs comments.
MW

PS
http://www.ecq.qld.gov.au/elections/state/state2009/results/booth84.html
http://www.ecq.qld.gov.au/elections/state/state2006/results/booth84.html
http://www.ecq.qld.gov.au/elections/state/state2009/results/booth61.html

DO NOT underestimate the ability of Peter Lindsay to hold the federal vote for liberal whilst the vast majority of townsvillians were Labor supporters in general.
ie GG was correct


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Our internet and phones and eftpos in Townsville have been out, something to do with a cable broken down south, all today.

Businesses would have lost millions in the North today.

The NBN will be similarly ransom to weather events.

We should have spent all the money on wireless. 

But no, a brilliant idea by a couple of Labor appartchiks who have never worked a day in their lives in private enterprise, thought up over a vino in a business class seat, on the back of an envelope, trumps common sense.

gg


----------



## sydboy007

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Our internet and phones and eftpos in Townsville have been out, something to do with a cable broken down south, all today.
> 
> Businesses would have lost millions in the North today.
> 
> The NBN will be similarly ransom to weather events.
> 
> We should have spent all the money on wireless.
> 
> But no, a brilliant idea by a couple of Labor appartchiks who have never worked a day in their lives in private enterprise, thought up over a vino in a business class seat, on the back of an envelope, trumps common sense.
> 
> gg




How heavy is the rain currently???  I used to have to support a microwave link in Thailand.  Could always tell what the rain was like from the amount of errors on the line.  Could tell it was monsoon kind of rain when the link failed.  Heavy rain affects wireless quite a lot.

So if the cable down south is broken, I'd assume that was a major trunk fibre.  Considering the rainfall that's occurred it would be hard to build any kind of infrastructure that would reliably cope with it.

At least with fibre you wont get the performance degradation I am seeing for customers from Sydney up that you get with copper ADSL.  As soon as the cables get a bit wet things slow down or just totally fail till the cable dries out.


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Our internet and phones and eftpos in Townsville have been out, something to do with a cable broken down south, all today.
> 
> Businesses would have lost millions in the North today.
> 
> The NBN will be similarly ransom to weather events.
> 
> We should have spent all the money on wireless.
> 
> But no, a brilliant idea by a couple of Labor appartchiks who have never worked a day in their lives in private enterprise, thought up over a vino in a business class seat, on the back of an envelope, trumps common sense.
> 
> gg




*1. *If the cable cut was a major one, linking the Townsville phone networks with the rest of the country (as I believe it was), then it would also have affected the wireless since all those mobile towers are connected to the same optical fibre backbone network as the rest of the networks. Wireless towers require electricity and a data link to operate.

The above is of course in addition to the fact that the laws of physics (radio-via-air _V_ light-via-glass) prevent any wireless tech from ever approaching optical fibre for capacity.


*2. *There's not a single country or telecommunications company on the planet that is proposing to replace urban or suburban fixed networks with wireless. Not one. Even the Coalition's broadband plan is not wireless. Do you think you know better than every telco expert in the World, and your own beloved LNP?


*3. *Continuing 2.... The ALP adopted what the experts in telecommunications recommended - Fibre To The Premises.  FTTP is the network of choice all around the World for both private enterprise and Government-owned Telcos. 60 countries have varying levels of FTTP underway. Google are building an FTTP network in Kansas. Most Asian countries have mandated FTTP rollouts. The US, UK, NZ and much of Europe all have targets or projects underway to increase FTTP networks. Even the coalition propose FTTP for all new homes.

I know it must be hard to admit it, but whether you like them or not, the ALP's NBN is admired and touted Worldwide as a very good project. Especially by your beloved "private sector".... Google, Intel, Microsoft, Vodafone, Optus, the Australian Small business council....etc. have all praised the project.

You might want to check the public statements on this page, and the qualifications of those who made them:

http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/what-do-the-experts-say/


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> I suppose we'll wait for another LNP Govt to see the cookie jar is full of a tasty asset to sell off.  Bet they'll add the lovely vertical integration of a Telstra and let them go full retail
> 
> Howard needs to be SHOT for selling off Telstra the way he did.  Retail should have been sold, whith network / wholesale kept in public hands, or sold off as a separate entity.  I would argue the way things stand that consumers and business especially, have been right royal shafted that the sale price has been lost in higher charges.




Sydboy don't get too out of shape, Labor sold off plenty as well.
I bought into the first sale of Telstra and the opposition (Labor) said it was sold too cheap. So the next tranche was sold at $7.40, I'm still waiting for it to hit that again.
Labor sold CBA at $5 first issue, $10 second tranche, I fail to see your reasoning.
Should Howard have split Telstra up and recieved less, or was Keating remiss in selling CBA cheap?
Maybe someone made a fortune out of shares?


----------



## NBNMyths

Here you go GG, some more high praise from the private sector for you:




> *NBN A ‘BRILLIANT FOUNDATION’, SAYS BERNERS-LEE*
> 
> The inventor of the world wide web, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, says the National Broadband Network is a “brilliant foundation” for Australia, but now work has to be done to make sure that we make the most of it.
> 
> “The fact that you have a piece of fibre optic cable coming out of the wall is only a start,” he says. Berners-Lee is making his first visit to Australia in 15 years.
> 
> Berners-Lee spoke in Sydney at the launch of the CSIRO’s $40 million Digital Productivity and Services Flagship research initiative, which is focused on helping the services sector get the full value from the NBN.
> 
> The program aims to help improve Australia’s sagging productivity levels and to change from being a a resource-focused nation to a country that delivers more efficient and innovative “digitally enhanced” services.



..... full story here: http://www.brw.com.au/p/tech-gadgets/nbn_brilliant_foundation_says_berners_LWyBHFJtdUoOi2M2QLpDZN


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> Here you go GG, some more high praise from the private sector for you:
> 
> 
> 
> ..... full story here: http://www.brw.com.au/p/tech-gadgets/nbn_brilliant_foundation_says_berners_LWyBHFJtdUoOi2M2QLpDZN




Perhaps he should wait another 15 years, then possibly more than 10000 people will be able to access it.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> Sydboy don't get too out of shape, Labor sold off plenty as well.
> I bought into the first sale of Telstra and the opposition (Labor) said it was sold too cheap. So the next tranche was sold at $7.40, I'm still waiting for it to hit that again.
> Labor sold CBA at $5 first issue, $10 second tranche, I fail to see your reasoning.
> Should Howard have split Telstra up and recieved less, or was Keating remiss in selling CBA cheap?
> Maybe someone made a fortune out of shares?




The issue I have is converting a public monopoly into a private one.

While the sale price would have been less, a sale of Telstra retail and wholesale would have been much better for consumers and business due to the increased levels of competition.  A Telstra wholesale would have been similar to the current NBN.  Both have a self interest to get the highest number of users on the network.  What retail company gives them the user is of no relevance as each one will pay the same price.

Cut over to Telstra and the situation we have now I think anyone who has a bit of an understanding of how the industry works would agree that Telstra has abused its monopoly and we as consumers have suffered from higher prices.  So the reality is the higher sale price has been at the cost of higher consumer prices.

Oh, and now Lord Bullturn is complaining the Govt is selling the 4G mobile spectrum at too high a price.  Hmmm.  AT&T just paid the equivalent of $1.80 per MHz per subscriber, so seems we're not being ripped off too much


----------



## sails

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Our internet and phones and eftpos in Townsville have been out, something to do with a cable broken down south, all today.
> 
> Businesses would have lost millions in the North today.
> 
> The NBN will be similarly ransom to weather events.
> 
> We should have spent all the money on wireless.
> 
> But no, a brilliant idea by a couple of Labor appartchiks who have never worked a day in their lives in private enterprise, thought up over a vino in a business class seat, on the back of an envelope, trumps common sense.
> 
> gg






We lost our cable internet the last couple of days presumably to the bad weather. Our only access to the internet has been through mobile data on our phones using WIRELESS.  It worked well.

 It made me wonder if fibre optic will fare any better in these bad weather conditions.  It seems not according to the two articles below.  And yet isn't the plan for fibre optic cables to even replace our land lines?  What's the point of that if they are going to just go down when we have heavy rain and people lose both internet and land lines?  We are spending billions of dollars on this?



> Telstra has flown techicians in to repair a flood-damaged fibre optic cable between Gladstone and Bundaberg in Queensland that it says "carries much of the state's communications needs".




Read more:
Telstra flies in crew to repair flood-damaged fibre

and previously in 2011:



> Telstra has repaired a flood-damaged fibre optic cable on the NSW far south coast that cut landline access to the Triple Zero emergency network.




Read more:
Telstra fibre optic cable damaged in NSW storms


----------



## Smurf1976

sydboy007 said:


> Cut over to Telstra and the situation we have now I think anyone who has a bit of an understanding of how the industry works would agree that Telstra has abused its monopoly and we as consumers have suffered from higher prices.  So the reality is the higher sale price has been at the cost of higher consumer prices.



Not only that, but Telstra have profit mined (run down) the copper network to the point that replacement would soon be required even if fibre and the NBN hadn't come along.

The NBN is as much about bailing out a failed privately owned communications network as it is about introducing new technology.

I'm all for private enterprise in its' place but it has a rotten track record when it comes to infrastructure things like electricity, water etc and the evidence is pointing in much the same direction with communications networks. The trouble is, these big corporations tend to focus on this year and next versus the 30 - 100 year life of major infrastructure assets. That leads directly toward running things into the ground so as to extract profits more quickly and ends with a government bail-out.

Communications - being bailed out now.

Electricity - been done once before and we're on the track toward a second go.

Transport - blatant anti-competitive conduct props up private roads in NSW. Meanwhile look what happened in Tas with rail - run down by Pacific National to the point that trains couldn't actually make it from one end of the state to the other without derailing.

As I said, I'm all for private enterprise but I just don't think the model fits well with long life cycle assets. It tends to be too short term focused and that doesn't end well.


----------



## sydboy007

Smurf1976 said:


> Not only that, but Telstra have profit mined (run down) the copper network to the point that replacement would soon be required even if fibre and the NBN hadn't come along.
> 
> As I said, I'm all for private enterprise but I just don't think the model fits well with long life cycle assets. It tends to be too short term focused and that doesn't end well.




+1

Add in that sometimes it's better to have the Govt do it, even if less efficient than the private sector, because at the end of the day they only need to break even and fund maintenance, while the private sector needs to make a 15-20% return on equity else they wont invest.  

That's where the NBN wins.  Low cost of Govt debt, mandated to not make more that 7%, excess profits ploughed back into either extending the fibre foot print or reducing access fees.

I get annoyed the LNP keep bagging the NBN yet they have a policy that's not much more developed than a few slogans on a napkin.  There's nothing to actually compare to the NBN, and as yet the FTTN network they propose is still uncertain as to being a core or non core promise.

If the LNP do go the way of FTTN I will love to see the reaction of their supporters as the devil in the detail becomes well known.

There's no acknowledgement by Bullturn that when a tech goes to move a customer pair to the node, that the records are so bad it is going to be trial and error to get a service working.  he doesn't even provide an estimate to how much copper will be replaced with fibre once they start the rollout.  he's not even been willing to say which areas currently getting fibre are going to end up on fixed wireless instead.


----------



## NBNMyths

sails said:


> We lost our cable internet the last couple of days presumably to the bad weather. Our only access to the internet has been through mobile data on our phones using WIRELESS.  It worked well.
> 
> It made me wonder if fibre optic will fare any better in these bad weather conditions.  It seems not according to the two articles below.  And yet isn't the plan for fibre optic cables to even replace our land lines?  What's the point of that if they are going to just go down when we have heavy rain and people lose both internet and land lines?  We are spending billions of dollars on this?
> 
> 
> 
> Read more:
> Telstra flies in crew to repair flood-damaged fibre
> 
> and previously in 2011:
> 
> 
> 
> Read more:
> Telstra fibre optic cable damaged in NSW storms




Optical fibre is not generally damaged by water, unless that water washes away the soil covering it.

To repeat what I wrote above:

The optical fibres cables damaged in the stories above also carry the traffic for local wireless networks. The mobile network towers are joined to the rest of our phone/internet infrastructure by optical fibre cables. The same optical fibre cables that join telephone exchanges to the wider network. So when a transit cable serving an area is cut, then all phone/internet services (be they copper, NBN or wireless) will be cut, assuming they are from the same provider. (ie if Optus have their own transit cable, then their mobile might still work if a Telstra cable is damaged).

Mobile phone towers also require large amounts of electricity. Major towers have battery backups and/or generators, but if they cannot be refuelled or the tower base itself is flooded, then the network goes down.

And, once again, a cellular wireless network (no matter what the technology) is not physically capable of replacing the data load currently carried by our fixed networks. There is simply not enough bandwidth in the radio spectrum for this to occur, unless we plan rewriting the laws of physics. It's not a limitation you can fix by throwing money at it.

Urban and suburban areas require fixed-line networks for these technical reasons, and it is why *there is no country on the planet* where urban/suburban fixed line networks are being replaced with wireless.

In rural areas where population density is low, wireless systems can cope. And in such areas, the NBN uses wireless or satellite as part of the policy.


----------



## shermerhorn

Boggo said:


> Yeah, they are doing that alright, my tax just went up in the last week, anything that was in the kitty has been spent on setting fire to ceilings, putting illegal immigrants in military accommodation, partly building new classrooms, ensuring that more money is spent on the administration of both the health and education system than on the people doing the work, making donations to corruption in Indonesia and numerous jollies overseas to save the planet.
> 
> You cannot be serious !




Yeap, so no different from any previous govt, only they're giving people in remote areas a shot at joining the 21st century. You've either got a govt that thinks of the future but screws things up or one that sits on its hands and watches the place rot. Hang em, but don't hang em for the one thing they might be doing right. If we had a bit more forward thinking and a bit less bleating the country might be worth a jot.


----------



## NBNMyths

shermerhorn said:


> Yeap, so no different from any previous govt, only they're giving people in remote areas a shot at joining the 21st century. You've either got a govt that thinks of the future but screws things up or one that sits on its hands and watches the place rot. Hang em, but don't hang em for the one thing they might be doing right. If we had a bit more forward thinking and a bit less bleating the country might be worth a jot.




Well written.


----------



## So_Cynical

shermerhorn said:


> Yeap, so no different from any previous govt, only they're giving people in remote areas a shot at joining the 21st century. You've either got a govt that thinks of the future but screws things up or one that sits on its hands and watches the place rot. Hang em, but don't hang em for the one thing they might be doing right. If we had a bit more forward thinking and a bit less bleating the country might be worth a jot.




Cant help but wonder what mite of been had Howard stepped aside before APEC, with Costello backing a FTTN project with a 10 > 12 billion spend and passing Kyoto and promising at the least some backing for renewable's etc.

Perhaps It didn't have to end in tears.


----------



## Bill M

shermerhorn said:


> Yeap, so no different from any previous govt, only they're giving people in remote areas a shot at joining the 21st century. You've either got a govt that thinks of the future but screws things up or one that sits on its hands and watches the place rot. Hang em, but don't hang em for the one thing they might be doing right.* If we had a bit more forward thinking and a bit less bleating the country might be worth a jot*.




Occasionally I pass by this thread, have a read and move on but when a post like this comes all I can say is

I agree 100%


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> Cant help but wonder what mite of been had Howard stepped aside before APEC, with Costello backing a FTTN project with a 10 > 12 billion spend and passing Kyoto and promising at the least some backing for renewable's etc.
> 
> Perhaps It didn't have to end in tears.




Spot on, the splash of cash and monty python style running of infrastructure spending, really didn't have to happen.
It ended up as an excercise, in giving the teenage kids control of the family budget.
The result is as expected, internet gaming and social networking, is the winner.


----------



## NBNMyths

NBN Co have just announced a huge boost to the country/remote NBN wireless and satellite services, from a previous maximum of 12Mbps down, 1Mbps up to 25Mbps down and 5Mbps up.

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_to_boost_wireless_satellite_zEe93EbV2yN97sUZgKnYGN



> NBN Co plans to increase the internet speeds offered to nearly a million homes and businesses in rural and remote Australia starting from June 2013.
> 
> Communications Minister Stephen Conroy announced the changes during an event in Bungendore on the outskirts of Canberra.
> 
> People connecting to the $37.4 billion national broadband network using wireless and satellite technologies will see a doubling of the base downloads speeds from 12 megabits per second to 25Mbps. Uploads will increase from 1Mbps to 5Mbps.
> 
> *The new promised speed is faster than what most people in cities using copper-based broadband like ADSL currently experience.*
> 
> NBN Co said it would sell the new services to telecommunications companies like Telstra and iiNet for the same price as its fibre optic services to provide a level playing field - $27 per month for the 25/5Mbps service and $24 for the 12/1Mbps service respectively.
> 
> “The price for customers for the 25/5 Mbps service on fixed wireless and satellite will be the same as that charged for 25/5 Mbps fibre services at around $40 per month,” Senator Conroy said.
> 
> In a statement NBN Co said customers using fixed wireless services would be the first to see their services increase from June 2013 onwards. Premises in the most remote parts of Australia using satellite systems will not see an increase until the company launches its hardware into space in 2015.
> 
> According to its own predictions, the total number of premises NBN Co expects to have connected using both satellite and wireless services by June 2013 across all of Australia is 38,000. But a large portion of those customers will remain on satellite speeds of up to 6Mbps until 2015.
> 
> NBN Co revealed last month that while 17,300 homes and businesses could now connect to the fixed wireless network, just 1000 had an activated connection.
> 
> Senator Conroy told the ABC on Wednesday morning that the upgraded speeds would be offered after tests conducted on the network.


----------



## sydboy007

Interesting article in the blatantly biased ABC online.

A common complaint about the NBN is that it costs too much, or is expensive.

If you look at the CAPEX of just Telstra and Optus over the last 10 years (similar time frame to the NBN rollout) well Telstra spent $36B inflation adjusted and Optus spent $11.4B.

Admittedly a lot of that spending would have been in the mobile space, but it does go to show that the NBN isn't ridiculously expensive.


----------



## drsmith

Rollout problems bubbling to the surface ?

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_won_detail_problems_MAh8SEs74d7JLkwdPL9PzI


----------



## pixel

There won't be any problem for either Government or Broadband service providers.
I requested clarification from the TIO about the legal obligations of an ISP. Answer: All we, the peepull, are entitled to is a landline telephone service. Neither mobile phones nor internet need work.


----------



## sydboy007

pixel said:


> There won't be any problem for either Government or Broadband service providers.
> I requested clarification from the TIO about the legal obligations of an ISP. Answer: All we, the peepull, are entitled to is a landline telephone service. Neither mobile phones nor internet need work.
> 
> View attachment 50977




While what the TIO has told you is correct, if you could show that the issue had not been resolved by your previous ISP, but since migrating to the new ISP the problems you had experienced had cleared, then at the very least they could probably get any penalties for early termination refunded.

The USO only specifies either 14.4 or 28.8 Kbs data dialup speeds.

I would also add the USO isn't really relevant to the NBN, but at least if you have an NBN service you ave a much greater claim to a certain speed level - may not be able to complain about peak time speeds, but if you could show out of peak times that you are not getting the speeds you pay for, then you'd have a good case with the TIO.


----------



## tinhat

Hey Pixel, you didn't do a very good job of blurring out iinet. Best wishes with your next ISP.


----------



## sydboy007

Finally getting a little clarity from the Bullturn

Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull has confirmed that metropolitan areas of Australia in the HFC cable footprint of Telstra and Optus would not immediately receive the Coalition’s planned fibre to the node upgrade if it wins Government and did not commit to deploying FTTN infrastructure in those areas in the long-term.

The *shadow *minister said:

“An ideal scenario would be that you would – well what you would certainly do is you would not prioritise areas where HFC is,” said Turnbull. “You wouldn’t be overbuilding the HFC areas in the near term because they’re getting very good service already. The Government, however, is over-building the HFC areas.”

Considering HFC is not available to MDUs and Optus has in some areas stopped allowing new users to connect to their cable for internet, seems like large swathes of capital cities will not be getting an internet upgrade any time soon.  So much for a faster rollout.  So the LNP NoBN will now exclude approx 25% of households as that is the HFC footprint.

Will be very interesting to see how that goes down in voter land as understanding percolates through the no longer upgrading suburbs.  It also seems that current NoBN policy has no intention to upgrade internet access in HFC areas.


----------



## pixel

tinhat said:


> Hey Pixel, you didn't do a very good job of blurring out iinet. Best wishes with your next ISP.




Actually, it was Telstra's techs that couldn't get the landline stable enough for ADSL2. They told me our copper was so badly corroded that it would have to be replaced, but as NBN would come in 3 or 4 years, Telstra won't spend a cent any more. After all, the USO stipulates *phone service.* iiNet even put me on one of Telstra's DSLAMs and a "stable" profile. Result: 630 dropouts in a month, 111 peak on a single day! As that still didn't fix my problem, I got the TIO involved, and received my Internet subscription refunded back to April; that's when the trouble started.


----------



## sydboy007

pixel said:


> Actually, it was Telstra's techs that couldn't get the landline stable enough for ADSL2. They told me our copper was so badly corroded that it would have to be replaced, but as NBN would come in 3 or 4 years, Telstra won't spend a cent any more. After all, the USO stipulates *phone service.* iiNet even put me on one of Telstra's DSLAMs and a "stable" profile. Result: 630 dropouts in a month, 111 peak on a single day! As that still didn't fix my problem, I got the TIO involved, and received my Internet subscription refunded back to April; that's when the trouble started.




My job revolves around dealing with this kind of issue every day.  I think the LNP have painted themselves into a corner, not willing to admit just how badly the copper has been maintained by Telstra, and how expensive it would be to replace.

I get 12Mbs and a reasonably stable connection, and there's no one at work that comes close to my speed or reliability.  They'd all take slow and stable, but get slow and constant dropouts.

Now that the LNP have come out and admitted the ~25% of households in the HFC footprint wont be getting any form of upgrade, I'm starting to wonder what they're really offering the punters.


----------



## NBNMyths

*Coalition broadband policy "doomed to fail" : CCC*

The Competitive Carriers Coalition, a group of telecommunications providers (including iiNet, AAPT, Hutchison Telecoms, Macquarie Telecom, Verizon Australia, PowerTel, iPrimus and TransACT) have slammed the LNP broadband policy as being *"doomed to fail"*, saying _*"it will undermine competition"*_ and that _*"it will adversely affect consumer outcomes."*_

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/coalition_broadband_plan_doomed_y82LOVLL6tXZv4peNCKBHN

http://www.abc.net.au/technology/articles/2013/02/15/3691240.htm


I guess we can add them to the list.

Who would have thought there would be a coalition policy that ignores the advice and opinions of the industry experts.... 
http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/what-do-the-experts-say/


----------



## drsmith

*Re: Coalition broadband policy "doomed to fail" : CCC*

Malcolm Turnbull's response,

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/turnbull_hits_back_at_nbn_backers_A02PyZx3X9ivGn8rLd7RnM


----------



## NBNMyths

*Re: Coalition broadband policy "doomed to fail" : CCC*



drsmith said:


> Malcolm Turnbull's response,
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/technology/turnbull_hits_back_at_nbn_backers_A02PyZx3X9ivGn8rLd7RnM




And as usual, he's full of it.

For a start, only about 30% of HFC passed premises can actually connect to it. Then there's the strawman statement about the NBN being able to "charge higher and higher prices".

The fact of the matter is that NBN Co’s prices are regulated by the ACCC. And the SAU submitted to them by NBN Co specifies that they will not be able to increase their pricing at all for the first 5 years. After that, they’ll only be able to lift them at a maximum of 1.5% below CPI in any one year, for the next 25 years. In other words, their prices must fall by at least 1.5% in real terms for the next 30 years.

And the above is worst-case. In reality, given the enormous takeup of 100Mbps speeds on the NBN (almost 50% so far), prices are likely to fall in both real and nominal terms, because the NBN Co is not permitted to earn more than a ~7% return, which will happen if the takeup of 100Mbps speeds continues at the present rate.


----------



## sydboy007

*Re: Coalition broadband policy "doomed to fail" : CCC*



NBNMyths said:


> Who would have thought there would be a coalition policy that ignores the advice and opinions of the industry experts....
> http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/what-do-the-experts-say/




It is a strange world we live in when the ALP seems to be guided by market forces much more than the LNP.

As for NBN prices beign unafordable, so far not seen it, and so far the LNP are giving private enterprises free reign to charge as they please under their NoBN, unlike the NBN which is restricted in raising prices to below CPI.

At least with every revelation the LNP make now shows just how inadequate their NoBN really is.

NBN = world class user pays infrastructure

NoBN = endless Govt subsidy and increasing OPEX to maintain a copper network that's rotting in the ground.


----------



## Smurf1976

*Re: Coalition broadband policy "doomed to fail" : CCC*



sydboy007 said:


> It is a strange world we live in when the ALP seems to be guided by market forces much more than the LNP.



Except when messed about with by NSW and Vic politicians in the 1980's, ye olde public utilities generally always were pretty conscious of market forces, something which seemed to bewilder their "free market" critics who never understood why so-called monopolies did in fact need to advertise on account of competitive pressures.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not some tin foil hat-wearing communist who hates private enterprise. Not at all, business is a good thing (and this is a stock forum after all). It's just that the only examples I've ever seen of private enterprise successfully running infrastructure over an extended period are when they have to compete directly against a rival state-run service. Eg privately owned gas versus government-owned electricity is the obvious one. Other than that, the end result is the same practically every time. Private ownership ends up costing the community more for the service, is less technically efficient in operation and ends up with the physical infrastructure in ruin or damn close to it. 

The crux of the problem is that infrastructure is a long term proposition. In 2013 we are still very heavily reliant in infrastructure which commenced construction in the 1940's, 50's and 60's. That's where most of our energy and water comes from, and much of our transport infrastructure too. And there's nothing wrong with that, if something lasts 100 years then there's no reason at all why we shouldn't still be using 60 year old infrastructure. The trouble is, private enterprise has a strong dislike of investing now, with no hope of even one cent of income for 5 - 10 years and break even being 30 years away. Things like that are better done by government authorities run by competent people and placed out of easy reach of politicians - the old state utility model. 

Leave business to run business and governments to run national / state / city infrastructure in my opinion and don't mix the two.


----------



## sydboy007

*Re: Coalition broadband policy "doomed to fail" : CCC*



Smurf1976 said:


> Private ownership ends up costing the community more for the service, is less technically efficient in operation and ends up with the physical infrastructure in ruin or damn close to it.
> 
> The crux of the problem is that infrastructure is a long term proposition. In 2013 we are still very heavily reliant in infrastructure which commenced construction in the 1940's, 50's and 60's. That's where most of our energy and water comes from, and much of our transport infrastructure too. And there's nothing wrong with that, if something lasts 100 years then there's no reason at all why we shouldn't still be using 60 year old infrastructure. The trouble is, private enterprise has a strong dislike of investing now, with no hope of even one cent of income for 5 - 10 years and break even being 30 years away. Things like that are better done by government authorities run by competent people and placed out of easy reach of politicians - the old state utility model.
> 
> Leave business to run business and governments to run national / state / city infrastructure in my opinion and don't mix the two.




Couldn't agree more.  Add in the fact that private enterprises practically wont train anyone these days, but will whinge about the lack of qualified tradies and moan of the high wages they have to pay resource workers.  The old state water and electricity companies churned out loads of tradies.  Telecom did too.  These days the level 1 tech for Telstra are all contractors who have barely a clue as to how to fix a fault.

I also think PPPs should be a thing of the past.  Let the Govt borrow cheaply, set the cost to the public at a rate to pay off the debt over 40-50 years and we all win by getting the infrastructure we need at a far cheaper rate with no shonky backdoor deals.  Cheap toll roads that can be built with extra lanes to cope with future demand.  I remember 1 of the toll roads built in Sydney had a clause which stipulated if the Govt built any public transport or did anything that could limit the traffic on the road that the building entity would be entitled to compensation.  How is that good for the people???  Thank you Mr Greiner.

I bet if the Fed Govt was selling 30 year bonds right now they could get away with it for around 4%.  Imagine the kind of infrastructure we could build.  A lot of foreign Governments and investors would jump at the chance to get a real yield on their money.  Might as well take their cheap money and rid us of all the bottlenecks that the lack of infrastructure is causing.


----------



## So_Cynical

This is going to be a mess, politically the noalition cant continue the roll out as planned because they fought so hard against it that to turn around and support it would make them look stupid...so they will have to tinker with it, so it can be re-branded as their own.

And that's going to lead to a half arsed NBN.


----------



## medicowallet

So_Cynical said:


> This is going to be a mess, politically the noalition cant continue the roll out as planned because they fought so hard against it that to turn around and support it would make them look stupid...so they will have to tinker with it, so it can be re-branded as their own.
> 
> And that's going to lead to a half arsed NBN.




So you are saying for 99% of users, 

They will only be able to D/L pr0n and pirated movies 2x faster than now and not 4x

and their productivity will remain exactly the same

and their consumption will increase at a slower rate than before..


Not sure how this is a negative.

MW
(Working in the real world)


----------



## So_Cynical

medicowallet said:


> So you are saying for 99% of users,
> 
> They will only be able to D/L pr0n and pirated movies 2x faster than now and not 4x
> 
> and their productivity will remain exactly the same
> 
> and their consumption will increase at a slower rate than before..
> 
> 
> Not sure how this is a negative.
> 
> MW
> (Working in the real world)




Dude you have no idea at all...it may be all about handicapped animal snuff pr0n at your house but out in the real world its not.


----------



## Smurf1976

*Re: Coalition broadband policy "doomed to fail" : CCC*



sydboy007 said:


> These days the level 1 tech for Telstra are all contractors who have barely a clue as to how to fix a fault.



Crux of the problem there is that it's been "dumbed down" to a somewhat ridiculous extent, largely to reduce the cost of training.

It extends beyond the trades however. It used to be quite common to encounter people, in all fields, who really knew what they were on about and who could explain things in great detail. There are a lot fewer such people about these days, and those that exist tend to be in specialised (and fairly well paid) fields that do not involve dealing with the general public.


----------



## sails

So_Cynical said:


> ...And that's going to lead to a half arsed NBN.




And that would seem to be a significant improvement to what we have now...


----------



## NBNMyths

*Chaos: Coalition a total shambles on NBN policy | Delimiter*

Technology website Delimiter is the latest to put the boot into the coalition for their broadband policy disarray.

*Turnbull* can't make up his mind what they're going to do, but constantly mentions FTTN and HFC cable;
*Abbott *claims they'll save $50bn (more than the total cost of the NBN), _and_ still deliver a new nationwide FTTN broadband network (with what money?);
*Hockey *says that we should all use 4G wireless instead;
*Coalition backbenchers* are campaining everywhere for the NBN to be rolled out first in their seats, but at the same time complaining it's a waste of money and voting against it in parliament. 

Chaos indeed!




> *Chaos: Coalition a total shambles on NBN policy | Delimiter*
> 
> Up until now, I’ve been willing to give the Coalition the benefit of the doubt when it comes to national broadband policy, due primarily to the intelligence and experience of its Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull. *But events last week starkly demonstrated the Coalition is currently a complete mess when it comes to this critical portfolio.*
> 
> Two weeks ago, from an outside perspective, the Coalition more or less appeared to have overcome the internal disagreements which have plagued Tony Abbott’s front bench about the future of the NBN. Turnbull’s vision of an expedited, more inexpensive upgrade of Telstra’s copper network to fibre to the node technology, using the bones of NBN Co to do so, and maintaining existing HFC cable infrastructure as well as much of the satellite and wireless components of the NBN, appeared to have gained ascendancy over the “demolish the NBN”, “white elephant” rhetoric of less technically minded Coalition politicians such as Abbott and Shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey.
> 
> *Today, we’re right back where we started: In complete chaos.* Turnbull is demonstrating his technical and commercial ineptitude by pitching a technology to the electorate which most Australians have considered deprecated for most of the past decade, and Abbott is back on the bandwagon about how expensive the NBN “white elephant” is, despite the fact that it is actually slated to deliver the Government a long-term return on its investment.
> ....
> *But all of the signals coming out of the Coalition so far are that, when it comes to national telecommunications policy, it’s not capable of organising that proverbial chook raffle; let alone taking charge of something as complex and important as the NBN.*




Read the full article at: http://delimiter.com.au/2013/02/18/chaos-coalition-a-total-shambles-on-nbn-policy/


----------



## albaby

So_Cynical said:


> Dude you have no idea at all...it may be all about handicapped animal snuff pr0n at your house but out in the real world its not.



Nearly fell off my zimmer frame when I spotted this,great line So-C.


----------



## sydboy007

David Braue on ZDnet has just blown a huge hole in Bullturns fig leaf of saying he can't provide a costing on the LNP NoBN because he can't know what the cost of current contracts will be.

Well David has collated publicly available data to show that the cost of current contracts will be ~$1B post Sept 2013.

So I ask, if a lowly IT journalist is able to do the math to come up with this information, how is it the superior economic management skills of the LNP not able to do the same?

Heaven help up if this mob get their butts onto the treasury benches.

If the LNP can't get their figures right on a <$40B infrastructure project, then what chance do they have to get things right in a $1.5T economy 

Bullturn has changed the cost of the NoBN so many times it's laughable.


----------



## moXJO

I don't think the benefits of the NBN will be realized for a number of years. Libs should bite the bullet and be supporting NBN imo as it will foster new business directions.
They will more then likely leave it alone if they win the election.


----------



## sptrawler

moXJO said:


> I don't think the benefits of the NBN will be realized for a number of years. Libs should bite the bullet and be supporting NBN imo as it will foster new business directions.
> They will more then likely leave it alone if they win the election.




I'm with you on that, I think if the libs get in and it makes sense to keep rolling it out, they will.
All they will say is it is past the point of rollng it back.
At this point in time it is about winning an election, if the coalition back flipped at the moment, labor would carve them up.IMO


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> I'm with you on that, I think if the libs get in and it makes sense to keep rolling it out, they will.
> All they will say is it is past the point of rollng it back.
> At this point in time it is about winning an election, if the coalition back flipped at the moment, labor would carve them up.IMO




Once again attaining political power trumps supporting sound policy.

There'd be short term pain in a backflip, but it just might be the circuit breaker needed to shake his Dr NO image.


----------



## moXJO

sydboy007 said:


> Once again attaining political power trumps supporting sound policy.
> 
> There'd be short term pain in a backflip, but it just might be the circuit breaker needed to shake his Dr NO image.




I know there are lib members currently lobbying for Tbull to change his mind. Libs are more likely to listen then labor would. I think current NBN position is like you said: a smokescreen to political power.


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> Once again attaining political power trumps supporting sound policy.
> 
> There'd be short term pain in a backflip, but it just might be the circuit breaker needed to shake his Dr NO image.




I dissagree, Labor would really run with any weakening of the coalitions stance on the NBN, at this point.

I think Abbott will soon turn the tables on the dr no thing, it is getting a bit off topic. 
But as shown in the article below Abbott blows Swans feet off, in this too and frowing. 
Swan would do better by saying nothing he certainly is no assett. IMO sorry it is a bit off topic.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...a-party-comments/story-e6freono-1226580957617


----------



## sydboy007

I don't know how the LNP can justify the behaviour during the latest Senates Estimates hearing

What are we to make, for instance, of Senator Bill Heffernan’s statement that if Conroy turned off his laptop, which he had with him to aid in the Senate Estimates process, his “brain would go dead”? Or his following statement that Conroy was “full of ****” ”” a statement he made repeatedly? Or Senator Ian McDonald’s statement that NBN Co was “full of Labor Party apparatchiks right from the top”? Or Heffernan’s later statement that Quigley was “brain-dead”?

Now if this was the uncouth behaviour of union officials, I'm sure quite a few member of this forum would be up in arms.  When when it's members of the LNP doing the argy bargy, well seems the attitude is that the ALP deserve it.

I ask you, how many people on this forum talk to their work colleges in the same manner?

One measure of the farcical nature of the ongoing Senate Estimates hearings with respect to the NBN is the fact that during calendar year 2012, NBN Co was asked some 444 questions on notice by Senators and members of the Joint Parliamentary Committee into the NBN ”” including 192 alone from Liberal Senator Simon Birmingham. Upon examining the questions, it’s possible to ascertain ”” as Senator Conroy pointed out during last week’s session ”” that a large amount of them could be answered by the questioners themselves by simply viewing the appropriate section of NBN Co’s comprehensive website.

Obviously LNP senators like things to be served up to them on a silver platter.


----------



## NBNMyths

sydboy007 said:


> I don't know how the LNP can justify the behaviour during the latest Senates Estimates hearing
> 
> What are we to make, for instance, of Senator Bill Heffernan’s statement that if Conroy turned off his laptop, which he had with him to aid in the Senate Estimates process, his “brain would go dead”? Or his following statement that Conroy was “full of ****” ”” a statement he made repeatedly? Or Senator Ian McDonald’s statement that NBN Co was “full of Labor Party apparatchiks right from the top”? Or Heffernan’s later statement that Quigley was “brain-dead”?
> 
> Now if this was the uncouth behaviour of union officials, I'm sure quite a few member of this forum would be up in arms.  When when it's members of the LNP doing the argy bargy, well seems the attitude is that the ALP deserve it.
> 
> I ask you, how many people on this forum talk to their work colleges in the same manner?
> 
> One measure of the farcical nature of the ongoing Senate Estimates hearings with respect to the NBN is the fact that during calendar year 2012, NBN Co was asked some 444 questions on notice by Senators and members of the Joint Parliamentary Committee into the NBN ”” including 192 alone from Liberal Senator Simon Birmingham. Upon examining the questions, it’s possible to ascertain ”” as Senator Conroy pointed out during last week’s session ”” that a large amount of them could be answered by the questioners themselves by simply viewing the appropriate section of NBN Co’s comprehensive website.
> 
> Obviously LNP senators like things to be served up to them on a silver platter.




While all very petty, it's pretty typical behaviour from one politician to another, but I do draw the line at Heffernan describing Mr Quigley as "brain dead".

I doubt you could find a more intelligent and successful man in telecommunications anywhere in the World, and from all reports very well respected and likeable. For the tech-illiterate like Heffernan to call him brain-dead is a pretty low ebb of the debate.


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> Rollout problems bubbling to the surface ?
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_won_detail_problems_MAh8SEs74d7JLkwdPL9PzI




More indigestion on the rollout ?

http://afr.com/p/technology/contractor_troubles_hit_nbn_rollout_B84IZXkCUmoiUV3dTGkZdO


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> More indigestion on the rollout ?
> 
> http://afr.com/p/technology/contractor_troubles_hit_nbn_rollout_B84IZXkCUmoiUV3dTGkZdO




Considering the AFR and The Australian are pretty always factually incorrect about what they report on the NBN I wouldn't put too much stock in the article.


----------



## medicowallet

sydboy007 said:


> as Senator Conroy pointed out during last week’s session ”” that a large amount of them could be answered by the questioners themselves by simply viewing the appropriate section of NBN Co’s comprehensive website.
> 
> Obviously LNP senators like things to be served up to them on a silver platter.




lol

It is always different getting it from the horse's mouth. 

Conroy can hide behind bs and fabricated statements on a website, but if he SAYS the bs then it comes back to bite him on the ass.

MW


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Considering the AFR and The Australian are pretty always factually incorrect about what they report on the NBN I wouldn't put too much stock in the article.



Interesting.

The AFR is Fairfax.


----------



## Smurf1976

drsmith said:


> More indigestion on the rollout ?
> 
> http://afr.com/p/technology/contractor_troubles_hit_nbn_rollout_B84IZXkCUmoiUV3dTGkZdO



What do you seriously expect? Has there ever been a situation where a contractor doing electrical or similar work for government didn't either mess it up or walk away with a ridiculous sum of money? Government = easy money and the whole industry knows it. 

As I've said before, business and government don't mix well. Business should run business and government should keep away. If government is going to build the NBN then NBNCo should set up their own works depots, hire their own labour and so on. Doing so ends up far cheaper in the long run. Heck, even privately owned utilities are going back to this approach to some extent.

Just wait until the inevitable kinks in the cable, improperly removed asbestos, sinking pits, insufficient compaction and poor reinstatement start turning up. Then it'll be a real circus.

Handing huge profits to contractors doesn't mean you have small government. It actually means you have a far bigger government than necessary due to the additional taxation required. The sooner people work this out, the better off business and individuals alike will be.


----------



## IFocus

drsmith said:


> Interesting.
> 
> The AFR is Fairfax.




News print and TV media are directly threatened by the NBN hence most are actively dead against it News have pretty much taken the lead in shock negative coverage.


----------



## sails

Unbelievable... first they won't release costings and now they want an industry study to determine the best way to build the NBN?  Why didn't they think about that BEFORE they started spending tax payers money?

It would seem anything the coalition might do with the NBN is highly likely to be an improvement...




> The head of the National Broadband Network (NBN) wants an industry study to determine the best way to build the high-speed internet project.
> 
> Construction has been underway on the NBN for more than two years but there is still debate over which technology should be used.




and



> Opposition communication spokesman Malcolm Turnbull says the study should have been completed before the Government embarked on the NBN project.
> 
> "Mike Quigley's statement today is a colossal admission of failure," he told PM.
> 
> "It is admitting that the Government has made a hash of this ... that there needs to be an examination of the different options and ... that should have been done four years ago."




Read more:  http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-02-22/nbn-boss-calls-for-study-into-broadband-policy/4535092


----------



## dutchie

sails said:


> Unbelievable... first they won't release costings and now they want an industry study to determine the best way to build the NBN?  Why didn't they think about that BEFORE they started spending tax payers money?
> 
> It would seem anything the coalition might do with the NBN is highly likely to be an improvement...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and
> 
> 
> 
> Read more:  http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-02-22/nbn-boss-calls-for-study-into-broadband-policy/45350[B]92






Looks like there might be some holes in the drink coaster plan.

Maybe they should have done a little research first,   duh


NBN 'can be changed', says Mike Quigley 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ays-mike-quigley/story-fn59niix-1226583906421

At least that intelligent and successful telecommunications man, Mr Quigley can see the light!
( Bet he doesn't wear red underpants on *his* head)


----------



## NBNMyths

sails said:


> Unbelievable... first they won't release costings and now they want an industry study to determine the best way to build the NBN?  Why didn't they think about that BEFORE they started spending tax payers money?
> 
> It would seem anything the coalition might do with the NBN is highly likely to be an improvement...
> 
> 
> and
> 
> Read more:  http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-02-22/nbn-boss-calls-for-study-into-broadband-policy/4535092






dutchie said:


> Looks like there might be some holes in the drink coaster plan.
> 
> Maybe they should have done a little research first,   duh
> 
> 
> NBN 'can be changed', says Mike Quigley
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ays-mike-quigley/story-fn59niix-1226583906421
> 
> At least that intelligent and successful telecommunications man, Mr Quigley can see the light!
> ( Bet he doesn't wear red underpants on *his* head)





Interesting the way Mr Quigley's statements have been completely misconstrued by Turnbull, and then reported by the media.

He most certainly has not called for a review of the technology used for the NBN, and most certainly is not looking for "a better way" to rollout the NBN. He merely said that if the Coalition think there are better alternatives, then ask the Communications Alliance. 

And the inference that no research was done on the technology chosen is blatantly false. To the contrary, the initial plan back in 2007 was FTTN. As we all know, that proposal fell over for a number of reasons, mainly Telstra. Numerous submissions recommended FTTP, and that's what the review panel recommended.

Since then of course, FTTP rollouts have exploded around the World, and it has become the technology of choice.

Turnbull's touted technologies of FTTN and HFC have just been described as the "steam trains" of broadband technology by Paul Budde. There has been no new standard for FTTN ratified since 2006. That's 7 years of stagnation!

*Nobody* is constructing new HFC networks around the World now, because FTTP is better and cheaper.

*Nobody* is constructing FTTN except for incumbent carriers/owners of copper networks. And The Govt or NBN Co are not the incumbent operator of the Australian copper network.

The fact is, that when the NBN project was begun in 2009, there was no possibility of going with an open access FTTN network instead, because Telstra owned it and they refused to co-operate. That left the Govt with little choice, and given the swath of recent FTTP announcements from around the World and the rapid obsolescence of HFC and FTTN, it has turned out to be a smart decision.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/02/20/uk-france-broadband-idUKBRE91J11D20130220
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiber_to_the_premises_by_country


----------



## sails

NBNmyths - are you employed by someone to professionally promote NBN?

Your link in your signature seems more than a lay person's interest in NBN.


----------



## sydboy007

dutchie said:


> Looks like there might be some holes in the drink coaster plan.
> 
> Maybe they should have done a little research first,   duh
> 
> 
> NBN 'can be changed', says Mike Quigley
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ays-mike-quigley/story-fn59niix-1226583906421
> 
> At least that intelligent and successful telecommunications man, Mr Quigley can see the light!
> ( Bet he doesn't wear red underpants on *his* head)




If the NBN is a drink coaster plan, then Malcolm has the leftovers of a soggy napkin at an all you can eat buffet.

At least with the NBN you are guaranteed the speed you pay for.  The NoBN is all about UP TO with so far nothing concrete.  Now if Malcolm would state the maximum node to premises cable length, a semblance of debate could occur.  I find it crass hypocrisy to complaint he Government is spending too much and yet not even be able to give an approximate figure on what his NoBN will cost.

At present the Govt has a well thought out plan for delivering fiber to practically all Australians.

The NoBN is offering what?  No minimum speed.  No rollout schedule.  Nothing on the equipment to be used.  No estimate of CAPEX and continuing OPEX.  No estimate of the resale value of the network once finished.

Basically the LNP have gone from a fully costed policy last year - so Malcolm said on Lateline - only to say 3 days later that no he didn't have a fully costed plan.  They still have no plan.  Saying faster and cheaper 10 times a day does not constitute a plan.

I have yet to read of a story of someone complaining about the NBN once they're on it.  I'm sure there's complaints about RSPs and teething probs that come from doing something new, but when businesses can gain access to 100/40 speed plans for <$150 a month with 1TB of downloads, the REVOLUTION for the SME market will probably provide productivity improvements and cost savings to businesses in excess of the cost to build the NBN.  I know quite a few small business people and have yet to hear one of them say they're happy with their internet speeds.  The cost to move up from ADSL is just so high that it can be hard to justify.

Tele health trials are already showing they can help reduce medical costs for the elderly by over 50% simply by allowing them to talk to their doctors via their TV with a video camera.  These trials free up ambulances acting as taxis, free up hospital beds by allowing people to be monitored in their homes.  Cisco has come out and said you  will need a minimum 5Mbs up and down to support their new health communications systems.  The NBN will do this easily, the NoBN will be able to do this ONLY for the select few mainly in the capital cities.

Malcolm is staking his reputation on a speedy rollout of the NoBN, yet has to get Telstra to agree to sell him their copper network.  He's given Telstra a vice and placed his own googlies into it and pretty much told Telstra to keep applying pressure till he hands them a blank cheque.  There is absolutely no incentive for Telstra to do a deal that isn't obscenely in their favour.  This will go down in history as the worst negotiation tactic of a Federal Govt, up there with Gillard and the miners, though I get the feeling Malcolm's is going to cost the country far more over the long term!  If the LNP win the election I say buy Telstra as they will be getting at least double the amount of payments, AND they will have entrenched their position as the dominant telco in Australia till a FTTH network is built, depending on if we've become such a slowlane country that we can even afford it.


----------



## drsmith

IFocus said:


> News print and TV media are directly threatened by the NBN hence most are actively dead against it News have pretty much taken the lead in shock negative coverage.



I read the AFR article online from the link provided.


----------



## medicowallet

sydboy007 said:


> If the NBN is a drink coaster plan, then Malcolm has the leftovers of a soggy napkin at an all you can eat buffet.




One of the things the lefties and the techheads need to realise is that someone has to pay for this $50 billion project.

Also, as I have been harping on about for ages, is there are better places with much greater returns to put $50 billion into.

Also the health part is a bit of a pipe dream at the moment, as the health system cannot even fund what it is doing at the moment.

The real world (where pirating movies, downloading movies and consuming should not be the main concern for government expenditure) exists, take a while and take a whiff of it.

MW


----------



## albaby

sails said:


> NBNmyths - are you employed by someone to professionally promote NBN?
> 
> Your link in your signature seems more than a lay person's interest in NBN.




If he is, he deserves a bonus.Great work.Al


----------



## NBNMyths

sails said:


> NBNmyths - are you employed by someone to professionally promote NBN?
> 
> Your link in your signature seems more than a lay person's interest in NBN.




As I've said many times....

*No.* I receive no benefit in money or otherwise for what I write about the NBN. I'm not and never have been a member of any political party. I don't know anyone who works at NBN Co or any related company. I don't own any shares (period) and I (to the best of my knowledge) don't know anyone who owns any shares in any NBN-related company.


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> One of the things the lefties and the techheads need to realise is that someone has to pay for this $50 billion project.
> 
> Also, as I have been harping on about for ages, is there are better places with much greater returns to put $50 billion into.
> 
> Also the health part is a bit of a pipe dream at the moment, as the health system cannot even fund what it is doing at the moment.
> 
> The real world (where pirating movies, downloading movies and consuming should not be the main concern for government expenditure) exists, take a while and take a whiff of it.
> 
> MW




Yes, somebody does have to pay for it. And it will be the users. Most particularly the "tech heads" who pay for the biggest, fastest NBN plans and therefore make the biggest contribution to paying for the project.

And it's not a $50bn project. It's a $37bn project (capex), requiring a peak of $39bn (inc opex) of external funding either through Govt or NBN Co's own debt raising. The $11bn in opex to Telstra does not add to the funding required for the project, as it is paid progressively and therefore mostly comes from operating revenue.

But (for argument's sake) if you want to include that $11bn and call the NBN a ~$50bn project, then you must also include that $11bn (plus another $4-9bn to buy the copper) in the Coalition's "$19bn" FTTN proposal. 

So that takes their policy to $34-39bn for a technology considered obsolete around the World, that will require upgrading in another 10 years.


So the broadband policy choice is: 

Spend ~$50bn (inc Telstra) for an FTTP network that can already do 1000Mbps, which will probably last 50 years without requiring substantial upgrading.​*OR*
Spend ~$34-39bn (inc Telstra) for an FTTN network that will deliver 18-50Mbps, which will probably require an FTTP upgrade within a decade of completion, at a further cost of at least $20bn.​
Which represents better value, would you say?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> As I've said many times....
> 
> *No.* I receive no benefit in money or otherwise for what I write about the NBN. I'm not and never have been a member of any political party. I don't know anyone who works at NBN Co or any related company. I don't own any shares (period) and I (to the best of my knowledge) don't know anyone who owns any shares in any NBN-related company.




I think you need therapy mate.

To get so wound up over something that is going to be scrapped in October 2013, in which you have no interest.

gg


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> Yes, somebody does have to pay for it. And it will be the users. Most particularly the "tech heads" who pay for the biggest, fastest NBN plans and therefore make the biggest contribution to paying for the project.
> 
> And it's not a $50bn project. It's a $37bn project (capex), requiring a peak of $39bn (inc opex) of external funding either through Govt or NBN Co's own debt raising. The $11bn in opex to Telstra does not add to the funding required for the project, as it is paid progressively and therefore mostly comes from operating revenue.
> 
> But (for argument's sake) if you want to include that $11bn and call the NBN a ~$50bn project, then you must also include that $11bn (plus another $4-9bn to buy the copper) in the Coalition's "$19bn" FTTN proposal.
> 
> So that takes their policy to $34-39bn for a technology considered obsolete around the World, that will require upgrading in another 10 years.
> 
> 
> So the broadband policy choice is:
> 
> Spend ~$50bn (inc Telstra) for an FTTP network that can already do 1000Mbps, which will probably last 50 years without requiring substantial upgrading.​*OR*
> Spend ~$34-39bn (inc Telstra) for an FTTN network that will deliver 18-50Mbps, which will probably require an FTTP upgrade within a decade of completion, at a further cost of at least $20bn.​
> Which represents better value, would you say?




Oh NBNmyths and your naive belief that the NBN will come in on time and budget.

But hey, lets take your rolleyes comment and have a think about it with what is, in my world, a realistic view:

$15 billion less for a service that delivers speeds sufficient for ALL personal use, and a vast majority of business use.

then $20 billion in 10 years time to go to FTTP   

What is the cost in interest of $15 billion over 10 years mate?


What is the opportunity cost of say $15 billion into ports, or rail, or other methods of industry?


Oh, has the cat got your tongue?

You must live in a different world where money taken from the taxpayer is not able to be directed to alternative projects of which are proven benefit to the economy.. I stand by the belief that NBN speeds will do little to improve export earnings, and may in fact increase imports - ie be a negative for our economy, but I guess you will disagree (and, with your expertise, please show me some examples of how it will improve exports)
MW


----------



## Smurf1976

medicowallet said:


> You must live in a different world where money taken from the taxpayer is not able to be directed to alternative projects of which are proven benefit to the economy.. I stand by the belief that NBN speeds will do little to improve export earnings, and may in fact increase imports - ie be a negative for our economy



Agree with your point but would government actually invest in something else instead?

Apart from roads and the occasional rail line, the Australian Government doesn't really do anything much with infrastructure these days.

Gas - mostly privately owned. Liquid fuels - all privately owned. Electricity - last involvement of the Australian Government actually building something of significance was 38 years ago. Water - that's in the too hard basket given the political need to keep the Greens happy. Ports - mostly run by the states or private.

The NBN is somewhat unique in that it represents actual investment in real infrastructure which has at least some lasting benefit. That's the main thing I see going for it - if it doesn't happen then they'll just blow the money on something silly instead.  

Something that's missing in this debate is that the NBN is effectively a Telstra bail-out due to chronic underinvestment in the copper network. FTTN has limited viability for that reason. If the government had any balls then they'd build FTTN now and force (literally force) Telstra to fund the maintenance backlog (which at a rough guess would pay the difference between FTTN and FTTP anyway). Trouble is, governments have a tendency of privatising the profits and socialising the costs and that's exactly what's driving much of this. By building FTTP they are basically allowing Telstra to simply get away with it....


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I think you need therapy mate.
> 
> To get so wound up over something that is going to be scrapped in October 2013, in which you have no interest.
> 
> gg




You mean like it was going to be scrapped when you started this thread, and again about half way through?


----------



## Calliope

Smurf1976 said:


> The NBN is somewhat unique in that it represents actual investment in real infrastructure which has at least some lasting benefit.




You mean like the $16.2 billion blown on the BER?


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> Oh NBNmyths and your naive belief that the NBN will come in on time and budget.
> 
> But hey, lets take your rolleyes comment and have a think about it with what is, in my world, a realistic view:
> 
> $15 billion less for a service that delivers speeds sufficient for ALL personal use, and a vast majority of business use.
> 
> then $20 billion in 10 years time to go to FTTP
> 
> What is the cost in interest of $15 billion over 10 years mate?
> 
> 
> What is the opportunity cost of say $15 billion into ports, or rail, or other methods of industry?
> 
> 
> Oh, has the cat got your tongue?
> 
> You must live in a different world where money taken from the taxpayer is not able to be directed to alternative projects of which are proven benefit to the economy.. I stand by the belief that NBN speeds will do little to improve export earnings, and may in fact increase imports - ie be a negative for our economy, but I guess you will disagree (and, with your expertise, please show me some examples of how it will improve exports)
> MW





Although I wrote $20bn, it would actually be considerably more than that. If it's $20bn extra today for FTTP, it would probably be $40bn extra in 15 years, given that most of the expense is in labour.

That aside, your "it won't be on budget" argument applies just as much to the Coalition's policy as the NBN, meaning the cost difference between the policies would be similar even if blowouts occur.


Whether ports, rail, roads etc are of benefit to the economy is a moot point. Spending on those items would not earn a positive return, and therefore would have to be found in the budget from tax revenue. Unlike the NBN money, since subscribers must pay to use it, returning those funds to the Govt.

Who are you to say that FTTN would be sufficient for all personal use? 15 years ago, 56k dialup was "sufficient for all personal use". Do you seriously expect that we have reached the end of development for broadband uses, and that nothing will arrive requiring better-than-30Mbps in the near future? Hell, it's already here. 4kTV is already retailing, and 8k is ratified. 150Mbps data rates for a single compressed 3D stream.

Subscriptions to the NBN to date also disagree with your claim that fast speeds are not wanted/required. Almost 50% of NBN customers so far have chosen the top 100Mbps speed.

The other point I didn't make earlier is that for the NBN to break even, it depends on the revenue from those high speed plans. It requires an ARPU of $33 per user, but it's not until you hit 50Mbps that they get that level. Essentially, they lose money on the 12 and 25Mbps fibre, wireless and satellite plans. They need the 50/100/250/1000 tiers to get their money back, and particularly pay for the rural wireless/sat segments. Because FTTN will only offer maybe the 12 and 25 plans to most users, with a few able to get 50, it will be very difficult to earn a return, even with a lower capex, unless they increase pricing.

It's a lose-lose situation. We get a lower capability network, but it won't cost us any less to use it. And the ~60% of customers who have show they are willing to pay more for a fast NBN plan (50 and 100) would have that option taken from them.


----------



## So_Cynical

Nothing to do with the NBN (according to the article) but found this interesting.

Ultra-fast deal for all federal MPs



			
				SMH said:
			
		

> All federal politicians will have ultra-fast internet cables installed in their electorate office within weeks as part of a new $23 million telecommunications contract. *The upgrade comes after widespread complaints from politicians and their staff about broadband speeds in suburban offices.* This will give politicians access to the same download speeds as the national broadband network, but years before it is widely available to all Australians.
> 
> Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...federal-mps-20130219-2epm3.html#ixzz2LiPgRomm


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> You mean like the $16.2 billion blown on the BER?




You don't think that having 23,000 new school buildings will have a lasting benefit? It may have cost 10% too much, but that doesn't mean the $16bn was blown. Arguably $1.6bn was, although that's a debate for another thread.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> You don't think that having 23,000 new school buildings will have a lasting benefit?



How much more benefit could have been provided by an analysis of how best to spend the money ?

In the context of schools alone, there's libraries, classroom upgrades, aircons, sport facilities, the list is endless.

That's the fundamental problem with Labor. Just spend and spend hard and and leave the consequences to someone else. The waste goes well beyond the 10% you refer to.


----------



## Smurf1976

Calliope said:


> You mean like the $16.2 billion blown on the BER?



No.

If we build the NBN then it is highly likely that it will still be in use for quite some time. It thus delivers at least _some_ benefits, the unanswered question being in regard to their extent. Assuming there aren't streets where literally nobody connects (possible but in general that wouldn't be the case), there will be at least some practical use of everything that gets built.

In contrast, the BER was essentially a make work scheme. It possibly built some things that were actually useful, but much of it wasn't. At least a portion of the "investment" produces zero actual benefits. In contrast, I don't think that anyone could honestly say that there is zero benefit in the NBN. 

So far as the cost of the NBN is concerned, a fair analysis can not be done based on $37 billion, $50 billion or any other "total construction cost" figure. Since we'll have to invest heavily in the copper network anyway, a fairer analysis of the cost of fibre would be (Cost of NBN) - (Cost of keeping copper network going) and the end result of that is likely to be a long way short of the figures generally being discussed here.


----------



## drsmith

A key question for the NBN will be blowouts, both in terms of time and cost.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> A key question for the NBN will be blowouts, both in terms of time and cost.




No more of a question than it will be if scaled back to FTTN.


----------



## Aussiejeff

So_Cynical said:


> Nothing to do with the NBN (according to the article) but found this interesting.
> 
> Ultra-fast deal for all federal MPs




Just think how much more pr0n they will be able to download.....


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> Although I wrote $20bn, it would actually be considerably more than that. If it's $20bn extra today for FTTP, it would probably be $40bn extra in 15 years, given that most of the expense is in labour.
> 
> That aside, your "it won't be on budget" argument applies just as much to the Coalition's policy as the NBN, meaning the cost difference between the policies would be similar even if blowouts occur.
> 
> 
> Whether ports, rail, roads etc are of benefit to the economy is a moot point. Spending on those items would not earn a positive return, and therefore would have to be found in the budget from tax revenue. Unlike the NBN money, since subscribers must pay to use it, returning those funds to the Govt.
> 
> Who are you to say that FTTN would be sufficient for all personal use? 15 years ago, 56k dialup was "sufficient for all personal use". Do you seriously expect that we have reached the end of development for broadband uses, and that nothing will arrive requiring better-than-30Mbps in the near future? Hell, it's already here. 4kTV is already retailing, and 8k is ratified. 150Mbps data rates for a single compressed 3D stream.
> 
> Subscriptions to the NBN to date also disagree with your claim that fast speeds are not wanted/required. Almost 50% of NBN customers so far have chosen the top 100Mbps speed.
> 
> The other point I didn't make earlier is that for the NBN to break even, it depends on the revenue from those high speed plans. It requires an ARPU of $33 per user, but it's not until you hit 50Mbps that they get that level. Essentially, they lose money on the 12 and 25Mbps fibre, wireless and satellite plans. They need the 50/100/250/1000 tiers to get their money back, and particularly pay for the rural wireless/sat segments. Because FTTN will only offer maybe the 12 and 25 plans to most users, with a few able to get 50, it will be very difficult to earn a return, even with a lower capex, unless they increase pricing.
> 
> It's a lose-lose situation. We get a lower capability network, but it won't cost us any less to use it. And the ~60% of customers who have show they are willing to pay more for a fast NBN plan (50 and 100) would have that option taken from them.




Just like a politician..   So, is it 10 years or 15 years?

A change of goalposts hey?

Here is an idea, 

Why not go for a 10000 speed network, that costs $1 trillion, it won't cost the government anything, and in 100 years time it will be needed just to send the equivalent of an e-mail.   The minimum speed allowed will be 3000 and this will cover the break even.   

Everyone is a winner because the govnuts won't have to front up with any money, and the monopoly will be mandated to provide services at a cost determined by the efficiency of the investment that was made WITHOUT analysis of it.

Sounds interesting... in fact the only problem at the moment is Howard's Liberals stuffed up the sale of Telstra, therefore decreasing the ability of third parties to compete efficiently... this is being replaced by Rudd's alternative monopoly which will also stifle competition.

But the important question is:

How does 4k TV allow for increased exports for the country to effectively fund the $50 billion stripped out of the economy for the NBN?

Oh, cat got your tongue?

MW


----------



## sydboy007

medicowallet said:


> Just like a politician..   So, is it 10 years or 15 years?
> 
> A change of goalposts hey?
> 
> Here is an idea,
> 
> Why not go for a 10000 speed network, that costs $1 trillion, it won't cost the government anything, and in 100 years time it will be needed just to send the equivalent of an e-mail.   The minimum speed allowed will be 3000 and this will cover the break even.
> 
> Everyone is a winner because the govnuts won't have to front up with any money, and the monopoly will be mandated to provide services at a cost determined by the efficiency of the investment that was made WITHOUT analysis of it.
> 
> Sounds interesting... in fact the only problem at the moment is Howard's Liberals stuffed up the sale of Telstra, therefore decreasing the ability of third parties to compete efficiently... this is being replaced by Rudd's alternative monopoly which will also stifle competition.
> 
> But the important question is:
> 
> How does 4k TV allow for increased exports for the country to effectively fund the $50 billion stripped out of the economy for the NBN?
> 
> Oh, cat got your tongue?
> 
> MW




Let me give you a little homework.

Ring around and find out how much it would cost to get a 100/40 Mbs internet access for business outside a capital city and major regional city in Australia.

If you can find a non NBN offering at less than $150 / month I'll gladly rescind my support for the NBN and start to view it as a huge white elephant that businesses in this country have no need for.  Actually if you can find anyone but Telstra willing to provide that to you I will be greatly surprised.

Also let us know what the installation cost will be - usually that's quite a few hundred dollars, depending on how long you are willing to sign up for.  My company is usually a 3 year minimum, and I can assure you that currently a 2Mbs SHDSL service costs a LOT more than $150 a month!

While I like what the NBN will offer the general public, for me the major benefit will be the huge reduction to businesses for their telecommunication costs.  High speed internet will provide a major competitive advantage to Australian companies, especially the SME and against foreign competitors.

As for replacing a private monopoly with a public owned one, I'm not sure which is worse, but at least a Govt owned monopoly can in theory be easier to control than the private one.  As you say, Howard got us into this situation and the ALP have done their best to try and get around it.  The wonderful private sector - AKA Telstra - has taken the short term view of reducing OPEX and maintenance on the copper network to improve the short term profit.  Without the NBN what's going to happen?  The LNP want to buy a copper network that's about 5 minutes to midnight, and pay top dollar for it.  That to me is a far bigger waste of money than the current NBN will ever be.


----------



## Calliope

drsmith said:


> A key question for the NBN will be blowouts, both in terms of time and cost.




Like in any Labor Government enterprise* the contractors will fleece the taxpayer for millions. This is especially so when there is no cost-benefit analysis carried out. All the government says is ''here is the money... spend it''. Like with the BER, value for money plays second fiddle to ribbon-cutting opportunities. 

*''Labor Government enterprise'' is of course, an oxymoron.


----------



## medicowallet

sydboy007 said:


> Let me give you a little homework.
> 
> Ring around and find out how much it would cost to get a 100/40 Mbs internet access for business outside a capital city and major regional city in Australia.
> 
> If you can find a non NBN offering at less than $150 / month I'll gladly rescind my support for the NBN and start to view it as a huge white elephant that businesses in this country have no need for.  Actually if you can find anyone but Telstra willing to provide that to you I will be greatly surprised.
> 
> Also let us know what the installation cost will be - usually that's quite a few hundred dollars, depending on how long you are willing to sign up for.  My company is usually a 3 year minimum, and I can assure you that currently a 2Mbs SHDSL service costs a LOT more than $150 a month!
> 
> While I like what the NBN will offer the general public, for me the major benefit will be the huge reduction to businesses for their telecommunication costs.  High speed internet will provide a major competitive advantage to Australian companies, especially the SME and against foreign competitors.
> 
> As for replacing a private monopoly with a public owned one, I'm not sure which is worse, but at least a Govt owned monopoly can in theory be easier to control than the private one.  As you say, Howard got us into this situation and the ALP have done their best to try and get around it.  The wonderful private sector - AKA Telstra - has taken the short term view of reducing OPEX and maintenance on the copper network to improve the short term profit.  Without the NBN what's going to happen?  The LNP want to buy a copper network that's about 5 minutes to midnight, and pay top dollar for it.  That to me is a far bigger waste of money than the current NBN will ever be.




I have nothing against competitive high speed broadband for businesses.  A vast majority of small businesses have speeds via ADSL2 which are more than sufficient, and businesses that require more can, as you have inferred, access higher speeds, albiet at a higher cost...  also, what is the cost of a business grade 100/40 connection on the NBN?

The vast majority of use will be for private consumption for the general user, and I think if anyone out there with the means to do a study, were to do so, then they would likely find that there is either a net loss to the country with high speed broadband, or at least less of a benefit than expected, and a cost-benefit analysis would be a great place to start as we have other, proven avenues to invest $50 billion into to make money.


We are going to disagree, as I have owned and run a tech heavy business with very large turnovers (talking 8 figures plus)  on ADSL2, no problems.     Considering most small businesses around the country are not to that kind of level, I can assure you that ADSL or ADSL2 would be sufficient for years to come.

We are also going to see over the next 10 years what kinds of innovations that add to *exports* are generated, as even though the NBN has been around for years, I am yet to hear of the massive benefit derived from its introduction, and I am sure that if there was a benefit, the spruiking would be heard across the country.

MW


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> Just like a politician..   So, is it 10 years or 15 years?
> 
> A change of goalposts hey?
> 
> Here is an idea,
> 
> Why not go for a 10000 speed network, that costs $1 trillion, it won't cost the government anything, and in 100 years time it will be needed just to send the equivalent of an e-mail.   The minimum speed allowed will be 3000 and this will cover the break even.
> 
> Everyone is a winner because the govnuts won't have to front up with any money, and the monopoly will be mandated to provide services at a cost determined by the efficiency of the investment that was made WITHOUT analysis of it.
> 
> Sounds interesting... in fact the only problem at the moment is Howard's Liberals stuffed up the sale of Telstra, therefore decreasing the ability of third parties to compete efficiently... this is being replaced by Rudd's alternative monopoly which will also stifle competition.
> 
> But the important question is:
> 
> How does 4k TV allow for increased exports for the country to effectively fund the $50 billion stripped out of the economy for the NBN?
> 
> Oh, cat got your tongue?
> 
> MW




Have you ever known the cat to have my tongue? Why would a few poor arguments suddenly cause it to happen? 

I haven't moved any goalposts. You'll note that I previously wrote "10 years after completion" (of FTTN), which would be about 15 years from now (if they're lucky).

Funny that you facetiously say they should build a network capable of 10,000Mbps, since that's exactly what the NBN will be able to do in 5 or 10 years time. Such is the beauty of building a fibre network, where the only thing required for a speed increase is an upgrade of the equipment at the ends of the cables. The NBN uses GPON (gigabit passive optical network), and the next standard (already ratified) is 10GPON, which does indeed offer 10Gbps (10,000Mbps). By replacing some minor components, the NBN can become a 10GPON network, and it's likely that before the rollout is complete, they will start using 10GPON as the component costs come down. There are further improvements already being researched.

There is a massive difference between Telstra and NBN Co. The former is a vertically-integrated monopoly, the latter is a wholesale-only, open access monopoly with prices regulated by the ACCC.

Communications is a natural monopoly, just like power lines and water pipes. It makes absolutely no sense to roll out competing cable infrastructure any more than rolling out multiple sets of power lines to each house. To do so would be a waste of time, money and resources. Telstra and Optus blew a billion trying, and no-one would be that stupid again.

However if someone were silly enough, there is nothing in the NBN legislation preventing it. Companies are free to roll out competing wired networks to the NBN, but they must do so on a wholesale-only, open access basis. Just like the NBN. There are no restrictions at all on wireless networks.

Why does the NBN have to earn export income? Are we supposed to deny access to tech such as 4kTV simply because it doesn't earn export dollars? What a top idea. Perhaps we should also stop spending on healthcare, since it also doesn't add to export earnings?


----------



## Smurf1976

Calliope said:


> Like in any Labor Government enterprise* the contractors will fleece the taxpayer for millions.



Agreed although it makes no difference who is in government. It is outsourcing itself that brings about the taxpayer rip offs, not which party oversees it.

All governments are easy money and most contractors have worked this out. When is the last time you heard of a government actually taking legal action against a contractor in a meaningful way for poor quality work? It's probably happened sometime, but 95% of it just gets accepted "as is" due to the political (and public) pressure to complete the project.


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> Have you ever known the cat to have my tongue? Why would a few poor arguments suddenly cause it to happen?
> 
> I haven't moved any goalposts. You'll note that I previously wrote "10 years after completion" (of FTTN), which would be about 15 years from now (if they're lucky).
> 
> Funny that you facetiously say they should build a network capable of 10,000Mbps, since that's exactly what the NBN will be able to do in 5 or 10 years time. Such is the beauty of building a fibre network, where the only thing required for a speed increase is an upgrade of the equipment at the ends of the cables. The NBN uses GPON (gigabit passive optical network), and the next standard (already ratified) is 10GPON, which does indeed offer 10Gbps (10,000Mbps). By replacing some minor components, the NBN can become a 10GPON network, and it's likely that before the rollout is complete, they will start using 10GPON as the component costs come down. There are further improvements already being researched.
> 
> There is a massive difference between Telstra and NBN Co. The former is a vertically-integrated monopoly, the latter is a wholesale-only, open access monopoly with prices regulated by the ACCC.
> 
> Communications is a natural monopoly, just like power lines and water pipes. It makes absolutely no sense to roll out competing cable infrastructure any more than rolling out multiple sets of power lines to each house. To do so would be a waste of time, money and resources. Telstra and Optus blew a billion trying, and no-one would be that stupid again.
> 
> However if someone were silly enough, there is nothing in the NBN legislation preventing it. Companies are free to roll out competing wired networks to the NBN, but they must do so on a wholesale-only, open access basis. Just like the NBN. There are no restrictions at all on wireless networks.
> 
> Why does the NBN have to earn export income? Are we supposed to deny access to tech such as 4kTV simply because it doesn't earn export dollars? What a top idea. Perhaps we should also stop spending on healthcare, since it also doesn't add to export earnings?




What is the cost of $15 billion over 15 years?

If the NBN rollout is completed in 5 years, I will buy you a bottle of Moet, if it is not will you buy me a bottle of Moet?    

I would hazard to guess the a FTTN rollout would be much faster than a FTTP rollout, where the revenue received will come in faster (yes some fixed costs like fat cat salaries and coffee will benefit from a faster rollout) and the FTTP can be rolled out at a later date when it is needed.  

I also love that you believe that the ACCC is anything but incompetent, or that there is incentive for the NBN to be run as anything but a fat cat organisation of gold plated un-necessary in the majority infrastructure project.. I mean at Telstra or optus or iinet, there is incentive to be super efficient..  where is the incentive at NBN?

Why not go 10000 NOW, I mean we will need it in the future, and it won't cost the govnut anything, so why not just put it in now?  Just charge more for it.

MW

EDIT : oh, don't get me started on the waste in the healthcare system, it is appalling. 

but on a side note to that, on the way to the hospital the other day, I saw a NBN Co vehicle, and thought to myself, well even though I have only returned to work after a long break, these NBN people might only have another 12 months of work left.... so I guess we'll see who finishes up in their role first.


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> What is the cost of $15 billion over 15 years?
> 
> If the NBN rollout is completed in 5 years, I will buy you a bottle of Moet, if it is not will you buy me a bottle of Moet?
> 
> I would hazard to guess the a FTTN rollout would be much faster than a FTTP rollout, where the revenue received will come in faster (yes some fixed costs like fat cat salaries and coffee will benefit from a faster rollout) and the FTTP can be rolled out at a later date when it is needed.
> 
> I also love that you believe that the ACCC is anything but incompetent, or that there is incentive for the NBN to be run as anything but a fat cat organisation of gold plated un-necessary in the majority infrastructure project.. I mean at Telstra or optus or iinet, there is incentive to be super efficient..  where is the incentive at NBN?
> 
> Why not go 10000 NOW, I mean we will need it in the future, and it won't cost the govnut anything, so why not just put it in now?  Just charge more for it.
> 
> MW




You seem to have a comprehension issue, or are simply being deliberately obtuse. 

I am not saying the NBN will be finished in 5 years. The statement was that 10 years after an FTTN network would be completed, we'd have to pay to upgrade to FTTP anyway. The estimate for FTTN is 5 years from now which, depending on how close they decide to put the nodes is a plausible timeframe. Hence, ~15 years from now.

Yep, at 8c a cup (or 16c including machines and maintenance), the NBN Coffee bill is absolutely ridiculous.  How much was the coffee bill at your "8 figure tech company"?

When the NBN Bus case was done, 10GPON was not available. It's still not available at reasonable prices, which is probably why they are not installing it yet. 

Two more points:

_ADSL2+... There are two major problems with it. _
The first is upload speeds. At a maximum of 1Mbps, it's totally inadequate for any business that transfers large volumes of data, such as high resolution photos or video. It's also useless for decent video conferencing or the delivery side of video education/training. Possibly most importantly with regards to emerging applications, it's totally impractical for any business that is trying to move to the cloud for either applications or backup.

The second major problem is that it's distance-dependent. You're right that 20Mbps is not bad for many uses currently. However, most people don't get anything like that. The average ADSL2+ in Australia is 9Mbps, which means 50% of people can't even get that.

You're right that businesses can get and pay for fibre. But such a concept is totally out of reach for suburban small businesses. What small business can justify $5-10k for a connection, then $1k per month? Particularly when you could get that on the NBN for zero connection charge and $100/month for 1TB at 100/40.​
_"We have better things to spend $50bn on..."_
This is another logical fallacy, because you ignore the fact that the choice we face isn't between a _"$50bn" NBN_ and _nothing_. It is a choice between a "$50bn" FTTP and a ~$35bn FTTN.​


----------



## noco

Why can't Labor tell the truth about NBN?




http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/.../fact_checking_how_the_abc_pushes_labors_nbn/


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> _"We have better things to spend $50bn on..."_
> This is another logical fallacy, because you ignore the fact that the choice we face isn't between a _"$50bn" NBN_ and _nothing_. It is a choice between a "$50bn" FTTP and a ~$35bn FTTN.​



How did FTTN get to be $xxbn ?

Wern't Labor originally going to support it to the tune of ~$4bn ?


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> How did FTTN get to be $xxbn ?
> 
> Wern't Labor originally going to support it to the tune of ~$4bn ?




The original "$4.7bn" FTTN NBN was actually a $15bn-odd project, to be done by the private sector with $4.7bn of Govt investment.

Citigroup recently estimated that FTTN would cost about $17bn, but that excluded the satellite segment of the NBN which are already contracted, taking it to ~$19bn. Plus an estimated $15-20bn to buy Telstra copper network, which would be required to implement FTTN. Hence $34-39bn total.


----------



## NBNMyths

noco said:


> Why can't Labor tell the truth about NBN?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/.../fact_checking_how_the_abc_pushes_labors_nbn/




Oh, the Andrew Bolt blog complaining about another blog not being objective. 

How did the irony not cause Andy to spontaneously combust?


Seriously though, Graeme Lynch is not exactly an objective commentator on the NBN himself, and has some form when it comes to criticising the project subjectively:
http://loonpond.blogspot.com.au/2010/08/grahame-lynch-intertubes-australian.html#.USmfXo7V2kR


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> Oh, the Andrew Bolt blog complaining about another blog not being objective.
> 
> How did the irony not cause Andy to spontaneously combust?
> 
> 
> Seriously though, Graeme Lynch is not exactly an objective commentator on the NBN himself, and has some form when it comes to criticising the project subjectively:




Oh! The irony! Myths is talking about the objectivity of other commentators. You, yourself have never deviated from the Party line.


----------



## sydboy007

Smurf1976 said:


> Agreed although it makes no difference who is in government. It is outsourcing itself that brings about the taxpayer rip offs, not which party oversees it.
> 
> All governments are easy money and most contractors have worked this out. When is the last time you heard of a government actually taking legal action against a contractor in a meaningful way for poor quality work? It's probably happened sometime, but 95% of it just gets accepted "as is" due to the political (and public) pressure to complete the project.




I remember reading an article where the CIO of CCA basically said if you have an IT manager that tells you to out source you need to get a new IT manager that's willing to do their job.

Outsourcing is based on loosing money for the first 2 years, breaking even to small profit in the third year, then milking the contract for the next X years.

You only have to see how well Howard's Office of Asset Sales and IT Outsourcing cost the country hundreds of millions of dollars.

Best to have the knowledge inhouse, best to have the accountability inhouse.

An ex boss of mine said the main reason companies outsource is so that when something goes wrong you have someone to blame, and can get some service credits back.


----------



## Bintang

NBNMyths said:


> ......
> So the broadband policy choice is:
> 
> Spend ~$50bn (inc Telstra) for an FTTP network that can already do 1000Mbps, which will probably last 50 years without requiring substantial upgrading.​*OR*
> Spend ~$34-39bn (inc Telstra) for an FTTN network that will deliver 18-50Mbps, which will probably require an FTTP upgrade within a decade of completion, at a further cost of at least $20bn.​
> Which represents better value, would you say?




NBNMyths, how about you answer this question yourself with some substance to back it up. Alternatively as you seem to have very many facts at your disposal which the rest of us punters don't perhaps you could give us some data to help us objectively answer that question ourselves. If I simplistically take your $50 bn spent over 10 years versus $34-39bn over 10 years plus a deferred $20 bn 10 years after that I would conclude on a net present cost basis that the FTTN could be the way to go. But I suspect that is not the answer implied by your rolling eyes emoticon.
Why don't you lay out more clearly (an excel spreadsheet would be handy) the respective expenditure and revenue profiles for each of these options and then those of us here who understand the time value of money and net present value calculations would be able to draw a more objective conclusion than the one you offer or indeed anyone is offering right now. I am not even saying you are wrong. You might be right. But this whole debate is so devoid of sufficient facts that quite frankly I do not believe anyone's assertions .... least of all the government and our very own 'world's best treasure' whose monumental screw-up over the mining tax proves beyond any doubt in my mind that he doesn't understand how to analyse a business cashflow.


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> You seem to have a comprehension issue, or are simply being deliberately obtuse.
> 
> I am not saying the NBN will be finished in 5 years. The statement was that 10 years after an FTTN network would be completed, we'd have to pay to upgrade to FTTP anyway. The estimate for FTTN is 5 years from now which, depending on how close they decide to put the nodes is a plausible timeframe. Hence, ~15 years from now.
> 
> Yep, at 8c a cup (or 16c including machines and maintenance), the NBN Coffee bill is absolutely ridiculous.  How much was the coffee bill at your "8 figure tech company"?
> 
> When the NBN Bus case was done, 10GPON was not available. It's still not available at reasonable prices, which is probably why they are not installing it yet.
> 
> Two more points:
> 
> _ADSL2+... There are two major problems with it. _
> The first is upload speeds. At a maximum of 1Mbps, it's totally inadequate for any business that transfers large volumes of data, such as high resolution photos or video. It's also useless for decent video conferencing or the delivery side of video education/training. Possibly most importantly with regards to emerging applications, it's totally impractical for any business that is trying to move to the cloud for either applications or backup.
> 
> The second major problem is that it's distance-dependent. You're right that 20Mbps is not bad for many uses currently. However, most people don't get anything like that. The average ADSL2+ in Australia is 9Mbps, which means 50% of people can't even get that.
> 
> You're right that businesses can get and pay for fibre. But such a concept is totally out of reach for suburban small businesses. What small business can justify $5-10k for a connection, then $1k per month? Particularly when you could get that on the NBN for zero connection charge and $100/month for 1TB at 100/40.​
> _"We have better things to spend $50bn on..."_
> This is another logical fallacy, because you ignore the fact that the choice we face isn't between a _"$50bn" NBN_ and _nothing_. It is a choice between a "$50bn" FTTP and a ~$35bn FTTN.​




So a FTTN endeavour, rolled out for $15 billion less is going to generate almost identical revenue (as a price point for the higher speeds can be the same for the download limit - ie 25 speed can be charged the same as 100 speed)  and will be delivered many years earlier, so it will be cash flow positive earlier, and businesses will be able to harness it earlier...........

Sorry, why is this not being done pronto?????   It makes no flipping sense the way they are doing it, as evidenced by the fact that a cost-benefit was not officially adhered to..

I never paid for coffee or tea for my staff  

My argument is that FTTP is not economical at the moment and FTTN is more affordable.

How many small businesses do you think teleconference... lmfao...   I have teleconferenced over ADSL2 lines in medicine, and it worked quite well.... up to an adequate level for small business yes (but admittedly for health delivery no)

"we have $50 billion to spend on"   <---- strawmanning, well done.

MW


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Oh! The irony! Myths is talking about the objectivity of other commentators. You, yourself have never deviated from the Party line.




I'm not a journalist. I don't have a code of conduct I'm *supposed* to follow. And given Bolt's writings on... well, pretty much _everything_... he apparently doesn't think he has one either.

I just thought it was rather amusing that he titled his blog post with the phrase "fact checking", when he wouldn't know a fact-check if it jumped out at him from behind a cloud of plant food.


----------



## So_Cynical

NBNMyths said:


> You seem to have a comprehension issue, or are simply being deliberately obtuse.




My first thought was its the Latter, but actually thinking about it a little its more likely the first option....based on the "cat got tongue" thing.



NBNMyths said:


> _ADSL2+... There are two major problems with it. _
> The first is upload speeds. At a maximum of 1Mbps, it's totally inadequate for any business that transfers large volumes of data, *such as high resolution photos or video. It's also useless for decent video conferencing or the delivery side of video education/training. Possibly most importantly with regards to emerging applications*, it's totally impractical for any business that is trying to move to the cloud for either applications or backup.
> ​





A personal example of this i recently en-counted was my Sinus CT scan, the file i was told was simply to large to email so the CT place had to burn it to disk and post it to me....my specialist didn't have the CT images on file also because of the size, interesting the the Diagnostic imaging business has to either host the files themselves or get a third party to host them and the various doctors simply log in to the server to view the picture files.​


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> So a FTTN endeavour, rolled out for $15 billion less is going to generate almost identical revenue (as a price point for the higher speeds can be the same for the download limit - ie 25 speed can be charged the same as 100 speed)  and will be delivered many years earlier, so it will be cash flow positive earlier, and businesses will be able to harness it earlier...........
> 
> 
> MW




Except for a few things...

First, Turnbull has already said his FTTN will be cheaper than the NBN for consumers, not more expensive (although I doubt it will be, speed for speed).

Also, for 25Mbps FTTN to retail for the same as 100Mbps NBN, that would mean consumers would be paying *considerably* more than they do today for 5-20Mbps ADSL2+ or 30Mbps Telstra/Optus cable, particularly in metro areas.

Then there are the areas that already have FTTP NBN, which will cover about 2,000,000 premises by the time the current rollout contracts are completed. So 2,000,000 premises dotted around the country will have access to 100Mbps for the same price as the rest of us pay for 25Mbps. That'll be popular with the voters.


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> Except for a few things...
> 
> First, Turnbull has already said his FTTN will be cheaper than the NBN for consumers, not more expensive (although I doubt it will be, speed for speed).
> 
> Also, for 25Mbps FTTN to retail for the same as 100Mbps NBN, that would mean consumers would be paying *considerably* more than they do today for 5-20Mbps ADSL2+ or 30Mbps Telstra/Optus cable, particularly in metro areas.
> 
> Then there are the areas that already have FTTP NBN, which will cover about 2,000,000 premises by the time the current rollout contracts are completed. So 2,000,000 premises dotted around the country will have access to 100Mbps for the same price as the rest of us pay for 25Mbps. That'll be popular with the voters.




I agree with you on the first point.

As you know ADSL2 is up to speeds, and NBN delivers speeds, therefore 25Mbps NBN is better than ADSL2 and could carry a premium.

It doesn't matter that there would be differences, as currently there are differences wrt zones 1,2,3 with ADSL2 and that doesn't really cost anyone votes.

What matters is cash flow, and FTTN progressing to FTTP when needed is a much better proposition, and anyone with any business sense would understand this to be the case.....

How about FTTN for everyone, FTTP for sml businesses and FTTP upgrade for residential when time permits???

Surely this make massive financial sense, even for someone like me who does not really believe that faster speeds make any real difference to productivity, I believe that a sensible cash flow positive rollout makes much more sense, and  would stand a greater chance of being delivered on time..

MW


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> I agree with you on the first point.
> 
> As you know ADSL2 is up to speeds, and NBN delivers speeds, therefore 25Mbps NBN is better than ADSL2 and could carry a premium.
> 
> It doesn't matter that there would be differences, as currently there are differences wrt zones 1,2,3 with ADSL2 and that doesn't really cost anyone votes.
> 
> What matters is cash flow, and FTTN progressing to FTTP when needed is a much better proposition, and anyone with any business sense would understand this to be the case.....
> 
> How about FTTN for everyone, FTTP for sml businesses and FTTP upgrade for residential when time permits???
> 
> Surely this make massive financial sense, even for someone like me who does not really believe that faster speeds make any real difference to productivity, I believe that a sensible cash flow positive rollout makes much more sense, and  would stand a greater chance of being delivered on time..
> 
> MW




With an FTTN rollout, ADSL2+ would (by necessity) be eliminated, so if your idea of charging NBN 100 speeds for FTTN 25, then people would be forced to pay more, whether they want FTTN or not. This is not the case with the NBN because people have the option of getting 25 for the same price as ADSL2+ or paying a premium for faster speeds.

The practical difference between the current ADSL zones and FTTP would be that the more expensive ADSL zones are generally in rural areas. There are fewer votes there, and people are used to being screwed. However, NBN FTTP does or will exist in many regional areas, plus all of Tasmania and Darwin. Additionally, NBN 25Mbps wireless and sat will cover hundreds of small towns.

How do you think the millions of city/suburban voters would feel about country Armidale getting 100Mbps for the same price as they pay for 25Mbps? Or the farmer in Oodnadatta getting 25Mbps via satellite for half what city dwellers pay for the same speed on FTTN?

Additionally, Telstra ADSL2+ pricing is flat nationwide. It's only 3rd-party charges that differ, which usually means they just don't offer services in outer areas.


FTTN doesn't really "progress" to FTTP. It's not a simple upgrade path. You would build then throw out billions of dollars in equipment in the 'upgrade', because it would not be required for FTTP.

http://nbnexplained.org/wordpress/technical-points/the-fttn-first-debate/



> *Mark Newton, former network engineer at Internode:*
> If someone is going to contrast FTTN against FTTP/FTTH, it’s important that they understand that the technical and economic differences between them mean that there’s no upgrade path from one to the other. This notion that FTTN is a “stepping stone” to something else is pure fantasy. If an FTTN network is built you’d better like it, because it’ll be around for a long, long time to come.”


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> With an FTTN rollout, ADSL2+ would (by necessity) be eliminated, so if your idea of charging NBN 100 speeds for FTTN 25, then people would be forced to pay more, whether they want FTTN or not. This is not the case with the NBN because people have the option of getting 25 for the same price as ADSL2+ or paying a premium for faster speeds.
> 
> The practical difference between the current ADSL zones and FTTP would be that the more expensive ADSL zones are generally in rural areas. There are fewer votes there, and people are used to being screwed. However, NBN FTTP does or will exist in many regional areas, plus all of Tasmania and Darwin. Additionally, NBN 25Mbps wireless and sat will cover hundreds of small towns.
> 
> How do you think the millions of city/suburban voters would feel about country Armidale getting 100Mbps for the same price as they pay for 25Mbps? Or the farmer in Oodnadatta getting 25Mbps via satellite for half what city dwellers pay for the same speed on FTTN?
> 
> Additionally, Telstra ADSL2+ pricing is flat nationwide. It's only 3rd-party charges that differ, which usually means they just don't offer services in outer areas.
> 
> 
> FTTN doesn't really "progress" to FTTP. It's not a simple upgrade path. You would build then throw out billions of dollars in equipment in the 'upgrade', because it would not be required for FTTP.
> 
> http://nbnexplained.org/wordpress/technical-points/the-fttn-first-debate/




A very quick google of iinet pricing shows that 200gb plan on ADSL2 is cheaper than on NBN for 25 speed, only 12/1 is the same price.

Hence a FTTN could offer the same price for 12/1 (which is essentially the same speed as ADSL2) and a premium price for 25 speed.

I really don't gas about what city bumpkins drinking lattes think about what 20000 people in armidale pay.   If only city people realised how much rural people subsidised their existence, the country would be a better place.

What you are saying is that the NBN should be designed for political purposes, and that is the bloody problem.. that some moron ex-pm didn't perform analysis on a $50 billion project..   

It may not be a direct upgrade path, but it 

1. Is an upgrade path.
2. Allows for cheaper, speedier delivery
3. Allows for FTTP to be rolled out where it is productive, and FTTN to be rolled out where it is not (ie business vs non-business)   ie the best of both worlds.

MW

PS  i can't wait to hear the whining when Liberals chop up your beloved NBN


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> How do you think the millions of city/suburban voters would feel about country Armidale getting 100Mbps for the same price as they pay for 25Mbps?




They would think (and they would be right) that it was part of Gillard's bribe to get Windsor on side.



> Or the farmer in Oodnadatta getting 25Mbps via satellite for half what city dwellers pay for the same speed on FTTN?




They would be very surprised, because the farmer in Oodnadatta is a figment of your imagination


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> They would think (and they would be right) that it was part of Gillard's bribe to get Windsor on side.
> 
> They would be very surprised, because the farmer in Oodnadatta is a figment of your imagination




Lovely fantasy, but Armidale was chosen as an NBN trial site long before the 2010 election, and therefore long before it was known that Windsor would hold the balance of power.


What, cattle stations don't count as farms? There were plenty of cattle roaming around last time I was there.


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> A very quick google of iinet pricing shows that 200gb plan on ADSL2 is cheaper than on NBN for 25 speed, only 12/1 is the same price.
> 
> Hence a FTTN could offer the same price for 12/1 (which is essentially the same speed as ADSL2) and a premium price for 25 speed.
> 
> I really don't gas about what city bumpkins drinking lattes think about what 20000 people in armidale pay.   If only city people realised how much rural people subsidised their existence, the country would be a better place.
> 
> What you are saying is that the NBN should be designed for political purposes, and that is the bloody problem.. that some moron ex-pm didn't perform analysis on a $50 billion project..
> 
> It may not be a direct upgrade path, but it
> 
> 1. Is an upgrade path.
> 2. Allows for cheaper, speedier delivery
> 3. Allows for FTTP to be rolled out where it is productive, and FTTN to be rolled out where it is not (ie business vs non-business)   ie the best of both worlds.
> 
> MW
> 
> PS  i can't wait to hear the whining when Liberals chop up your beloved NBN




iiNet is one supplier. Telstra (with 50% market share) and Optus both charge the same for 25Mbps NBN as they do for ADSL2+ or 30Mbps cable. Discount operators like Pennytel have 25Mbps NBN bundles for slightly less than ADSL2+/phone bundles.


Don't worry, there will be plenty of whining if that's what they do. Especially in about 10 years time when the non-tech heads realise what a blunder it was.


----------



## sptrawler

The one thing I have noticed with this NBN issue is, I dont think it is reflective of mainstream Australia.
The pro NBN members are generally in IT based jobs or computer enthusiasts.
I thought tonight how many of the people in my immediate family or close friends will really care.

Well my wife and myself use computers all the time for banking, surfing, buying etc. We are happy with the speed.

We have four children ranging from 27 - 35, one has a landline, two use wireless and the other doesn't have a phone or computer.

Next I thought what about our parents, both males have passed away.
My mother was very adept on computers during her working life, she asked me to get her on the internet and bought a laptop. Two years later, she has passed on the laptop and isn't interested, gone back to sewing.
The mother inlaw has never been interested.
That's eight people in my immediate family that have no interest in the NBN and resultant faster speeds.

This is the problem with the government, there is no one in my family can see their vision. 
I'm sure 80% of Australians have the same feelings.


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> iiNet is one supplier. Telstra (with 50% market share) and Optus both charge the same for 25Mbps NBN as they do for ADSL2+ or 30Mbps cable. Discount operators like Pennytel have 25Mbps NBN bundles for slightly less than ADSL2+/phone bundles.
> 
> 
> Don't worry, there will be plenty of whining if that's what they do. Especially in about 10 years time when the non-tech heads realise what a blunder it was.




Don't go using the most expensive ripoff merchants as your proxy for pricing...  I do realise that you like monopolies and lack of competition, but I like choice and efficiency.

Telstra 25 200gb = $115/month   http://www.telstra.com.au/internet/national-broadband-network/plans-and-products/

ADSL2  200gb  = $115/month

iinet 25 NBN 200gb $65 per month = add their voip plan to this and it absolutely destroys Tel$tra$ plan.

The more efficient providers are the ones who drive affordability in the marketplace NOT monopolies, and it looks like only the top 3-5 of providers have a future in the NBN world...

Then again you already knew that anyway, as Mr Hacket pointed this out many moons ago, hey NBNMyths..  or do you disagree with that too, to make stuff up?

MW
MW


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> Don't go using the most expensive ripoff merchants as your proxy for pricing...  I do realise that you like monopolies and lack of competition, but I like choice and efficiency.
> 
> Telstra 25 200gb = $115/month   http://www.telstra.com.au/internet/national-broadband-network/plans-and-products/
> 
> ADSL2  200gb  = $115/month
> 
> iinet 25 NBN 200gb $65 per month = add their voip plan to this and it absolutely destroys Tel$tra$ plan.
> 
> The more efficient providers are the ones who drive affordability in the marketplace NOT monopolies, and it looks like only the top 3-5 of providers have a future in the NBN world...
> 
> Then again you already knew that anyway, as Mr Hacket pointed this out many moons ago, hey NBNMyths..  or do you disagree with that too, to make stuff up?
> 
> MW
> MW




Nice cherrypick. I notice you only mentioned one of my examples. Wonder why that was... 


I just gave you three operators. One expensive, one middle and one cheap: 

Telstra, the market leader. Overpriced they may be, but the fact is that they alone command ~50% of the market, and therefore their speed/pricing is the comparison that a very sizeable chunk of Australians will be comparing, and they charge the same for 25Mbps NBN as they do for ADSL2+.

Optus, the #2 broadband operator, likewise charge the same for 25Mbps NBN as they do for ADSL2+, at considerably lower prices than Telstra.

So in those two ISPs alone, there is probably 60-70% of the market selling 25Mbps NBN for the same price as ADSL2+. You don't think that is relevant? In your mind the only relevant ISP is iiNet, since their pricing supports your conclusion?


Then there's Pennytel (owned by iiNet, BTW) selling unlimited-data/unlimited-phone 25Mbps NBN bundles for $60/month, which is $8 a month less than their ADSL2+ bundles.


Perhaps there will be ISP consolidation, perhaps not. We will see. However there are currently 40 ISPs offering NBN services, many using POI aggregators like NextGen to help them compete with the likes of Telstra et al, by overcoming the cost of connecting to every POI. I should also also point out on this topic that the coalition's NBN will have the same issue because the reasoning Simon gave for his assessment is the 121 POI situation, and that will not change one iota under the coalition policy.


sptrawler...
Yes, I think you're right to some extent. Hence my comment that the non-tech heads will realise the blunder in 10 years!


----------



## So_Cynical

NBNMyths said:


> We will see. However there are currently 40 ISPs offering NBN services, many using POI aggregators like NextGen to help them compete with the likes of Telstra et al, by overcoming the cost of connecting to every POI. I should also also point out on this topic that the coalition's NBN will have the same issue because the reasoning Simon gave for his assessment is the 121 POI situation, and that will not change one iota under the coalition policy.




Wondering what your thinking on the 121 POI's is?

Perhaps the noalition will want to go back to the 2 POI's in every capital plan? apparently its cheaper?


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> Nice cherrypick. I notice you only mentioned one of my examples. Wonder why that was...
> 
> 
> I just gave you three operators. One expensive, one middle and one cheap:
> 
> Telstra, the market leader. Overpriced they may be, but the fact is that they alone command ~50% of the market, and therefore their speed/pricing is the comparison that a very sizeable chunk of Australians will be comparing, and they charge the same for 25Mbps NBN as they do for ADSL2+.
> 
> Optus, the #2 broadband operator, likewise charge the same for 25Mbps NBN as they do for ADSL2+, at considerably lower prices than Telstra.
> 
> So in those two ISPs alone, there is probably 60-70% of the market selling 25Mbps NBN for the same price as ADSL2+. You don't think that is relevant? In your mind the only relevant ISP is iiNet, since their pricing supports your conclusion?
> 
> 
> Then there's Pennytel (owned by iiNet, BTW) selling unlimited-data/unlimited-phone 25Mbps NBN bundles for $60/month, which is $8 a month less than their ADSL2+ bundles.
> 
> 
> Perhaps there will be ISP consolidation, perhaps not. We will see. However there are currently 40 ISPs offering NBN services, many using POI aggregators like NextGen to help them compete with the likes of Telstra et al, by overcoming the cost of connecting to every POI. I should also also point out on this topic that the coalition's NBN will have the same issue because the reasoning Simon gave for his assessment is the 121 POI situation, and that will not change one iota under the coalition policy.
> 
> 
> sptrawler...
> Yes, I think you're right to some extent. Hence my comment that the non-tech heads will realise the blunder in 10 years!




I can tell by your post that you don't understand market fundamentals etc.

I can tell that you don't understand the problems with monopolies.  

I don't see how using uncompetitive providers who are gouging ADSL2 customers is really relevant, no, because the NBN is supposed to drive competitive pricing is it not?   

However as you can summise, I actually advocate people paying for the service ( ie paying for a good speed at a reasonable price)  I just don't think that we should be wasting money NOW for a service which we MIGHT need in 15 years time,

when we can use the $$$$ NOW to make way more monet NOW.

I am pissing up a wall against your arguments, as you want to give the majority faster pr0n and illegal downloads,

I want improved exports allowing better healthcare, education and living conditions.

and only one of our two proposals can deliver what I believe is right for an ageing population  
MW

PS I would Love to have 10000 speed internet NOW, but it truly is not needed, and contrary to what your beloved Labor party believes, there are not bottomless pits of money, we all have to pay for stuff, which leaves us less able to afford other stuff.


----------



## sptrawler

medicowallet said:


> I can tell by your post that you don't understand market fundamentals etc.
> 
> I can tell that you don't understand the problems with monopolies.
> 
> I don't see how using uncompetitive providers who are gouging ADSL2 customers is really relevant, no, because the NBN is supposed to drive competitive pricing is it not?
> 
> However as you can summise, I actually advocate people paying for the service ( ie paying for a good speed at a reasonable price)  I just don't think that we should be wasting money NOW for a service which we MIGHT need in 15 years time,
> 
> when we can use the $$$$ NOW to make way more monet NOW.
> 
> I am pissing up a wall against your arguments, as you want to give the majority faster pr0n and illegal downloads,
> 
> I want improved exports allowing better healthcare, education and living conditions.
> 
> and only one of our two proposals can deliver what I believe is right for an ageing population
> MW
> 
> PS I would Love to have 10000 speed internet NOW, but it truly is not needed, and contrary to what your beloved Labor party believes, there are not bottomless pits of money, we all have to pay for stuff, which leaves us less able to afford other stuff.




I think you have answered your own question.

You won't stop So-Cynical beating the drum, when Labor go down the toilet, he will probably join the Salvos. 
Which to my thinking, would be more beneficial.


----------



## medicowallet

http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/454925/small_businesses_don_t_see_benefit_nbn_report/

No way!! 

Only 30% of small businesses believe they will derive any benefit from the NBN...

And I still hold firm that this is a massive overguestimate.    


So to give these 30% of small businesses access to something that might benefit their businesses, lets cripple the mining industry, education and other industry to the tune of $50 billion dollars... 

Well done

MW


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> So to give these 30% of small businesses access to something that might benefit their businesses, lets [highlight]cripple the mining industry, education and other industry to the tune of $50 billion dollars... [/highlight]
> 
> Well done
> 
> MW




Would you care to explain how the NBN will do this? Feel free to insert as much detail as required to support your argument. 

Don't forget to factor the coalition's $35bn+ alternative plan into your calculations. And also, let us know by what method building the NBN will cripple all these industries, based on the known funding arrangements (ie the issue of infrastructure bonds) for the NBN, and therefore its relevance to the funding or taxation of the industries you cited.


----------



## NBNMyths

So_Cynical said:


> Wondering what your thinking on the 121 POI's is?
> 
> Perhaps the noalition will want to go back to the 2 POI's in every capital plan? apparently its cheaper?




I think there are pros and cons to both. The 14 certainly made life easy for smaller ISPs, but it wasted already-present infrastructure for the bigger ISPs.

I don't think the coalition can/would go back as they complained about the 14POI model to begin with, and the 121 are all built and operational now in any case.


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> Would you care to explain how the NBN will do this? Feel free to insert as much detail as required to support your argument.
> 
> Don't forget to factor the coalition's $35bn+ alternative plan into your calculations. And also, let us know by what method building the NBN will cripple all these industries, based on the known funding arrangements (ie the issue of infrastructure bonds) for the NBN, and therefore its relevance to the funding or taxation of the industries you cited.




Are you 12 with your constant rolleyes?

Anyhoo, let me explain.

1. $50 billion has to come from somewhere
2. The government directs this to NBN at the expense of other infrastructure projects with greater ROI
3. This in effect decreases the ability of those industries to grow.
4. This in effect screws them ( and also the beneficiaries of taxation of those projects )

I don't even think that a FTTN is needed ATM so I hold that it is $50 billion wasted, just that the coalition's plan is $15 billion less wasted.

So,
Mature up, stop rolling eyes and start thinking of the community at large and not your internet gaming habits and pings,

MW


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> Are you 12 with your constant rolleyes?
> 
> Anyhoo, let me explain.
> 
> 1. $50 billion has to come from somewhere
> 2. The government directs this to NBN at the expense of other infrastructure projects with greater ROI
> 3. This in effect decreases the ability of those industries to grow.
> 4. This in effect screws them ( and also the beneficiaries of taxation of those projects )
> 
> I don't even think that a FTTN is needed ATM so I hold that it is $50 billion wasted, just that the coalition's plan is $15 billion less wasted.
> 
> So,
> Mature up, stop rolling eyes and start thinking of the community at large and not your internet gaming habits and pings,
> 
> MW




Yes, the "$50bn" has to come from somewhere....

~$30bn will come from the issue of Australian Infrastructure bonds.
~$11bn will come from NBN Co raising on debt markets
The rest is lease and migration payments to Telstra over time, and comes from NBN Co's operating revenue.

Please give an example of an alternative spend the Government could make, and (more importantly) how that spend would provide an ROI. Also, how not spending that money will cripple those industries. Last time I looked, the mining industry wasn't struggling and the education "industry" were extremely strong supporters of the NBN due to the additional opportunities it will provide.


I should also point out that the construction of the NBN itself directly leads to job creation (construction, IT), manufacturing industry support (eg: fibre cable, cabinets, construction materials) plus it leads to additional company tax, income tax and GST revenues.


Oh, and I haven't played an online game since I dabbled in Starcraft 1, which was probably 7 or 8 years ago.


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> Yes, the "$50bn" has to come from somewhere....
> 
> ~$30bn will come from the issue of Australian Infrastructure bonds.
> ~$11bn will come from NBN Co raising on debt markets
> The rest is lease and migration payments to Telstra over time, and comes from NBN Co's operating revenue.
> 
> Please give an example of an alternative spend the Government could make, and (more importantly) how that spend would provide an ROI. Also, how not spending that money will cripple those industries. Last time I looked, the mining industry wasn't struggling and the education "industry" were extremely strong supporters of the NBN due to the additional opportunities it will provide.
> 
> 
> I should also point out that the construction of the NBN itself directly leads to job creation (construction, IT), manufacturing industry support (eg: fibre cable, cabinets, construction materials) plus it leads to additional company tax, income tax and GST revenues.
> 
> 
> Oh, and I haven't played an online game since I dabbled in Starcraft 1, which was probably 7 or 8 years ago.




You have misunderstandings of some basic fundamentals about money creation.

You cannot acknowledge that money cannot be magicked up, and must come from somewhere.
You cannot acknowledge opportunity cost, or that anything else can have much greater ROI than the NBN
You cannot acknowledge that alternative investment also creates jobs.
You cannot acknowledge the concept of exports vs imports.
You cannot acknowledge the concept of growth of a business.


You have clearly not ever owned or run a business in the real world, and whilst I understand that theorising is enjoyable for you, it is clear that we have both made decisions about what we think is best for the country, and those opinions differ.

I cannot in any way, ever, convince you that $50 billion (from whatever sources) invested in, for example rail and ports would enable massive increase in exports and hence new money into the country to pay for many services such as health, education and, dare I say it the NBN when the time is right.

An analogy would be small business

Say I own the pharmacy in a medical centre I also own (as one of my friends does)

I could run i3 computers which very very easily run my dispensing programs 

Say I can access $20000

I can either update my 6 computers to i7-3970x computers, the computing power which I may need in 15 years time, futureproofing my IT needs somewhat,

or I can add a few extra carpark spaces in the spare lot I own adjaceant to my very busy business....

I'll leave it at that.

MW

Anyhoo, off to the fluoridation thread, much greater logic shown in that thread


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> You have misunderstandings of some basic fundamentals about money creation.
> 
> You cannot acknowledge that money cannot be magicked up, and must come from somewhere.
> You cannot acknowledge opportunity cost, or that anything else can have much greater ROI than the NBN
> You cannot acknowledge that alternative investment also creates jobs.
> You cannot acknowledge the concept of exports vs imports.
> You cannot acknowledge the concept of growth of a business.




I just told you where it was coming from.
You haven't given an example of an alternative that would generate a better ROI.
I can acknowledge that, but you haven't acknowledged that the NBN will create jobs
The NBN is not really relevant to a discussion of imports vs exports.
There will be many businesses that will grow as a result of infrastructure like the NBN.



> You have clearly not ever owned or run a business in the real world, and whilst I understand that theorising is enjoyable for you, it is clear that we have both made decisions about what we think is best for the country, and those opinions differ.




I do own and run a business in the real World, and have done so for the last 10-odd years.



> I cannot in any way, ever, convince you that $50 billion (from whatever sources) invested in, for example rail and ports would enable massive increase in exports and hence new money into the country to pay for many services such as health, education and, dare I say it the NBN when the time is right.



Not that I'm against such infrastructure, but unless they were toll roads or the Govt charged for port access sufficiently to recover the investment, then they would become a charge on the budget, unlike the NBN.

Any improvement in port efficiency would also make imports cheaper, so it's a double-edged sword.

I strongly support Australian manufacturing, but more efficient ports and better roads will not overcome our grossly overvalued dollar.




> Anyhoo, off to the fluoridation thread, much greater logic shown in that thread




Perhaps from you, but not everyone if its anything like an average fluoride discussion!


----------



## sydboy007

medicowallet said:


> http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/454925/small_businesses_don_t_see_benefit_nbn_report/
> 
> No way!!
> 
> Only 30% of small businesses believe they will derive any benefit from the NBN...
> 
> And I still hold firm that this is a massive overguestimate.
> 
> 
> So to give these 30% of small businesses access to something that might benefit their businesses, lets cripple the mining industry, education and other industry to the tune of $50 billion dollars...
> 
> Well done
> 
> MW




Possibly these small businesses don't have the resources available to them to really understand how the NBN can benefit them.  I've helped a few over the years make significant cost savings with the simple IT knowledge I have.  With NBN access I know I could cut their costs even more, especially via software as a service

Yesterday I spent 3.5 hours of my 8.33 hour day fighting with Telstra to get 4 faults fixed due to rotting copper.

So if we can the NBN and the NoBN, is the Government going to legislate that the private sector AKA Telstra has to now spend a few billion on fixing up the copper network they've left to deteriorate so they can prob up the high yielding dividend?

As for crippling the mining industry, I'd say the CEOs of the companies have done pretty well at shooting themselves in the foot.  All ego and no economic sense amongst them.  Rising CEO salaries and bonuses = market forces = good.  Rising mining worker wages = union thuggery = bad.  Yet my understanding is market forces use price signals to show when a resource is in high demand, the price goes up and then you either work out how to use the resource more efficiently, or the high price brings in more supply.


----------



## Calliope

Turnbull's plans will send a chill through all those rusted on believers in the efficiency of a Labor-run "business enterprise". Yes Myths, the Conroy version of the NBN  Rollout will be scrapped.



> Turnbull's immediate focus is the communications ministry and the NBN, his responsibilities from September if Abbott wins. *His comments should send a chill through the Labor Party.*
> 
> Turnbull says the message of the NBN policy he will launch with Abbott is that "we will complete it (NBN) sooner, cheaper and, as a consequence, it will be more affordable.
> 
> "We would not have gone about this task of upgrading Australia's broadband by establishing a government-owned telecommunications company," Turnbull says. "That was a profound mistake.
> 
> *"Having said that, we are where we are. So we will complete the broadband network as cost-effectively as we can. That will mean a change in the technologies used in the urban areas - we won't be running fibre into every premise, the cost and time involved to do that is completely out of proportion to the benefits derived."
> 
> Turnbull will impose full disclosure on Labor's NBN model: "The first thing we will do is to publish a clear analysis of how much it will cost in terms of time and dollars to complete the network under the current strategy. I predict people will be very shocked. I believe the truth will be very ugly, but no one should be afraid of the truth."*
> 
> *The second step he intends is another analysis showing how much can be saved by varying the strategy. His game plan is to meet consumer demands at a fraction of the cost and time without taking the fibre into premises.
> 
> The Coalition will take whatever step is required to prevent any future government repeating the NBN financial blunder. Turnbull says: "This is the biggest infrastructure project in the nation's history. It is vital to implement Coalition policy to ensure there is no major future project invested in by the commonwealth without a ... rigorous cost-benefit analysis."*



(MY bolds)

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...-for-team-abbott/story-e6frg74x-1226588738616


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> I just told you where it was coming from.
> You haven't given an example of an alternative that would generate a better ROI.
> I can acknowledge that, but you haven't acknowledged that the NBN will create jobs
> The NBN is not really relevant to a discussion of imports vs exports.
> There will be many businesses that will grow as a result of infrastructure like the NBN.




I have just given you an example... seriously are you trolling?

I never said that the NBN would not generate jobs, however, I will say that $50 billion spent in an alternative, such as roads, rail etc (which mind you, source a lot of material requirements locally as opposed to importing it) would also generate jobs.

Of course it is not really relevant for imports / exports as it will no doubt result in cash outflow from the country....  AFAIAC  there are few enterprises that the government should undertake which should not take this into consideration.... however I do acknowledge that the current Labor government does not cost or think about any of their so called projects, as evidenced by the NBN.

Which businesses will grow as a result of the NBN?

Really, truly, I really am unaware of which ones will benefit, please explain how these businesses will result in improved efficiency for the economy and improved exports in excess of the increased consumption and imports that will result from the NBN (however, as evidenced previously, I doubt you will give a serious answer to this)

And remember, I have no problem with improving speeds, but I just think a timed, measured rollout with thought, realistic deadlines and cost-benefit analysis is the way to go, not some hastily made backhanded comment which was forced into policy by the third worst pm of my lifetime, and continued by the worst pm of my lifetime.

MW


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Turnbull's plans will send a chill through all those rusted on believers in the efficiency of a Labor-run "business enterprise". Yes Myths, the Conroy version of the NBN  Rollout will be scrapped.
> 
> (MY bolds)
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...-for-team-abbott/story-e6frg74x-1226588738616




There is nothing new there. Turnbull is just repeating the same stuff he's been saying for months. Of course, back in 2007 he described FTTN as a colossal waste of money and unnecessary. Now, he thinks it's the way to go.

He says "people will be shocked" about how long the NBN will take, and what it will cost. I disagree, and only time will tell who ends up being right. Turnbull certainly has no evidence to support his assertion that it will be anything different to what is contained in the most recent corporate plan, otherwise he would have published it. He's just making a political statement.

The other thing I will absolutely stake my reputation on is that, speed for speed, the retail prices for FTTN will not be cheaper than the NBN. Contrary to Turnbull's claim that his solution will be "more affordable for consumers". This simply will not happen. It cannot, because the NBN's low entry-level pricing depends on the subsidy that comes from selling high-end speeds (50Mbps+) to high end users. Without that revenue, even a cheaper build cannot result in lower prices on the lower speeds.


Even if Turnbull goes to the election planning to scale it back to FTTN, it is by no means certain that he can (or will still want to) after the election, for the reasons I have already detailed:

• The unknown cost of buying Telstra's copper network (est $15-20bn);
• The unknown cost of remediating the poor condition of Telstra's copper network;
• The unknown cost of buying Telstra's and/or Optus' HFC networks and converting them into open access;
• The unknown cost of cancelling existing FTTP rollout contracts;
• The unknown cost of cancelling existing migration contracts with Telstra and Optus;
• The unknown results of the CBA (ie: what happens if it recommends FTTP?);
• The likely need to get legislation through an unfriendly Senate;
• The massive recent growth of FTTP networks Worldwide (Alcatel's _Copper:FTTP_ revenue ratio went from _71:29_ to _50:50_ between 2011 and 2012);
• The fact that a downgrade will means that huge parts of our major cities will be left with vastly inferior broadband to that available in numerous regional areas. (ie: It is politically tenable that Parramatta will have worse broadband than Armidale, Townsville, Darwin and all of Tasmania for example?


----------



## So_Cynical

NBNMyths said:


> • The fact that a downgrade will means that huge parts of our major cities will be left with vastly inferior broadband to that available in numerous regional areas. (ie: It is politically tenable that Parramatta will have worse broadband than Armidale, Townsville, Darwin and all of Tasmania for example?




I raised this point maybe 12 months ago.

Politically how does the noalition sell the fact that Townsville will have FTTP/H and Cairns wont...stopping the Townsville rollout will leave some suburbs with and some without... politically it cant be done, cant be sold.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> He says "people will be shocked" about how long the NBN will take, and what it will cost. I disagree, and only time will tell who ends up being right. Turnbull certainly has no evidence to support his assertion that it will be anything different to what is contained in the most recent corporate plan, otherwise he would have published it. He's just making a political statement.




So he just making a political statement? And you're not? I would trust his word ahead of that of an anonymous Labor lackey.



> The other thing I will absolutely stake my reputation on is that, speed for speed, the retail prices for FTTN will not be cheaper than the NBN.




What reputation do you have?  All your stuff is NBNSpin. You may have a high reputation in Labor circles. But outside of that, the only reputation you have to lose is that you picked the wrong side and you will end up with egg on your face.


----------



## Knobby22

Its the country people that gain the most. 
I really can't see the Nationals letting the rollout to those areas not happen.

There is a certain logic in the cities to try to work out a better solution. My area, Ascot Vale was built in the 19th century and will be difficult to roll out in. Probably why it is last on the list. The trouble is the older suburbs are usually the richer suburbs and they want FTTP. 

I don't think Turnball wanted this job. He had to take it from Abbott who knows it is a poison pill.


----------



## IFocus

Knobby22 said:


> Its the country people that gain the most.
> I really can't see the Nationals letting the rollout to those areas not happen.
> 
> There is a certain logic in the cities to try to work out a better solution. My area, Ascot Vale was built in the 19th century and will be difficult to roll out in. Probably why it is last on the list. The trouble is the older suburbs are usually the richer suburbs and they want FTTP.
> 
> I don't think Turnball wanted this job. He had to take it from Abbott who knows it is a poison pill.




I think Turnbul has learnt a lot about politics and is just playing along I doubt very much that he would hold his current line once in government but still think the Coalition would have some hybrid NBN where there would be winners and Labor electorates.


----------



## IFocus

Calliope said:


> So he just making a political statement? And you're not? I would trust his word ahead of that of an anonymous Labor lackey.
> 
> What reputation do you have?  All your stuff is NBNSpin. You may have a high reputation in Labor circles. But outside of that, the only reputation you have to lose is that you picked the wrong side and you will end up with egg on your face.




Calm down Calliope debate the issue, read up on Whirlpool if you don't like Myths facts, the Coalitions position is fractured and not very realistic.


----------



## Calliope

IFocus said:


> Calm down Calliope debate the issue, read up on Whirlpool if you don't like Myths facts, the Coalitions position is fractured and not very realistic.




Calm down IFocus and look before you leap. How can you say something as silly as *"Myths facts"*?
What Labor supporters call "facts" are usually just spin. But don't worry, Turnbull will begin to dismantle the NBN white elephant come September; so Conroy and Quigley are on borrowed time. However I dare say they can do a lot of damage in six months if they put their minds to it.


----------



## chode84

You could listen to the likes of Calliope or those clowns in opposition, or you could listen to this guy.




> FTTN a huge “mistake”, says ex-BT CTO
> 
> One of the UK’s foremost telecommunications experts, a former chief technology officer of British telco BT, has publicly stated that fibre to the node-style broadband is “one of the biggest mistakes humanity has made”, imposing huge bandwidth and unreliability problems on those who implement it, as the Coalition may do in Australia.



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


----------



## medicowallet

chode84 said:


> You could listen to the likes of Calliope or those clowns in opposition, or you could listen to this guy.
> 
> 
> 
> http://delimiter.com.au/2012/04/30/fttn-a-huge-mistake-says-ex-bt-cto/




Jeremy insists that an Aston Martin DB9 is better than a Toyota Prado...

Should I go out and buy an Aston Martin DB9 to go and get my groceries??

Nope, but hey, when the speed limit becomes 220kph, I'll trade in my car and get that Aston Martin.


MW


The Labor party:  Where rivers of gold paying for handouts are paid for by my grand children's sweat and tears.

Edit : I am not TOTALLY against FTTP, I am just against the sheer expense of the rollout, the poor uptake and the clowns running the show.


----------



## Calliope

medicowallet said:


> Jeremy insists that an Aston Martin DB9 is better than a Toyota Prado...
> 
> Should I go out and buy an Aston Martin DB9 to go and get my groceries??
> 
> Nope, but hey, when the speed limit becomes 220kph, I'll trade in my car and get that Aston Martin.
> 
> The Labor party:  Where rivers of gold paying for handouts are paid for by my grand children's sweat and tears.
> 
> Edit : I am not TOTALLY against FTTP, I am just against the sheer expense of the rollout, the poor uptake and the clowns running the show.




In the same article posted by the likes of chode84;



> opinion/analysis
> If you read beyond the commentary which I have included in this article and look at the wider transcript, it is clear that in many senses,* Cochrane is the UK telecommunications equivalent of a hippy. In his segment in the UK parliamentary committee into broadband, he rants and raves about how great fibre to the home is, *and highlights many examples where communities have independently rolled out fibre to their neighbourhoods without the assistance of major telcos like BT.
> 
> *Cochrane is an out and out evangelist for fibre broadband, and it shows in his one-sided approach to the matter*. There really is no point, he says repeatedly, in rolling out anything other than fibre; fibre is cheap enough and delivers such exorbitant levels of bandwidth that it will fill all of humanity’s broadband needs for the foreseeable future.



(My bolds)


----------



## medicowallet

Calliope said:


> In the same article posted by the likes of chode84;
> 
> (My bolds)




Damn it, I really wanted that Aston Martin DB9

MW


----------



## DB008

I'm not the smartest, but when doing a project, of any size, wouldn't ROI be an important factor?

So, why roll it out in the sticks, poor uptake, and leave the big smoke for later dates?

Wouldn't rolling it out in heavily populated areas be the smart (and first) thing to do, to maximize return and pay down debt?

It's almost like the ALP LOVE DEBT. Pig in $hit.


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> I'm not the smartest, but when doing a project, of any size, wouldn't ROI be an important factor?
> 
> So, why roll it out in the sticks, poor uptake, and leave the big smoke for later dates?
> 
> Wouldn't rolling it out in heavily populated areas be the smart (and first) thing to do, to maximize return and pay down debt?
> 
> It's almost like the ALP LOVE DEBT. Pig in $hit.




The premise of your comment is incorrect, for a few reasons....

First, the NBN is being simultaneously rolled out from each of the nationwide 121 Points Of Interconnect of the network. So it *is* being rolled out in "the big smoke" as well as "the sticks", concurrently.

Second, in the trial sites done so far, the regional sites are running at 20% higher takeup than the metro sites. Probably because the metro sites have higher rental accommodation (need landlords permission to connect), and they have reasonable broadband already.

Thirdly, one of the biggest points of the NBN is to reduce the "digital divide" between city and rural areas. If they did the entire city areas first, then that objective would not be achieved.


----------



## DB008

NBNMyths said:


> The premise of your comment is incorrect, for a few reasons....
> 
> First, the NBN is being simultaneously rolled out from each of the nationwide 121 Points Of Interconnect of the network. So it *is* being rolled out in "the big smoke" as well as "the sticks", concurrently.
> 
> Second, in the trial sites done so far, the regional sites are running at 20% higher takeup than the metro sites. Probably because the metro sites have higher rental accommodation (need landlords permission to connect), and they have reasonable broadband already.
> 
> Thirdly, one of the biggest points of the NBN is to reduce the "digital divide" between city and rural areas. If they did the entire city areas first, then that objective would not be achieved.





1) I'm still in the 3+ year to get the NBN, despite big smoke location. 
2) Of course it has a higher uptake. Telstra rip off or NBN? You'd be stupid not to take the NBN
3) Digital Divide. Your ROI business sense shows here. ROI, high population, pay down debt, your true colors show here....


----------



## So_Cynical

DB008 said:


> Your ROI business sense shows here. ROI, high population, pay down debt, your true colors show here....




You do know that you cant get even mobile phone coverage in like 70% of Australia, 300 clicks out the back of Sydney and reception can become patchy, most of the smaller rural towns have only had DSL for a couple of years and the larger ones get a choice of 2 providers if there lucky, even luckier to have slots available on the 1 or 2 DSLAMS in the local exchange that mite be 10 clicks down the road.

There is a massive digital divide in Australia, the tyranny of distance is very very real.


----------



## Calliope

So_Cynical said:


> You do know that you cant get even mobile phone coverage in like 70% of Australia,




That's not surprising; 70% of Australia is uninhabited or very sparsely inhabited desert. However if you mean 70% of the population, that is b/s.


----------



## So_Cynical

Calliope said:


> That's not surprising; 70% of Australia is uninhabited or very sparsely inhabited desert. However if you mean 70% of the population, that is b/s.



 70% of Australia is what i said...and yep its sparsely populated and yet is actually populated with Australians who have similar wants and needs as the Australians living in more populated areas...strange that hey.


----------



## Calliope

So_Cynical said:


> 70% of Australia is what i said...and yep its sparsely populated and yet is actually populated with Australians who have similar wants and needs as the Australians living in more populated areas...strange that hey.




As you said "tyranny of distance is very very real", and this is the reason that they don't have the facilities that you and I take for granted...hospitals, post offices, shopping malls, fresh fruit, public transport, mobile phones, secondary schools, power supplies, etc. 

It's a matter of supply and demand, not "wants and needs".


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> 1) I'm still in the 3+ year to get the NBN, despite big smoke location.
> 2) Of course it has a higher uptake. Telstra rip off or NBN? You'd be stupid not to take the NBN
> 3) Digital Divide. Your ROI business sense shows here. ROI, high population, pay down debt, your true colors show here....




My true colours?

You still don't get it. The NBN is not a project created primarily to deliver a return. It is a project designed to improve broadband *nationwide* and reduce the digital divide between rural/regional and metro areas, _while_ delivering a return. The rollout and pricing reflect these objectives.

You admitted yourself that takeup rates indicate that areas outside the metro centres want the NBN more than those in the cities. Doesn't this then support the NBN's policy of a concurrent regional/metro rollout?


----------



## inyaface

NBN ppl were just starting to roll up in front of my house....exciting times!


----------



## IFocus

NBNMyths said:


> My true colours?
> 
> You still don't get it. The NBN is not a project created primarily to deliver a return. It is a project designed to improve broadband *nationwide* and reduce the digital divide between rural/regional and metro areas, _while_ delivering a return. The rollout and pricing reflect these objectives.
> 
> You admitted yourself that takeup rates indicate that areas outside the metro centres want the NBN more than those in the cities. Doesn't this then support the NBN's policy of a concurrent regional/metro rollout?




Love your perseverance, facts and logic Myths.

Without getting into a political bun fight here note that the Barnett government in WA (Liberal / Nats) is spending bullions on infrastructure in WA................guess how many of these have been subjected to a ROI business process............none that I am aware of.
Yet strangely the Mandurah rail line (built by Labor) was hammered night and day because it failed everyone's (who wanted to knock it) ROI projections. 
After it was built it became the most successful line of any rail built in the state.

For some reason people really fear change and politicians just love to feed off peoples fear often repeated though these threads.


----------



## IFocus

inyaface said:


> NBN ppl were just starting to roll up in front of my house....exciting times!




My area is also on the roll out list looking forward to the same best I can get is 1.5 without paying a fortune go NBN and if the Coalition can the project then my property / area price premium just gets better.

LOL go Turnbul


----------



## sydboy007

DB008 said:


> I'm not the smartest, but when doing a project, of any size, wouldn't ROI be an important factor?
> 
> So, why roll it out in the sticks, poor uptake, and leave the big smoke for later dates?
> 
> Wouldn't rolling it out in heavily populated areas be the smart (and first) thing to do, to maximize return and pay down debt?
> 
> It's almost like the ALP LOVE DEBT. Pig in $hit.




* Deal with independents so had to rollout in the less populated areas

* Could have been done from the densely populated suburbs out but would require support from Dr NO.

* ACCC forced 122 POIs onto the NBN when they had a far easier 12 in their original plan


----------



## sydboy007

IFocus said:


> For some reason people really fear change and politicians just love to feed off peoples fear often repeated though these threads.




That is sadly true these days.

Abbott has shown negativity and constant fear works wonders.

I don't see the ALP being any better in opposition.  What's good for the goose is good for the gander I suppose


----------



## medicowallet

sydboy007 said:


> That is sadly true these days.
> 
> Abbott has shown negativity and constant fear works wonders.
> 
> I don't see the ALP being any better in opposition.  What's good for the goose is good for the gander I suppose




The fear campaign only works because of Rudd's and Gillard's record.

Why would you trust them to be able to roll out a $50 billion plan when their record for much smaller "plans" is so pathetic.

It also smacks of largesse when we witness debt and trade deficits blowing out, for a service of which a vast majority of people have adequate speeds, and it is unlikely to contribute much if any to exports over imports.

Sometimes it is better to pace yourself than run in all guns blazing.

MW


----------



## chode84

> Wouldn't rolling it out in heavily populated areas be the smart (and first) thing to do, to maximize return and pay down debt?




As NBNmyths has already pointed out, you really are missing the point aren't you? Not everything in life is done to make as much money as humanly possible. This may surprise you, but the Governments primary role is not to act like a private business. It's to provide services. 

Sure, it can't bleed money forever and needs to be financially viable in the long term but prioritising the NBN for areas with already decent infrastructure entirely defeats it's purpose considering the roll-out time frame.


----------



## sptrawler

IFocus said:


> Love your perseverance, facts and logic Myths.
> 
> Without getting into a political bun fight here note that the Barnett government in WA (Liberal / Nats) is spending bullions on infrastructure in WA................guess how many of these have been subjected to a ROI business process............none that I am aware of.
> Yet strangely the Mandurah rail line (built by Labor) was hammered night and day because it failed everyone's (who wanted to knock it) ROI projections.
> After it was built it became the most successful line of any rail built in the state.
> 
> For some reason people really fear change and politicians just love to feed off peoples fear often repeated though these threads.




You really do have to stop manipulating the truth.LOL
The Liberals were putting in the Mandurah line, the tunnel onto the freeway is still there (empty).
Labor chose to change the route down the centre of the freeway, taking up an extra 5 lanes of capacity.lol
This is the problem, Labor see any big spending issue has to be vote grabbing, it doesn't matter if it makes sense or not.
Running the train line down the centre of the freeway was dumb, we will end up having to spend billions to sort it out.
But that is Labor.IMO Fortunatelly the electorate seems to havewoken up to the crap, going by the latest poll the State election.
Back on track, the NBN will be cut back no matter who wins the election.IMO


----------



## Calliope

Is it possible that our resident NBN propagandist NBNMyths and the ABC's NBN propagandist Nick Ross are one and the same person?



> The corporation's journalists and presenters, by and large, have taken a benign view of the NBN. They see no need to question the government's ability to deliver or the considerable cost to the public purse. Indeed, one ABC journalist, its computer-game expert Nick Ross, has become a Conroy advocate, haranguing the opposition's Malcolm Turnbull in his public appearances. In January he wrote: "With it being an election year, there is a great deal to be done in informing the public about the current NBN policy and the consequences of ditching it in favour of a Coalition alternative."
> 
> It may surprise Ross to know *The Australian agrees that if money was no object the fibre-to-the-premises NBN plan has the edge in speed and capacity over the opposition's cheaper fibre-to-the-node network. The Australian also agrees that sending a stretched limo to Ross's house each morning, complete with a Jacuzzi and bath salts, will get him to work in a happier frame of mind. In the real world, however, the bus might have to suffice.*




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...cuzzis-all-round/story-e6frg71x-1226595928107

NBNMyths recently made the intriguing statement; 







> The other thing I will absolutely stake my reputation on is that, speed for speed, the retail prices for FTTN will not be cheaper than the NBN




I am stiil waiting to hear what this reputation is.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Is it possible that our resident NBN propagandist NBNMyths and the ABC's NBN propagandist Nick Ross are one and the same person?
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...cuzzis-all-round/story-e6frg71x-1226595928107
> 
> NBNMyths recently made the intriguing statement;
> 
> I am stiil waiting to hear what this reputation is.




Nick Ross? You should pay more attention.


----------



## medicowallet

I can't wait until I can upload all my photos to a developer in China, and they can develop and deliver them to my door cheaper than anyone in Australia.

Great way for us to donate money overseas..


NBN - the greatest consumption device in Australia in 2030

MW


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> I can't wait until I can upload all my photos to a developer in China, and they can develop and deliver them to my door cheaper than anyone in Australia.
> 
> Great way for us to donate money overseas..
> 
> 
> NBN - the greatest consumption device in Australia in 2030
> 
> MW




Funny you should mention photos. Watch this:
[video=youtube_share;eeahNO0-F9g]http://youtu.be/eeahNO0-F9g[/video]


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> Funny you should mention photos. Watch this:
> [video=youtube_share;eeahNO0-F9g]http://youtu.be/eeahNO0-F9g[/video]




I watched this on tv..

I would like to ask you how much export $$ this business makes for Australia, as I undertand that the chemicals etc are imported.

Can you please explain how this is actually of a cost benefit for Australia as a whole, and use this to justify the $50 billion investment into the technology to facilitate this, as opposed to infrastructure designed to improve exports

MW


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> I watched this on tv..
> 
> I would like to ask you how much export $$ this business makes for Australia, as I undertand that the chemicals etc are imported.
> 
> Can you please explain how this is actually of a cost benefit for Australia as a whole, and use this to justify the $50 billion investment into the technology to facilitate this, as opposed to infrastructure designed to improve exports
> 
> MW




I have no idea how much they export, nor whether the chemicals used are local or imported. 

The point was your claim that the NBN would simply facilitate direct photo importing from China. This Australian photo processing company thinks the NBN will be a boon for them, not a threat.

Whether they export or not, and/or use some imported components or not, products purchased here from them instead of being fully imported would of benefit to us, wouldn't you say?


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> I have no idea how much they export, nor whether the chemicals used are local or imported.
> 
> The point was your claim that the NBN would simply facilitate direct photo importing from China. This Australian photo processing company thinks the NBN will be a boon for them, not a threat.
> 
> Whether they export or not, and/or use some imported components or not, products purchased here from them instead of being fully imported would of benefit to us, wouldn't you say?




Of course ordering it locally is better...

but say I get 10 photos developed a year, but technology invites me to get 100 per year = net loss for the country.

PLUS, let us see when the cheap operators realise and set up services within this country when the technology allows them to do it.  

Hey, perhaps it is a great business opportunity for YOU to go overseas and contact a factory to get this **** sorted

See, what a great MW I am, giving you business advice and all.

MW


----------



## medicowallet

medicowallet said:


> Of course ordering it locally is better...
> 
> but say I get 10 photos developed a year, but technology invites me to get 100 per year = net loss for the country.
> 
> PLUS, let us see when the cheap operators realise and set up services within this country when the technology allows them to do it.
> 
> Hey, perhaps it is a great business opportunity for YOU to go overseas and contact a factory to get this **** sorted
> 
> See, what a great MW I am, giving you business advice and all.
> 
> MW




I note that you have not replied to the thoughts on the cost to the country (which I don't believe you ever do), and I do hope that you take the tongue in cheek business advice statement with a pinch of salt.

MW


----------



## Calliope

If Myths's hero, Stephen Conroy, gets his way it will soon become unlawful for the media to criticise the NBN roll-out fiasco.


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> I note that you have not replied to the thoughts on the cost to the country (which I don't believe you ever do), and I do hope that you take the tongue in cheek business advice statement with a pinch of salt.
> 
> MW




I'm not concerned about the "cost to the country", because I believe that the NBN will be of benefit to the country, not cost. Whether we like it or not, the World is increasingly online. To be competitive in the future, our businesses need to adapt to this and produce products to take advantage of the superfast broadband being rolled out. Unfortunately, when compared to the rest of the World we are being left behind:




Also, due to the way its funded I don't believe it prevents us from undertaking other useful spending in any way.

I take everything you write with a grain of salt!


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> If Myths's hero, Stephen Conroy, gets his way it will soon become unlawful for the media to criticise the NBN roll-out fiasco.
> 
> View attachment 51327




1. Stephen Conroy is most certainly not my hero.

2. Your proposition is utter rubbish. The proposed laws would do no such thing.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> 1. Stephen Conroy is most certainly not my hero.




Conroy and his henchman Quigley are your mentors.



> 2. Your proposition is utter rubbish. The proposed laws would do no such thing.




It was _The Australian's_ criticism of the NBN that motivated Conroy's bill to suppress the freedom of speech.

"Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost." Thomas Jefferson.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Conroy and his henchman Quigley are your mentors.
> 
> 
> 
> It was _The Australian's_ criticism of the NBN that motivated Conroy's bill to suppress the freedom of speech.
> 
> "Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost." Thomas Jefferson.




I have great respect for Mr Quigley. Not so much for Mr Conroy.

The problem with the Australian's coverage on the NBN is that it's generally demonstrably false. I've lost count of the number of corrections they have been forced to print on the topic. The tech press berates them regularly. As far as I am aware, the only change the proposed legislation would make with regards to those stories is that instead of simply being forced by the Press Council to issue a correction on page 46 for their false page 1 stories, they would be liable for a fine or other sanctions, again from the Press Council.

As for the other proposed changes, I can't really comment as I don't know enough about the bill.

I have no problem with freedom of the press. But there does need to be some accountability, lest powerful media owners attempt to exert control over society for their own gain. But, that would never happen, right?


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> I have great respect for Mr Quigley. Not so much for Mr Conroy.
> 
> The problem with the Australian's coverage on the NBN is that it's generally demonstrably false. I've lost count of the number of corrections they have been forced to print on the topic. The tech press berates them regularly.




You and Conroy really think alike.



> I have no problem with freedom of the press. But there does need to be some accountability, lest powerful media owners attempt to exert control over society for their own gain. But, that would never happen, right?




And you don't think that Conroy and Gillard want to exert control over the press for their own good? By "accountablity" you and Conroy both mean censorship.


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> I'm not concerned about the "cost to the country", because I believe that the NBN will be of benefit to the country, not cost. Whether we like it or not, the World is increasingly online. To be competitive in the future, our businesses need to adapt to this and produce products to take advantage of the superfast broadband being rolled out. Unfortunately, when compared to the rest of the World we are being left behind:
> 
> View attachment 51329
> 
> 
> Also, due to the way its funded I don't believe it prevents us from undertaking other useful spending in any way.
> 
> I take everything you write with a grain of salt!




I like that graph, it shows how many countries that do not experience our economic growth have faster internet.... really doesn't answer the question though does it...

Change tack, withdraw... style over substance..

MW


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> You and Conroy really think alike.
> 
> And you don't think that Conroy and Gillard want to exert control over the press for their own good? By "accountablity" you and Conroy both mean censorship.




Mike Quigley is one of the most respected telecommunications execs in the World, so I'm quite happy to be on that side of the fence, thanks. Even the few telco people who don't like the NBN still respect Quigley.

Beven Slattery in 2010: 


> “You don’t get that high at Alcatel if you’re a muppet, so he’s obviously a pretty good guy,” he said, referring to Quigley’s history at the French telecommunications vendor.




I think every politician, despite what they may say publicly, would like to have some control over the media.

That aside, the fact is that The Australian has been running a long campaign against the NBN, and have published numerous demonstrably false articles about it. They have even admitted as much with their string of corrections.

I have no real issue with the long list of dodgy opinion pieces they have published against the NBN. People are entitled to their opinions. However, when they publish page 1 *news* stories which are blatantly false, then correct them a week later with a tiny spot on page 40 (or never correct them at all), that is not acceptable. That is not objective reporting, that is outright lying.

The Press Council needs teeth, which is something they don't have at present. Now whether all the other reforms are necessary, I don't know. But I do know that the media (And yes, I particularly mean News Ltd) needs to have more accountability than they currently have.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> The Press Council needs teeth, which is something they don't have at present. Now whether all the other reforms are necessary, I don't know. But I do know that the media (And yes, I particularly mean News Ltd) needs to have more accountability than they currently have.




At last you have come out of the closet and confirmed your dislike of a newspaper that criticises this government. You have accepted that Conroy's bill is aimed solely at muzzling The Australian, and you agree with this, simply because of your fanatical support for Conroy and Quigley's NBN Co. fiasco. Naturally all your posts are prejudiced by your political leanings.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> At last you have come out of the closet and confirmed your dislike of a newspaper that criticises this government. You have accepted that Conroy's bill is aimed solely at muzzling The Australian, and you agree with this, simply because of your fanatical support for Conroy and Quigley's NBN Co. fiasco.




Since when have I been "in the closet"?

I make no bones about the fact that I dislike the fact that The Australian (and the Daily Tele) in particular flat-out lie about the NBN. They do. It's a fact, and they often admit it themselves, if belatedly.

I don't know if they do it for political reasons (they've always been right-leaning), or because the NBN is a threat to the business interests of News Ltd (specifically FOXTEL), or simply to pander to their conservative audience and therefore sell more papers.

Whatever the reason, they have been caught out many times, and the "slap on the wrist" dished out by the Press Council (which they flaunt anyway) doesn't seem to deter them from doing it again.

I have no problem with them or any other news agency reporting the facts. But they too often don't.

*Do you believe that newspapers should be able to report false news as they please, with no ramifications or accountability?*





Calliope said:


> Naturally all your posts are prejudiced by your political leanings.




As are yours.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> As are yours.




TouchÃ©! At last we agree on something. Our posts are politically biased.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Man up NBNMyths.

Is TLS a buy or a sell?

All this talk about the NBN will be judged by history.

I reckon the NBN is bollox.

You don't.

Who cares?

Is TLS a buy or a sell ?

gg


----------



## sptrawler

I think you all need to cut nbnmyths some slack.
He obviously believes implicitly in the benefits, but gives factual substantiated evidence to support it.
Somewhat like smurph, who also gives grounded posts.
We can't pay out on someone who is supplying facts, just because we dissagree.

By the way, I do dissagree with fibre to the home.

When you can show his posts as being incorrect or flawed, pay out.


----------



## orr

Calliope said:


> "Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost." Thomas Jefferson.




We all know that historical context isn't one of your stronger points, sits with most of the others. What Gutenberg give to those who could afford one( a printing press Cal ) the internet and connection to it, gives to all. Viva the individual Viva ideas Viva the digital revolution Viva the NBN... Without it freedom is lost.


----------



## Calliope

sptrawler said:


> I think you all need to cut nbnmyths some slack.
> He obviously believes implicitly in the benefits, but gives factual substantiated evidence to support it.
> Somewhat like smurph, who also gives grounded posts.
> We can't pay out on someone who is supplying facts, just because we dissagree.




Myths doesn't deny that be is politically biased. There is no such thing as politically biased "factual substantiated evidence". That is an oxymoron.


----------



## IFocus

Calliope said:


> Myths doesn't deny that be is politically biased. There is no such thing as politically biased "factual substantiated evidence". That is an oxymoron.




The NBN is pursued by sections of the media (News etc) because it will be in direct competition to them.

They are attacking not in yours or any body else's interests they are running the negative campaign to protect their own and clearly you are buying in because its a Labor thing.

The NBN is in Australia's interest and I am still waiting to hear an objective argument why not so far its all sniping and personalisations. .


----------



## MrBurns

I don't follow this thread much but is anyone connected yet ?

cost ?

any faster ?


----------



## IFocus

sptrawler said:


> You really do have to stop manipulating the truth.LOL
> The Liberals were putting in the Mandurah line, the tunnel onto the freeway is still there (empty).
> Labor chose to change the route down the centre of the freeway, taking up an extra 5 lanes of capacity.lol
> This is the problem, Labor see any big spending issue has to be vote grabbing, it doesn't matter if it makes sense or not.
> Running the train line down the centre of the freeway was dumb, we will end up having to spend billions to sort it out.
> But that is Labor.IMO Fortunatelly the electorate seems to havewoken up to the crap, going by the latest poll the State election.
> Back on track, the NBN will be cut back no matter who wins the election.IMO




Just saw this SP the freeway option was by far the best haven't heard any urban planner say it wasn't.....none.

The State Liberals made a big who har about it but the real risk was the tunnelling project associated with the freeway which turned out to be spot on so much so Barnett is looking for more of the same.

The Liberals plan really was 1/2 @rsed similar to the federal Liberals plan for NBN IMHO just means some one pays more further down the line in the future.


----------



## drsmith

Stephen Conroy in 2008,

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...50mbps-and-the-merits-of-internet-filter.html


----------



## Calliope

IFocus said:


> They are attacking not in yours or any body else's interests they are running the negative campaign to protect their own and clearly you are buying in because its a Labor thing.




Wrong again. They are doing it in the interests of the taxpayer. Remember the Pink Bats and the BER... huge wastes of the taxpayers' money, badly run and badly spent. What makes you think NBN will be any different? Naturally Conroy hates _The Australian_ for continually holding him up to ridicule.



> The NB Australia's interest and I am still waiting to hear an objective argument why




If it was in Australia's interests they wouldn't have a lunatic like Conroy running it. He is the Minister for Nastiness. Nothing Conroy does can be construed as in our interests. You would have to be brain-dead to think so.


----------



## boofhead

Calliope: Can you start playing the ball instead of the person? It reads like your bias is clouding your expressed views. I'll explain - so far most of what you said has been about the people involved or supporting the NBN and very little about the actual NBN. Do you work in Abbott's office or something?

Some in the thread have tried to discuss the NBN on information available and avoid the poor coverage by some mainstream print press. Some have tried to use the federal budget as a reason for not having it but ignore how the items are budgeted. Some want to introduce a false dichotomy. Seems to feel like a small number of people that try to have a rational discussion get goaded by those that want to make it personal.

Then again, maybe it all starts from the first post of the thread.


----------



## Calliope

boofhead said:


> Calliope: Can you start playing the ball instead of the person? It reads like your bias is clouding your expressed views.




It sure is. I have a deep seated bias against Conroy and anything he proposes. Anything that originates from him is nasty and draconian You'll just have to live with that boofy.

Feel free to defend him. Even Myths in his advocacy for the NBN won't do that, although he supports it as a Labor "enterprise", despite their record. That takes faith.


----------



## IFocus

Calliope said:


> It sure is. I have a deep seated bias against Conroy and anything he proposes. Anything that originates from him is nasty and draconian You'll just have to live with that boofy.
> 
> Feel free to defend him. Even Myths in his advocacy for the NBN won't do that, although he supports it as a Labor "enterprise", despite their record. That takes faith.




Don't think you are going to get many here who will defend Conroy, he didn't actually propose the NBN he is just the Minister, think of the program "Yes Minister" as for implementation that will be down to Quigley and less to do with government.

Speaking up about the NBN is not supporting Labor or Conroy, but if you work for serious company's that chew data and or watch the exponential increase in internet traffic and the technologies driving it then you will wonder why people just don't do a little bit of research and understand it.


----------



## sydboy007

MrBurns said:


> I don't follow this thread much but is anyone connected yet ?
> 
> cost ?
> 
> any faster ?




My Dad has been connected around a year now in Kiama Downs.

He's with Exetel.  He went from a ADSL + Line rental of ~ $65 a month (1.5Mbs speed) to a 12/1 Fiber connection with no line rental - free VOIP account with exetel that provides low cost mobile and untimed 10c land line calls - for $35 a month.

His first reaction after I connected his new VOIP modem was " I click and it's just there"

He's now watching catch up TV and lots of DIY videos.  He's also gotten into some of the TV shows on the SMH web site.  I'm scared to set him up Hulu access.  Might have to upgrade the office chair in the PC room and then he'll live in their like a teenager 

The demographics of Kiama are probably skewed to the older generation - certainly a lot of pensioners down there.  My dad does a lot of odd jobs and lawn mowing etc and so far he's not found anyone who's not looking forward to getting connected.  Yeah some of the old gals down there who never had a PC don't care, but I was surprised as to how much the internet is used by the 65+ group in Kiama.

Now for those who take everything that the LNP say as the Gospel Truth:

* It *DID NOT* cost $3000 to wire up my parents house so they could have the NBN - ONT in the "computer" room with Wireless router for smart phone connectivity = $0 cabling cost.  I got 3 bedrooms in my house cabled with ethernet for $450, and my house is double story.  /sarcasm - I know most LNP supporters are quite rich, but if they're paying $3000 to get their houses cabled then I shake my head at their lack of financial skills to get a competitive quote /sarcasm.

* My dad has halved his fixed telecommunication costs, reduced his phone call costs, gets 8 times the download speeds, 4 times the download limit, and enjoying self education opportunities he couldn't afford to do via a Telstra wholesale ADSL connection (the cost jump to an 8Mbs plan was too much for a pensioner).  He *IS NOT* paying over $100 a month.

Hopefully MT is telling the truth and we'll have his policy out for public viewing around June / July.  At the moment the only party with a fully costed PLAN is the ALP.  All the LNP have so far is a slogan of Faster and Cheaper with not 1 shred of evidence to back up their claims.  using examples of other countries where the incumbent carrier is rolling out the FTTN network is not relevant to Australia.

I can't wait to see the reaction of the NIMBYs who wont want Wireless internet - MT will probably triple the areas getting fixed wireless.


----------



## Calliope

IFocus said:


> Don't think you are going to get many here who will defend Conroy, he didn't actually propose the NBN he is just the Minister







> Conroy notoriously sketched out the blueprint for the $37.4 billion National Broadband Network on the back of a napkin while on a VIP RAAF flight with Kevin Rudd.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...govern-our-media/story-e6frg6z6-1226596728108


----------



## IFocus

Calliope said:


> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...govern-our-media/story-e6frg6z6-1226596728108




The idea had been around for awhile Labor just went FTTP and filled in the holes using wireless and satellite.





> Broadband Advisory Group 2003
> 
> In a report released on 22 January 2003 the Howard government’s Broadband Advisory Group (BAG) recommended the Federal Government work with other governments and industry stakeholders to form a "national broadband network".[98] A subsequent Senate committee recommend the Federal Government replace the "increasingly obsolete" copper network with a new network based on fibre to the node (FTTN) or alternative technologies





The main problem to solve was Telstra not sure if Conroy was involved in working that out but he certainty didn't come up with the idea of a NBN.


----------



## drsmith

On time and on budget ?

These will be the biggest questions of all.


----------



## drsmith

IFocus said:


> The main problem to solve was Telstra not sure if Conroy was involved in working that out but he certainty didn't come up with the idea of a NBN.



Who was it then ?

Kevin Rudd ?


----------



## Smurf1976

IFocus said:


> Speaking up about the NBN is not supporting Labor or Conroy, but if you work for serious company's that chew data and or watch the exponential increase in internet traffic and the technologies driving it then you will wonder why people just don't do a little bit of research and understand it.



This is a bit of a long winded post. Skip to the last sentence if you just want the summary. 

I think the point that many would implicitly question is whether or not there is much benefit in all that data in the first place?

The internet now is a bit like road traffic or electricity in the 1960's. It's been around long enough to become "critical" but still has huge annual growth rates which are now starting to require some serious infrastructure to support them.

People started worrying about roads when they started being put up on pillars and being "cut through" long established areas of significance to the community. Add in the huge financial cost of building them, the 1970's oil crises and the smog (and if you're under 35 you probably don't realise just how polluted even Australian cities used to be prior to emissions control improvements on cars) and the opinion of the general public and governments started to shift away from the "car is king" mentality. In any event, what was the actual point of all that traffic and all those roads? Do we really want every city to look like Los Angeles?

Electricity was much the same. Demand went up 10% per annum and that was taken for granted. Nobody really questioned where all the power was going or what the real point of it was. We just built more and bigger power stations with more and bigger coal mines to supply them. Nobody worried too much until Lake Pedder, Three Mile Island, the Franklin River, Chernobyl and what was then termed "the greenhouse effect" became household terms. Throw in the soaring financial costs, technological innovation improving energy efficiency and the realisation that it was only a matter of time until the Latrobe Valley ended up as one huge hole in the ground and opinions shifted.

Car use per capita peaked some years ago and is now trending down in much of the developed world. The car is no longer king. Electricity did the same, indeed it is declining in absolute terms not just per capita in Australia. Life has carried on quite well without doubling road traffic and power generation every 7 years it seems. 

The same goes for water although I don't have the figures. Concern about the environmental effects and cost plus the need for ever more elaborate infrastrucuture changed the game there too. Building a few dams around Melbourne (for example) is one thing. Once you come to the point where you need to either dam every last creek in Victoria or bring the water from Queensland, Tasmania or a desalination plant well then things are getting out of hand somewhat. Life has carried on without hosing the driveway every weekend or leaving the sprinkler running all night.

The same questions could be asked of the internet. What, exactly, is the real world benefit of all this data? What can I actually do with 100 MBPS that I can't do with ADSL2+ or for that matter plain ADSL? What is the actual benefit here?

1. Like other industries before it, the internet started with growth of its' own and in due course moved onto replacement of pre-existing industries. First comes the obvious major benefits such as email instead of snail mail, the web instead of newspapers or cars instead of horse & cart. No questions there.

2. Next come the second level benefits. Things like downloading music or social networks. Or electric vacuum cleaners instead of dust pans and brushes. There are clear advantages over previous technology, even though we did previously have a means of achieving essentially the same end result.

3. Then we come to the point where further growth is really only replacing some other technology that does much the same with a relatively minor benefit. Downloading TV instead of watching / recording broadcast TV. Buses instead of trams. Electric clothes dryers instead of a Hills hoist. Etc. A key point here is that the service must be kept cheap in order to sustain this growth. Cheap diesel will favour buses over trams, cheap electricity and people will use it to dry clothes or heat buildings. But if it's expensive then that demand disappears due to being of relatively minor advantage compared to alternatives.

4. Then finally we come to growth for the sake of it. I don't know what the internet equivalent will be but think in terms of running down railways to the point that they cease to function thus putting everything on the roads. Or banning the installation of gas mains in new subdivisions so as to force the use of electricity. At that point it is growth for the sake of growth, with no real benefit to the community. 

I read only a few days ago about a game which you play it mostly by yourself. However, it won't work without being connected to the company's server even though there is no real need for it to work this way since you're playing by yourself. Apparently the servers aren't coping, people aren't happy and even the geeks have realised that there's no actual need for it to work this way. That's stage 4 behaviour - consumption for the sake of it, rather than for an actual reason.

The NBN is essentially based on the notion that level 3 uses are driving up data volumes and that this will continue. There are benefits, but marginal utility is declining and in due course we end up at stage 4.

The unanswered question in all of this is where do we eventually end up? At some point the growth in data traffic will end, and it is already at the point of being price sensitive (nobody's would even think of downloading TV at the data costs which prevailed a few years ago). In other words, how much capacity do we actually need to build, before demand flattens out and it becomes pointless?

Will household demand for data actually exceed the capabilities of FTTN? Simply looking at current growth rates does not answer this question since in due course that growth will end.

Replacing the copper network because it is in a poor state and Telstra are difficult to deal with, rather than an a genuine need for FTTP rather than FTTN, is the rational reason to build FTTP now. If we had a good copper network and didn't have to deal with Telstra then FTTN would make sense given the uncertainty of future data demand. But if we have to replace it anyway then we may as well go all the way given that there won't be much difference in cost.


----------



## IFocus

Hi Smurf

Agree re the copper net work replacement, I do know a medium size business here in WA that has a number of sites in the state. they run all their applications from a central point but have to rent lines to run the data which costs extraordinary amounts for the speed they get (its rubbish).

With the NBN it all goes away hence vested interests oppose the NBN.

This is the case for any medium and bigger businesses, with mine site remote controls coming etc speed counts.


----------



## So_Cynical

Smurf1976 said:


> 4. Then finally we come to growth for the sake of it. I don't know what the internet equivalent will be but think in terms of running down railways to the point that they cease to function thus putting everything on the roads. Or banning the installation of gas mains in new subdivisions so as to force the use of electricity. At that point it is growth for the sake of growth, with no real benefit to the community.
> 
> *I read only a few days ago about a game which you play it mostly by yourself*. However, it won't work without being connected to the company's server even though there is no real need for it to work this way since you're playing by yourself. Apparently the servers aren't coping, people aren't happy and even the geeks have realised that there's no actual need for it to work this way. That's stage 4 behaviour - consumption for the sake of it, rather than for an actual reason.




SimCity 5 (the new Simcity) The Servers are there for 2 reasons, DLC (downloadable content) and MP (Multiplayer regions) a lot of unhappy people due to the login servers not coping with the demand, happens with pretty much every big game release...The Game publishers want everyone logged in so that its easier to manage their content and thus sell them more content.  helps with patching to, and by all accounts Simcity will need a lot of patching to fix the game.

http://consumerist.com/2013/03/09/e...away-free-games-to-people-who-bought-simcity/


----------



## Calliope

Nobody can deny that the NBN is a product of the devious mind of Stephen Conroy, the same guy who wanted to introduce an internet filter and now wants to control the press and suppress cartoons like this.


----------



## sptrawler

Well drsmith, this article just about sums up my thoughts on the NBN. 

http://www.theage.com.au/digital-li...e-worlds-fastest-internet-20130314-2g22s.html

As I've said all along, I can understand it for business, but to the home is an absolute waste of my taxes, at this point in time.
Another Labor stuff up.
It was great to read what a geek thought of bling speed internet.


----------



## chrislp

So_Cynical said:


> SimCity 5 (the new Simcity) The Servers are there for 2 reasons, DLC (downloadable content) and MP (Multiplayer regions) a lot of unhappy people due to the login servers not coping with the demand, happens with pretty much every big game release...The Game publishers want everyone logged in so that its easier to manage their content and thus sell them more content.  helps with patching to, and by all accounts Simcity will need a lot of patching to fix the game.
> 
> http://consumerist.com/2013/03/09/e...away-free-games-to-people-who-bought-simcity/




There's a 3rd reason. Always on DRM.


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> SimCity 5 (the new Simcity) The Servers are there for 2 reasons, DLC (downloadable content) and MP (Multiplayer regions) a lot of unhappy people due to the login servers not coping with the demand, happens with pretty much every big game release...The Game publishers want everyone logged in so that its easier to manage their content and thus sell them more content.  helps with patching to, and by all accounts Simcity will need a lot of patching to fix the game.
> 
> http://consumerist.com/2013/03/09/e...away-free-games-to-people-who-bought-simcity/




Yeh, forgot to mention, now we know why So_Cynical wants us to spend $50B of tax dollars on high speed internet. 
Well at least it's not pr0n.LOL
Why spend the money on a food bowl in the North of Australia, when you can do it in 'Simcity'.
I wonder why we bother?:1zhelp:


----------



## drsmith

sptrawler said:


> As I've said all along, I can understand it for business, but to the home is an absolute waste of my taxes, at this point in time.



Prioritisation is hopefully where the Opposition will go.

They will hopefully be better prepared this time than _"I'm no Bill Gates"_.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Well drsmith, this article just about sums up my thoughts on the NBN.
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/digital-li...e-worlds-fastest-internet-20130314-2g22s.html
> 
> As I've said all along, I can understand it for business, but to the home is an absolute waste of my taxes, at this point in time.
> Another Labor stuff up.
> It was great to read what a geek thought of bling speed internet.




*1.* As has been explained ad-infinitum, it's not using your tax dollars. The users of the NBN ultimately pay for the build, not taxpayers.

*2.* You could make the same argument about every utility rollout over the years. Power, water, sewer, telephone. In fact, _The Ecomomist_ (the same one that loudly criticises the NBN currently) also heaviliy criticised the construction of the London Sewer system in 1848. The boss of the British Post Office criticised the rollout of the telephone network as unnecessary.

History is replete with examples of conservatives criticising the construction or deployment of infrastructure that we take for granted today. And so it is with the NBN. The only difference is the century, but mark my words, in 50 years we will look back at _"The NBN is an unnecessary waste of money"_ quotes with the same humour as we do for the sewer/power/phone quotes of the last couple of centuries.


*3. *It's true that there's not much currently that you can do with 1Gbps broadband that you can't do (albeit much more slowly) with 50Mbps internet.

But are we seriously to believe that uses will not be developed? Although the following is slightly tongue-in-cheek, it's also valid. Consider it seriously, then substitute _FTTP broadband_ for _electricity_ and read it again:


*Let's step back ~120 years to the rollout of electricity networks:*​
*Person A:*
_Electricity is nice and all, but what can I do with it that my current gas light or candles can't do? We should spend the money on better hospitals or the war effort instead._

*Person B:*
_But things will be invented that use electricity, that gas lights or candles can't do. Maybe even things that help the hospitals._

*Person A:*
_Like what? How could invisible energy that simply creates light possibly help sick people? What they need is medicine and more doctors. Anyway, why don't we just wait until those things are invented, then build the electricity networks afterwards?_

*Person B:*
_Well, they probably won't be invented until the electricity is there for people to find uses for it. Supply and demand._

etc etc

I guess its lucky for us that the Governments of the day overcame the luddite factor, and they did roll out sewers, electricity and telephone wires.


Now, feel free to explain to me why its not a valid analogy.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> But are we seriously to believe that uses will not be developed?




"If you build it, he will come." 



> and they did roll out sewers




I would like to see that.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Now, feel free to explain to me why its not a valid analogy.



It's an emotive analysis, not a critical one.


----------



## drsmith

Calliope said:


> "If you build it, he will come."




That's what Isambard Kingdom Brunel thought. They did eventually, but too late for his defining project to be a commercial success.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Great_Eastern


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths, unlike your examples of electricity replacing gas and candles. Also installing a sewage sytem where non existed prior and installing telephone systems, again where non were present.
All the examples are of new technologies, the fibre to the home is providing the same service, with faster speed.
It is a bit like replacing your Ford Focus with a Porshe, it is fabulous for the first few weeks. Then the Porsche is just another car, to get you from point A to point B.
I thought the article I posted highlighted the issue very well.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> It's an emotive analysis, not a critical one.




How so? Given historical fact, and the incessant march of online technologies, increasing video and image resolution and move to 'cloud' based services, I doubt even the most "non Bill Gates" luddite would agree that it is almost a certainty that uses requiring superfast broadband will soon emerge.




drsmith said:


> That's what Isambard Kingdom Brunel thought. They did eventually, but too late for his defining project to be a commercial success.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Great_Eastern




Poor analogy. A railway isn't really an enabling technology. It will always be limited to the transport of goods or people. It may be able to transport them faster or further, but that's the limit.


The NBN (like electricity and the copper network) is an enabling technology. 

Electricity was initially a lighting network. However it enabled the invention (and use) of refrigeration, heating, A/C, computers etc.

The copper network was for voice telephony. However, it enabled the invention of telex, fax, fire/security alarm systems, networking, then the internet and all the uses for it. 

Think about it. If the copper telephone network was never built, then none of those things would have ever occurred, and I wouldn't be writing this today.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> NBNMyths, unlike your examples of electricity replacing gas and candles. Also installing a sewage sytem where non existed prior and installing telephone systems, again where non were present.
> All the examples are of new technologies, the fibre to the home is providing the same service, with faster speed.
> It is a bit like replacing your Ford Focus with a Porsche, it is fabulous for the first few weeks. Then the Porsche is just another car, to get you from point A to point B.
> I thought the article I posted highlighted the issue very well.




Put yourself back there.

You already have lights, provided by gas or candles. Or, you spend billions of dollars (in today's money) rolling out a network of wires across the nation to provide lights via electricity. What is the benefit? For such a massive spend, is the minor advantage of electric lights over gas lights really worth it? They both provide light. Remember that all the other uses for electricity must be ignored in any assessment, because those uses did not exist then.

_Fibre is to broadband_ as _electric lights were to gas lights_.


----------



## dutchie

NBNMyths said:


> _Fibre is to broadband_ as _electric lights were to gas lights_.




And perhaps

Wireless to fibre is as electric lights were to gas lights.

You just don't know. They probably thought electricity was not possible at the time of gas too.


----------



## NBNMyths

dutchie said:


> And perhaps
> 
> Wireless to fibre is as electric lights were to gas lights.
> 
> You just don't know. They probably thought electricity was not possible at the time of gas too.





No, _a torch is to an electric light_ as _wireless is to fibre._

A torch is mobile and very handy sometimes. But would you replace your electric lights at home with them? 


Electricity has never violated the laws of physics, which wireless (radio-via-air) would have to do to achieve anything more than about 1/20,000th the capacity of light-via-fibre.


----------



## medicowallet

Rollout is way way behind schedule and no doubt way way over budget... the end of this money sink cannot come soon enough...

Perhaps if the government actually sat down and made a plan, and worked out a budget and realistic goals, we wouldn't have this ridiculous money sink.

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/conroy-wont-commit-to-nbn-target-20130319-2gde3.html


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> The NBN (like electricity and the copper network) is an enabling technology.




It will enable:

1) people to download pr0n faster
2) people to pirate movies faster
3) people to consume to a greater extent
4) an industry filled with golden handshakes
5) businesses to value add to charge the consumer more
6) to game with lower pings

All this is being sold as good for us.  

When currently ADSL2 is more than sufficient for the vast majority of home users who have access to it.
When currently people do not even have phone lines and are moving to wireless
When currently important projects with proven export results are hamstrung by second rate infrastructure

It will be all over soon (well mostly anyway).

MW


----------



## dutchie

NBNMyths said:


> No, _a torch is to an electric light_ as _wireless is to fibre._
> 
> A torch is mobile and very handy sometimes. But would you replace your electric lights at home with them?
> 
> 
> Electricity has never violated the laws of physics, which wireless (radio-via-air) would have to do to achieve anything more than about 1/20,000th the capacity of light-via-fibre.




OK NBNMyths I hear what you are saying.

But just to make it absolutely clear to me in this regard -

Are you saying man will *never* discover/develop a wireless system as quick as fibre?


----------



## NBNMyths

dutchie said:


> OK NBNMyths I hear what you are saying.
> 
> But just to make it absolutely clear to me in this regard -
> 
> Are you saying man will *never* discover/develop a wireless system as quick as fibre?




Never say never. However, I do believe it is *extremely* unlikely, and for it to occur we would (literally) have to change some established laws of physics relating to the known size of the radio and light spectrums.

Even unproven, experimental ideas like DIDO only improve the ability to share the available radio bandwidth better. The total space available is not increased.

Don't underestimate the difference in fibre v wireless capability... To put it into some perspective, 100% of Australia's entire international phone and internet traffic is currently carried on just 36 strands of optical fibre, and those fibres would only be using 1% of their practical capability if they were all running the most recent current electronic technology at each end. In other words, a single strand of fibre could easily carry all of Australia's international phone/broadband traffic at the same time.

Compare that to the very best 4G mobile networks, which already struggle to serve a few hundred simultaneous connections.


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> It will enable:
> 
> 1) people to download pr0n faster
> 2) people to pirate movies faster
> 3) people to consume to a greater extent
> 4) an industry filled with golden handshakes
> 5) businesses to value add to charge the consumer more
> 6) to game with lower pings
> 
> All this is being sold as good for us.
> 
> When currently ADSL2 is more than sufficient for the vast majority of home users who have access to it.
> When currently people do not even have phone lines and are moving to wireless
> When currently important projects with proven export results are hamstrung by second rate infrastructure
> 
> It will be all over soon (well mostly anyway).
> 
> MW




Ahh, the copper phone network. It was the death of society as we knew it. It enabled:

1) People to download pr0n
2) People to pirate music and videos
3) People to consume stuff they don't need via the internet
4) Scammers to con people out of money
5) Women to gossip while they sat at home
6) Criminals to plan robberies




Let's get rid of it.


----------



## NBNMyths

*NBN support rises to 73 percent of Australians*

Good to see I'm not alone.....

*NBN support rises to 73 percent of Australians*


> A new poll has shown that support for Labor’s National Broadband Network project has risen over the past few months to a total of 73 percent, adding to a long-term trend of enduring support for the initiative demonstrated over the past several years; with *even a majority of Coalition voters supporting the project.*
> 
> The poll published today was recently taken by research house Essential Media, using a sample size of 1,874 Australians. One of the questions it asked was whether those polled supported or opposed a certain set of Government decisions, including the NBN, the Minerals Resource Rent Tax and the carbon tax.
> 
> In response to the question, some 35 percent of respondents indicated they strongly supported the NBN project, while some 38 percent supported it, making a total of 73 percent, up from 69 percent in a similar poll taken on 26 November last year. Only 9 percent of respondents strongly opposed the NBN policy and a further 10 percent opposed it, making only 19 percent in total of Australians which opposed the project. A further 8 percent of respondents didn’t know how they felt about the NBN.
> 
> *“The decision which has the most support amongst respondents is the NBN, with 73% in favour and only 19% opposed – an increase in support since this question was last asked in November,”* wrote Essential Media in its comments associated with the poll.
> 
> The detailed results also show that while support for the NBN was strongest amongst Labor and Greens voters (88 percent in both camps supported the NBN), the majority of Coalition voters also supported the NBN, with 61 percent in total supporting the project and only 33 percent against it. Only 18 percent of Coalition voters strongly opposed the project, while a further 15 percent opposed it.



http://delimiter.com.au/2013/03/18/nbn-support-rises-to-73-percent-of-australians/


----------



## dutchie

NBNMyths said:


> Never say never. However, I do believe it is *extremely* unlikely, and for it to occur we would (literally) have to change some established laws of physics relating to the known size of the radio and light spectrums.
> 
> Even unproven, experimental ideas like DIDO only improve the ability to share the available radio bandwidth better. The total space available is not increased.
> 
> Don't underestimate the difference in fibre v wireless capability... To put it into some perspective, 100% of Australia's entire international phone and internet traffic is currently carried on just 36 strands of optical fibre, and those fibres would only be using 1% of their practical capability if they were all running the most recent current electronic technology at each end. In other words, a single strand of fibre could easily carry all of Australia's international phone/broadband traffic at the same time.
> 
> Compare that to the very best 4G mobile networks, which already struggle to serve a few hundred simultaneous connections.




I guess that most people just don't like the idea of a government (irrespective of private funding) spending so much money on a project without a cost benefit analysis. 
Irrespective of the accuracy of a cba  (and I would think that they could be done better now than say 10/20 years ago) people would at least be able to see the pro's and con's of the system as it relates directly to them.

The government got a lot of people offside from the get go by not doing one (me for starters!)

To most objectors its overkill and repeats the governments inability to sell a policy.


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> Ahh, the copper phone network. It was the death of society as we knew it. It enabled:
> 
> 1) People to download pr0n
> 2) People to pirate music and videos
> 3) People to consume stuff they don't need via the internet
> 4) Scammers to con people out of money
> 5) Women to gossip while they sat at home
> 6) Criminals to plan robberies
> 
> 
> Let's get rid of it.




I see a country in debt, spending $50 billion on a depreciating asset which increases consumption greater than productivity or exports.  

I can see ports and rail bottlenecking our export capacity, and leading to inefficiencies.  

Why do we need fibre when copper does the job... before copper, as you have pointed out, there was not the ability to do it. Now, at the moment, clearly we have all that we require to do that job adequately, until we can support productive industries to generate the revenue to allow us to pay for playthings without going into debt to do so.

MW

PS my very large business was run like this until I sold it.   It made a lot more money that way, enabling me to do things with the money generated.... the NBN is like having a Ferrari as a delivery vehicle for a lolly store, where a Toyota echo would do.

Both make the same money for you, one costs you a lot more..


----------



## Smurf1976

The NBN is not really comparable to changing from gas lights to electric lights since that represents a major change of the actual technology in use.

I'd argue that the NBN is however directly comparable to what happened in the electricity industry itself after it had been around a couple of decades. That is, the setting up of the SECV, HEC, ETSA, SECWA so on which represented:

1. A move from a small scale, somewhat "ad hoc" supply to a planned supply made available from a single network to the vast majority of the state's population.

2. A major scaling up of the overall industry. We went from small power stations on the corner of city streets and in the suburbs to massive scale operations and what can only be considered as extreme measures in a physical sense were taken to achieve this in Tas and Vic especially.

3. The NBN is a "light" form of nationalisation and represents practically the only thing of significance to actually be nationalised in the past few decades. The electricity authorities were more "full on" in that regard, but it's a similar basic model being applied.

4. In both cases it represents government stepping in where private enterprise has messed it up. Electricity was troublesome under private ownership, and the move to public ownership in Tas and Vic ultimately forced the other states to do the same. Telstra's existing infrastructure is falling apart. That's the real problem and to be blunt, it's no surprise when you have for-profit ownership of something that is "out of sight, out of mind". They profit mine it then leave someone else to pick up the cost. No surprises there.


----------



## sptrawler

*Re: NBN support rises to 73 percent of Australians*



NBNMyths said:


> Good to see I'm not alone.....
> 
> *NBN support rises to 73 percent of Australians*
> 
> http://delimiter.com.au/2013/03/18/nbn-support-rises-to-73-percent-of-australians/




Yes and most of them would rather drive to work in a Porsche than a Focus, especialy if you tell them it will cost them nothing.


----------



## So_Cynical

sptrawler said:


> Yeh, forgot to mention, now we know why So_Cynical wants us to spend $50B of tax dollars on high speed internet.
> Well at least it's not pr0n.LOL
> Why spend the money on a food bowl in the North of Australia, when you can do it in 'Simcity'.
> I wonder why we bother?:1zhelp:




In 2011 global game market revenue was over $65 billion, what ever you think about gaming the fact is that there is some serious money in the industry, its not kids stuff any more. 

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/06/06/us-videogames-factbox-idUKTRE75552I20110606


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> In 2011 global game market revenue was over $65 billion, what ever you think about gaming the fact is that there is some serious money in the industry, its not kids stuff any more.
> 
> http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/06/06/us-videogames-factbox-idUKTRE75552I20110606




How do they make that sort of money, from playing video games?


----------



## drsmith

medicowallet said:


> Rollout is way way behind schedule and no doubt way way over budget... the end of this money sink cannot come soon enough...
> 
> Perhaps if the government actually sat down and made a plan, and worked out a budget and realistic goals, we wouldn't have this ridiculous money sink.
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/conroy-wont-commit-to-nbn-target-20130319-2gde3.html



Labor can sell the dream.

The process to realise it, that's another matter.


----------



## So_Cynical

sptrawler said:


> How do they make that sort of money, from playing video games?




Just 1 console the Xbox 360 has generated 56 billion in sales from 2005 to 2012, the games that run on that console would be 4 or 5 times that amount, PC's would be double or tripe that then you have the other consoles etc.

http://www.vg247.com/2012/05/30/xbox-360-hits-67-million-sales-worldwide-claims-47-market-share/

The next generation of consoles starts to be released this year...we get to do it all again...console internet gaming has only been around a little over a decade, the bandwidth and data getting used would double every 2 or 3 years.


----------



## sptrawler

drsmith said:


> Labor can sell the dream.
> 
> The process to realise it, that's another matter.




It will be very interesting when the real figures come out.


----------



## Calliope

> A new poll has shown that support for Labor’s National Broadband Network project has risen over the past few months to a total of 73 percent, adding to a long-term trend of enduring support for the initiative demonstrated over the past several years; with even a majority of Coalition voters supporting the project




Myths, you keep on using this specious argument. For the respondents NBN equates to faster broadband service. I'm surprised the vote wasn't 100% in favour. You would get the same reply is you asked whether they would like trains running on time, or faster roads, or faster service at the checkout.


----------



## So_Cynical

If you think the NBN is expensive: compared to what?

http://www.abc.net.au/technology/articles/2013/02/14/3690222.htm

Also talk on Whirlpool that the noalitions FTTN will need 83000 cabinets to be installed.  83000 im sure that's gona save alot of money.


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> Just 1 console the Xbox 360 has generated 56 billion in sales from 2005 to 2012, the games that run on that console would be 4 or 5 times that amount, PC's would be double or tripe that then you have the other consoles etc.
> 
> http://www.vg247.com/2012/05/30/xbox-360-hits-67-million-sales-worldwide-claims-47-market-share/
> 
> The next generation of consoles starts to be released this year...we get to do it all again...console internet gaming has only been around a little over a decade, the bandwidth and data getting used would double every 2 or 3 years.




So can you explain to me how the sale of Xboxes helps me or Australia. 
How does Australians paying $50B for faster internet speeds, so more people want to buy an Xbox that is made overseas, help us.
That is really crazy economics.
I can see why opening up the North, doesn't push your button.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNmyths, I posted years ago that the first casualty would be free to air t.v.
I said why the hell are we paying to put in infrastructure that is going to charge us for what we currently enjoy for free?
What about pensioners and people who don't want the internet, what will they do when free to air t.v requires an internet conection?
What about people who only want to pay for minimal download, to enjoy surfing and forums?

http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-...expensive-for-tv-networks-20130318-2gabu.html

Well that probably is collateral damage from your perspective.LOL
You should get preselection for Labor, "the party that gives you what you need, wether you want it or not".

I doubt your going to get unlimited t.v streaming on a $30 plan. 
Whereas at the moment it comes free to your t.v through the antenna on the roof.
It is a bloody national disgrace, the government should put that info out to the public.
Let's see how many of your 70% would vote for it then.


----------



## CanOz

I'm a bit lost here...why would you not want high speed fibre?


----------



## drsmith

From your linked article sp,



> The next generation of TV sets would be four times the resolution of current high-definition sets.




Unless they are very, very big, I'd like to know what improvement in human eyesight is on the way to make that of material use.


----------



## CanOz

Canada may be all 4G for rural internet soon....

I actually know these guys..lol

CanOz


----------



## CanOz

drsmith said:


> From your linked article sp,
> 
> 
> 
> Unless they are very, very big, I'd like to know what improvement in human eyesight is on the way to make that of material use.




That's probably what they said about black and white vs color lol!

CanOz


----------



## sptrawler

drsmith said:


> From your linked article sp,
> 
> 
> 
> Unless they are very, very big, I'd like to know what improvement in human eyesight is on the way to make that of material use.




Well doc, to fill the screen will take more download, this is going to end up like owning a boat, a hole that you throw money into.
The government will own the backbone infrastrure, therefore they will charge the user e.g chanel 7 to use the service.
Well '7' will have to pass on the cost to either the advertisers or the viewers.
At the moment only the advertisers pay, I wonder what will happen when users have to pay to watch?
We must be the dumbest people on earth.
Which is probably why Labor treat us as such.lol

By the way So_Cynical, your unlimited plan will soon be blown out of the water, when your free to air streaming is included.lol

Good old Labor to bring in the insideous by stealth.

I hope Bolt jumps on this. But he probably won't because he has skin in the game.lol


----------



## sptrawler

I see we are both viewing the same thread NBNmyths, thanks to GG.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> NBNmyths, I posted years ago that the first casualty would be free to air t.v.
> I said why the hell are we paying to put in infrastructure that is going to charge us for what we currently enjoy for free?
> What about pensioners and people who don't want the internet, what will they do when free to air t.v requires an internet conection?
> What about people who only want to pay for minimal download, to enjoy surfing and forums?
> 
> http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-...expensive-for-tv-networks-20130318-2gabu.html
> 
> Well that probably is collateral damage from your perspective.LOL
> You should get preselection for Labor, "the party that gives you what you need, wether you want it or not".
> 
> I doubt your going to get unlimited t.v streaming on a $30 plan.
> Whereas at the moment it comes free to your t.v through the antenna on the roof.
> It is a bloody national disgrace, the government should put that info out to the public.
> Let's see how many of your 70% would vote for it then.





What a bizarre series of arguments....

Who would have thought that the owner of a TV station would want free access to the network. I guess he's not thinking of himself at all.

There is no proposal, plan or discussion to dump the currently transmitted 576/1080 HDTV broadcasts. You will still get TV free via the antenna on your roof. But if you want _4K TV_ then the only practical way to deliver it would be via a fibre network. However, if you scale back the NBN to FTTN, then you can't deliver 4KTV to most people _at all_.

So are you saying we're better off with _nobody_ getting 4KTV, rather than offer them the option of getting it  as part of their monthly internet subscription if they want something better than standard HDTV?

The whole 4K TV thing is completely undecided anyway. There are a lot of issues:

None of the current stations have any plans to broadcast it;
It wouldn't be feasible over the NBN wireless/sat portions, so areas covered by regional stations would either miss out or need a dedicated satellite or terrestrial broadcast system anyway;
The NBN have announced multicast pricing, and it's pretty cheap. It would cost TV stations $250 per month for up to 100Mbps total (enough for about 5 4KTV streams). It would cost consumers about $5 per month for each channel. Maybe Kerry can't spare $250 per month, I don't know.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> What a bizarre series of arguments....
> 
> Who would have thought that the owner of a TV station would want free access to the network. I guess he's not thinking of himself at all.
> 
> There is no proposal, plan or discussion to dump the currently transmitted 576/1080 HDTV broadcasts. You will still get TV free via the antenna on your roof. But if you want _4K TV_ then the only practical way to deliver it would be via a fibre network. However, if you scale back the NBN to FTTN, then you can't deliver 4KTV to most people _at all_.
> 
> So are you saying we're better off with _nobody_ getting 4KTV, rather than offer them the option of getting it  as part of their monthly internet subscription if they want something better than standard HDTV?
> 
> The whole 4K TV thing is completely undecided anyway. There are a lot of issues:
> 
> None of the current stations have any plans to broadcast it;
> It wouldn't be feasible over the NBN wireless/sat portions, so areas covered by regional stations would either miss out or need a dedicated satellite or terrestrial broadcast system anyway;
> The NBN have announced multicast pricing, and it's pretty cheap. It would cost TV stations $250 per month for up to 100Mbps total (enough for about 5 4KTV streams). It would cost consumers about $5 per month for each channel. Maybe Kerry can't spare $250 per month, I don't know.




Oh the answer is if you want 4KTV, who the hell knows what that is?
But I can see I have put you into hyperdrive. 
So what if free to air radio goes to DAB over the NBN? How does that reflect on free to air radio?
Do you need an internetconnection to get radio transmitted through the NBN?
I can see why they would want to get rural Australia hooked up first, they will complain the most, because of lack of options.lol


----------



## bellenuit

sptrawler said:


> Oh the answer is if you want 4KTV, who the hell knows what that is?




It's a new standard that provides about 4 times the pixel density as todays HD. Although technically that would imply a requirement of 4 times the bandwidth to play the same length movie as the HD format, technology has comes to the rescue with a new compression format; H.265.

(I am out of my depth on this topic, so no questions to me please).

*Next-Gen Video Format H.265 Is Approved, Paving The Way For High-Quality Video On Low-Bandwidth Networks*

http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/25/h265-is-approved/


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Oh the answer is if you want 4KTV, who the hell knows what that is?
> But I can see I have put you into hyperdrive.
> So what if free to air radio goes to DAB over the NBN? How does that reflect on free to air radio?
> Do you need an internetconnection to get radio transmitted through the NBN?
> I can see why they would want to get rural Australia hooked up first, they will complain the most, because of lack of options.lol




4KTV is a new video standard with 4x the resolution of current HDTV. A lot of major movies have been filmed using the standard for the last 5 years or so, but it isn't widely used for broadcast anywhere yet.

There is also an upcoming standard called 8KTV, which, as the name implies is 8x the resolution of current HDTV.

Both standards will allow the adoption of larger and larger "TVs", and also allow user zooming to particular parts of an image with little degradation, depending on the screen size. 

Give it 20 years, and you'll probably have a "TV" that fills your entire lounge room wall.

What has FTA radio got to do with the NBN? You could deliver that over the current network, why would the NBN make any difference?

Have you resorted to just making up implausible arguments against the NBN now?


----------



## drsmith

sptrawler said:


> It will be very interesting when the real figures come out.



Not quiet the real figures yet, but the overall picture is becoming clearer.



> Under the targets, the NBN Co has said it would pass a total of 341,000 homes and businesses (comprising 286,000 existing homes and 55,000 newly built homes) with the fibre portion of the network by June 30. However, as of December 31, only 72,400 premises had been passed.
> 
> It is expected that as many as 140,000 premises could now be slashed from that June target.
> 
> The revision, however, is not yet a fait accompli, and the NBN Co has this week been engaged in vigorous discussions with its construction partners on ways to ramp up the rollout to still achieve its targets.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...to-10-week-delay/story-e6frgaif-1226601033008


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> 4KTV is a new video standard with 4x the resolution of current HDTV. A lot of major movies have been filmed using the standard for the last 5 years or so, but it isn't widely used for broadcast anywhere yet.
> 
> There is also an upcoming standard called 8KTV, which, as the name implies is 8x the resolution of current HDTV.
> 
> Both standards will allow the adoption of larger and larger "TVs", and also allow user zooming to particular parts of an image with little degradation, depending on the screen size.
> 
> Give it 20 years, and you'll probably have a "TV" that fills your entire lounge room wall.
> 
> What has FTA radio got to do with the NBN? You could deliver that over the current network, why would the NBN make any difference?
> 
> Have you resorted to just making up implausible arguments against the NBN now?




Thanks for the info on the t.v situation, I hadn't heard of it.

No I'm not trying to make up implausible arguments. I'm just trying to think of what services we currently recieve free,  that might be charged for if delivered via internet.


----------



## Smurf1976

Radio - I don't have any hard facts, but I'd expect that a very large portion of total radio listening occurs in situations where it could not be received via the NBN. In the car where it's mobile, at work where the boss is OK with it as long as there's no cost to the company and so on.

Cars aren't going to be wired to the NBN that's for sure, and I doubt that too many bosses would be willing to pay the cost of having a radio running at work. In any event, if someone is listening via that means then they no longer have any reason to listen to their local station, or indeed any conventional station with advertising. The radio stations would be well aware of this and so aren't likely to go down the NBN track ever.

As for TV, I can see that it may happen but it will be content, not picture quality, that drives it. 

People didn't go to digital TV because there's a better picture. They went digital in order to get extra stations, hence Tasmania had the highest takeup rate for many years since it was the only state with a digital-only mainstream channel. 

Likewise it was similar with other things like CD taking over from records and tapes - it wasn't the audio quality but rather the convenience that pushed the change. And then when MP3 largely replaced CD, well that's a decrease in quality but convenience and price has driven the change.

I've had a HDTV at home for over 5 years now. But if I turn it on right now, the vast majority of broadcasts are not in HD because the networks haven't really adopted it on a major scale. Sure there's some, but it's nowhere near to being universally accepted.

TV via the NBN is quite likely a goer, but I'd expect the actual picture to be 1080 at best and possibly less. It's content that will drive it, not a minor improvement in picture quality.


----------



## IFocus

CanOz said:


> I'm a bit lost here...why would you not want high speed fibre?




Because you are scared to death of leaning to use any more technical than a abacus.


----------



## IFocus

Dont disagree we you often....but IMHO



Smurf1976 said:


> As for TV, I can see that it may happen but it will be content, not picture quality, that drives it.
> 
> People didn't go to digital TV because there's a better picture. They went digital in order to get extra stations, hence Tasmania had the highest takeup rate for many years since it was the only state with a digital-only mainstream channel.




Tasmania might have good coverage here WA picture quality was what drove me to digital it was night and day.



> Likewise it was similar with other things like CD taking over from records and tapes - it wasn't the audio quality but rather the convenience that pushed the change. And then when MP3 largely replaced CD, well that's a decrease in quality but convenience and price has driven the change.




A mate of mine paid $1500 for a CD player (80's we were sharing a house) for the quality. It was so good we just about demolished the house as we cranked it up and stood out side admiring the clarity. 




> TV via the NBN is quite likely a goer, but I'd expect the actual picture to be 1080 at best and possibly less. It's content that will drive it, not a minor improvement in picture quality.




I think it will be the access to the web as a whole where you pretty much have unlimited choice on what, when and who you want to watch. It will open up to any talented Joe Blow who can string together a feature about some thing sorta like Utube but on a much bigger scale.


----------



## Smurf1976

IFocus said:


> Tasmania might have good coverage here WA picture quality was what drove me to digital it was night and day.



TDT (Channel 10) was the reason for many to make the switch in Tas, noting that in this part of the world Ten is a "new" station which has only ever broadcast digitally.

UHF broadcasting was much the same when that came in. Prior to 1994, there was only one commercial TV station at each end of the state and they broadcast on VHF channels 6 (Hobart) and 9 (Launceston). But once they both started broadcasting to the whole state, the new transmitters were all UHF thus meaning that older VHF-only TV's couldn't receive the new station (and couldn't receive SBS either). So going from 2 channels to 4 provided an incentive to get a UHF TV (or at least cheat by using a VCR to convert the signal to VHF which is what many people did).


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

I still reckon it is an ill conceived exercise by that intellectual midget Conroy.

It is so far behind budget and targets, the board are running for cover.

The only people in it's favour are it's progenitors and the basket weaving recipients of it's reach, few as they are in high class ALP Labor "doctor's wives" electorates.

The average person would be shocked if they knew how much money had been flushed down the dunnie on it's "rollout".

gg


----------



## Smurf1976

IFocus said:


> Tasmania might have good coverage here WA picture quality was what drove me to digital it was night and day.



TDT (Channel 10) was the reason for many to make the switch in Tas, noting that in this part of the world Ten is a "new" station which has only ever broadcast digitally (though in the past the other commercial stations did run some Ten programming which has since been discontinued).

UHF broadcasting was much the same when that came in. Prior to 1994, there was only one commercial TV station at each end of the state and they broadcast on VHF channels 6 (Hobart) and 9 (Launceston). But once they both started broadcasting to the whole state, the new transmitters were all UHF thus meaning that older VHF-only TV's couldn't receive the new station (and couldn't receive SBS either). So going from 2 channels to 4 provided an incentive to get a UHF TV (or at least cheat by using a VCR to convert the signal to VHF which is what many people did).


----------



## drsmith

Amongst the din of Labor consumed by itself, the real figures.



> The unscheduled announcement–which was expected in early April–was made just as the labour party was embroiled in a bitter leadership spill.
> 
> The new NBN fibre cable rollout will fall short of the original corporate plan by about one third from 341,000 homes to between 190,000 and 220,000 homes.




http://www.smh.com.au/business/nbn-admits-to-three-month-delay-20130321-2gi7l.html


----------



## Calliope

drsmith said:


> Amongst the din of Labor consumed by itself, the real figures.




I suppose Quigley thought, that considering all Conroy's monumental failures topped by his censorship bill failure, his own failures would become buried among the wreckage.


----------



## drsmith

More on the rollout,



> Senior engineering lecturer at RMIT University, Mark Gregory, says he expects NBN Co to downgrade its targets even further before the end of the year, which would have flow-on effects for the overall project's timing.
> 
> "If we continue down the path that we are going with external contractors doing the rollout, we'd expect [the rollout] could take five to 10 years longer than predicted," Dr Gregory said.
> 
> "We should expect it to cost anywhere between 50 to 100 per cent more than before."
> 
> Dr Gregory says there is evidence that NBN Co contractors are "cherry-picking" the areas they connect.
> 
> "Certainly I believe that we are seeing it happening already with the figures that we are getting from NBN Co," he said.
> 
> "The contractors are missing difficult areas, the rollout itself has already been planned as such that only areas that are easy to do are being cherry-picked."
> 
> But Dr Gregory says the problems could be fixed if the NBN Co goes ahead with creating its own construction arm to build the network.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-22/nbn-rollout-could-be-delayed-by-10-years3a-expert/4589520


----------



## Smurf1976

In other words, yet another example of why government should do things with an in-house workforce rather than spending more money for a worse result using contractors.

Blind Freddy could have seen a debacle coming as soon as they knew how the NBN was to be built - the outcome they're getting now is the exact same one that's happened in practically every other government project involving similar works. And it's the exact same situation, underground cabling, that I used to get paid a ridiculous amount (as a public servant at the time) to fix following contractor stuff ups.

Just wait until the quality of workmanship problems start to emerge. Just wait.... (been there, seen this game before - there will be problems especially with the method they are using to remove the old fibro pits. Also some depth of burial issues too, plus they haven't allowed enough in their estimates to cover unavoidable damage to other services in CBD areas particularly traffic lights which you can't avoid damaging under some circumstances due to the way the sensors are installed. Also there will most likely be a few compaction density issues simply because contractors on big projects like this tend not to disclose the full extent of their works to road owners, leaving them (ie councils and therefore ratepayers) to foot the bill some years later when it sinks). 

On a positive note, it's a great way for some to grab hold of some money. That's your money and mine they're grabbing of course.


----------



## drsmith

Smurf1976 said:


> Just wait until the quality of workmanship problems start to emerge.



A little off topic, but on a local scale, one of the worst examples I've seen of this is the resurfacing of Canning Road (Shire of Kalamunda in Western Australia). Rough as guts from day one. It's worse than the original seal it replaced. This, to the best of my knowledge was a contractor working on behalf of the shire.

Even the recent Great Eastern Highway upgrade which was a joint $380m Federal/State government road project between the Perth CBD and the airport has at least one section of that also has a rough finish. This was an alliance contract.

http://www.cityeastalliance.com.au/about-us/


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> More on the rollout,
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-22/nbn-rollout-could-be-delayed-by-10-years3a-expert/4589520




Dr Gregory is a little bit "out there". While I agree with one of his points (that it would be a good idea for NBN Co to have their own workforce, at least in part), he has also suggested (seriously) that the Army be conscripted into performing the rollout! http://theconversation.com/the-army-should-rescue-the-nbn-12387

In that article, he criticised NBN Co on the basis of numerous factual errors (eg that they only had one fibre supplier and assorted statistical errors). I'm a little surprised by this. Given his position I would have thought he'd be more familiar with the project. He is also an advocate of NBN Co extending their fibre footprint beyond 93% to (essentially) everyone, and for them to abandon their "cheap" PON system for a much more expensive "point-to-point" fibre system.

Thus, I don't think anti-NBN people should be holding him up as someone to listen to!


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> Dr Gregory is a little bit "out there". While I agree with one of his points (that it would be a good idea for NBN Co to have their own workforce, at least in part), he has also suggested (seriously) that the Army be conscripted into performing the rollout! http://theconversation.com/the-army-should-rescue-the-nbn-12387
> 
> In that article, he criticised NBN Co on the basis of numerous factual errors (eg that they only had one fibre supplier and assorted statistical errors). I'm a little surprised by this. Given his position I would have thought he'd be more familiar with the project. He is also an advocate of NBN Co extending their fibre footprint beyond 93% to (essentially) everyone, and for them to abandon their "cheap" PON system for a much more expensive "point-to-point" fibre system.
> 
> Thus, I don't think anti-NBN people should be holding him up as someone to listen to!




Having lived up in GGs territory for quite a few years, I must say that conscripting the army is a FANTASTIC idea.

1. It would help skill them up for the real world when they "retire"
2. It would make them productive - ie, what do AJs do for 40 hours per week?   
3. It would improve the image of the Army in the community and make them more visible.

and most importantly

4. it might mean it can be delivered somewhere within a decade of its proposed timeframe, and within $20 billion of its proposed cost.

Yes, it could make this very very poor project, slightly better.

MW

PS NBNMyths... how goes the rollout wrt timing and budget.  I assume you think everything is ok with your puppy?


----------



## CassieD

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I have it on good opinion from one of my Queensland ALP contacts , that the NBN is to be "modified".
> 
> This will free up money for the Flood and Cyclone Reconstruction.
> 
> The word "scrapped" will not be used.
> 
> "Modified" is the buzzword.
> 
> One can imagine a Dalek saying it...."Modified, modified, modified"
> 
> gg




Groucho Marx was a very funny man but said a lot of pertinent things


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> PS NBNMyths... how goes the rollout wrt timing and budget.  I assume you think everything is ok with your puppy?




The 3-month delay in the June 2013 figures is disappointing, but I suppose to be expected given what they've been saying for the last couple of months about Syntheo's areas of WA, SA and NT.

NSW, QLD, ACT, VIC and TAS are all on track AFAIK, and NBN Co have now relieved Syntheo of NT and are going to finish it themselves.

They have also added two more contractors in NSW and VIC in the last few months, being Visionstream and Downer EDI, again on-budget. I believe they are also looking at adding a second contractor in SA, being the power company which rolled out the Willunga trial site.

Whole project is still on budget, AFAIK.


----------



## So_Cynical

CassieD said:


> Groucho Marx was a very funny man but said a lot of pertinent things




Hilarious considering this thread was started in February 2011, Twenty Five months later and we are still waiting for GG's prediction to come good, be waiting a while longer i would think.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> Dr Gregory is a little bit "out there". While I agree with one of his points (that it would be a good idea for NBN Co to have their own workforce, at least in part), he has also suggested (seriously) that the Army be conscripted into performing the rollout! http://theconversation.com/the-army-should-rescue-the-nbn-12387
> 
> In that article, he criticised NBN Co on the basis of numerous factual errors (eg that they only had one fibre supplier and assorted statistical errors). I'm a little surprised by this. Given his position I would have thought he'd be more familiar with the project. He is also an advocate of NBN Co extending their fibre footprint beyond 93% to (essentially) everyone, and for them to abandon their "cheap" PON system for a much more expensive "point-to-point" fibre system.
> 
> Thus, I don't think anti-NBN people should be holding him up as someone to listen to!




The NBN is beginning to resemble pink batts and the great COLA and computer rollout to schools. Expensive, poorly planned and behind budget, progress and estimates. 

As for a "Senior lecturer's" opinion on what is considered suitable duties for the Australian Army, I would guess that he will never make a professor in whatever backwater of higher education, masquerading as a university,  in which he dozes.  



medicowallet said:


> Having lived up in GGs territory for quite a few years, I must say that conscripting the army is a FANTASTIC idea.
> 
> 1. It would help skill them up for the real world when they "retire"
> 2. It would make them productive - ie, what do AJs do for 40 hours per week?
> 3. It would improve the image of the Army in the community and make them more visible.
> 
> and most importantly
> 
> 4. it might mean it can be delivered somewhere within a decade of its proposed timeframe, and within $20 billion of its proposed cost.
> 
> Yes, it could make this very very poor project, slightly better.
> 
> MW
> 
> PS NBNMyths... how goes the rollout wrt timing and budget.  I assume you think everything is ok with your puppy?




medicowallet I do hope your response is tongue in cheek.

Soldiers are trained to defend our country and attack enemies, that is kill.

I fail to see how digging ditches on the whim of a muppet like Senator Conroy would contribute to defence readiness.

gg


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

My contacts tell me the NBN is an absolutely unsustainable business model.

I note The Australian has reported on a further threat from wireless.



> THE company building the National Broadband Network, already under fire for running late, has admitted it faces rising competition from wireless networks offering improved services and prices.
> 
> NBN Co has conceded its own modelling finds that if it increases prices by the maximum it expects to be allowed by regulators, the number of wireless-only premises will rise to 30 per cent by 2039-40 because affordability is such a significant factor for households.




gg


----------



## medicowallet

Garpal Gumnut said:


> medicowallet I do hope your response is tongue in cheek.
> 
> Soldiers are trained to defend our country and attack enemies, that is kill.
> 
> I fail to see how digging ditches on the whim of a muppet like Senator Conroy would contribute to defence readiness.
> 
> gg




No, only partially.

Skilling beyond the army has always been a massive issue.

Also, back in the day, I thought digging a trench was a particularly useful skill 

MW


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> The 3-month delay in the June 2013 figures is disappointing, but I suppose to be expected given what they've been saying for the last couple of months about Syntheo's areas of WA, SA and NT.
> 
> NSW, QLD, ACT, VIC and TAS are all on track AFAIK, and NBN Co have now relieved Syntheo of NT and are going to finish it themselves.
> 
> They have also added two more contractors in NSW and VIC in the last few months, being Visionstream and Downer EDI, again on-budget. I believe they are also looking at adding a second contractor in SA, being the power company which rolled out the Willunga trial site.
> 
> Whole project is still on budget, AFAIK.




3 more months ?  wasn't it june 2012 for 317000?   I mean I was referring to the initial targets.

On budget to date possibly, but not per unit connection, ie when the rollout blows out, so does the cost... and that doesn't include all that extra coffee etc.

MW


----------



## noco

If the NBN is going to have severe competition from wireless, it looks like the Green/Labor Governments scheme could become a massive "WHITE ELEPHANT". 

Another Labor failure!!!!!!!!But then again, we are all starting to realize that is in their DNA......Failure after failure.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...as-threat-to-nbn/story-fn59niix-1226608057785


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

medicowallet said:


> No, only partially.
> 
> Skilling beyond the army has always been a massive issue.
> 
> Also, back in the day, I thought digging a trench was a particularly useful skill
> 
> MW




That is a particularly insulting comment. One could equally say that hospital doctors sitting on their arses waiting for operations to start might be more usefully employed digging ditches for the NBN. 

Your experience of soldiering must be confined to toytown.

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> My contacts tell me the NBN is an absolutely unsustainable business model.
> 
> I note The Australian has reported on a further threat from wireless.
> 
> 
> 
> gg




Are they the same contacts that told you it was going to be scrapped? 


The only thing exposed in The Australian is their own incompetence.

1. It's highly unlikely that the NBN will increase their pricing at all, let alone by the maximum they are permitted to do.

2. If affordability is the primary issue, then wireless is not for you:

50GB on the *NBN $35/month* (including data, phone and with 10c calls)
50GB on Telstra *4G wireless: $360/month* (data only, no phone service)
50GB on Optus *4G wireless: $675/month* (data only, no phone service)


----------



## medicowallet

Garpal Gumnut said:


> That is a particularly insulting comment. One could equally say that hospital doctors sitting on their arses waiting for operations to start might be more usefully employed digging ditches for the NBN.
> 
> Your experience of soldiering must be confined to toytown.
> 
> gg




Absolutely not insulting at all.

Anything that upskills army personnel, and note that this would be not about "digging ditches" but by skilling in trades such as electrical, communications, engineering, mechanical etc to enable rollouts, and to involve the army by improving their presence in the community, as well as training them for deployment and rebuilding exercises.

How this can be seen as insulting is beyond me..

btw, it would only be a small group of AJs at a time to be rotated through assistance.

I am surprised that someone who lives in an army town would be against that... I might call up my old mate who used to be in charge at Lavarack, and see what he thinks.   I am aware that ther is a massive problem with unskilled army personnel after they retire early.

Oh, and btw, I know that there are a lot of inefficiencies in medicine, but in the private sector, no work = no pay, and in the public sector the pay is so poor that it would almost be assumed that the workload reflects it, also quite a few of the inefficiencies in the public sector are to do with poor systems, funding, and the need to train people.

MW

PS I think I finally found out your occupation GG.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

medicowallet said:


> Absolutely not insulting at all.
> 
> Anything that upskills army personnel, and note that this would be not about "digging ditches" but by skilling in trades such as electrical, communications, engineering, mechanical etc to enable rollouts, and to involve the army by improving their presence in the community, as well as training them for deployment and rebuilding exercises.
> 
> How this can be seen as insulting is beyond me..
> 
> btw, it would only be a small group of AJs at a time to be rotated through assistance.
> 
> I am surprised that someone who lives in an army town would be against that... I might call up my old mate who used to be in charge at Lavarack, and see what he thinks.   I am aware that ther is a massive problem with unskilled army personnel after they retire early.
> 
> Oh, and btw, I know that there are a lot of inefficiencies in medicine, but in the private sector, no work = no pay, and in the public sector the pay is so poor that it would almost be assumed that the workload reflects it, also quite a few of the inefficiencies in the public sector are to do with poor systems, funding, and the need to train people.
> 
> MW




I believe from your previous posts that you purport to be a doctor of some sort.

Soldiering has a far greater history than doctoring.

Your blase statements about soldiers indicate a sense of entitlement from the letters after your name, to decide how other worthwhile professions and trades should be used in the body politic.

I am aware of many medical offerings in Australia that would be better employed digging ditches.

You have an incomplete understanding of the purpose of defence in the Australian context.

While I may be wrong, I would guess you are a pom, or some such, as your sentiments are common in poorer declining nations such as the UK, or Cyprus.

The ADF is not for digging ditches for the NBN.

gg


----------



## medicowallet

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I believe from your previous posts that you purport to be a doctor of some sort.
> 
> Soldiering has a far greater history than doctoring.
> 
> Your blase statements about soldiers indicate a sense of entitlement from the letters after your name, to decide how other worthwhile professions and trades should be used in the body politic.
> 
> I am aware of many medical offerings in Australia that would be better employed digging ditches.
> 
> You have an incomplete understanding of the purpose of defence in the Australian context.
> 
> While I may be wrong, I would guess you are a pom, or some such, as your sentiments are common in poorer declining nations such as the UK, or Cyprus.
> 
> The ADF is not for digging ditches for the NBN.
> 
> gg




If you want to condemn Army personnel to a life of struggle seeking employment after retiring from the army, then so be it.

I am offering a suggestion to assist the country, a noble enterprise, and you wish to keep the status quo. See, GG, you might be surprised as to what I know of the defence forces.

Perhaps I was involved somehow in the medical treatment of soldiers in Townsville?  Perhaps at Lavarack barracks?  Perhaps even with you?

Who knows what some people know, and others do not over the anonymity of the internet.  Who also knows which ones prance about using false personas.

MW.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

medicowallet said:


> If you want to condemn Army personnel to a life of struggle seeking employment after retiring from the army, then so be it.
> 
> I am offering a suggestion to assist the country, a noble enterprise, and you wish to keep the status quo. See, GG, you might be surprised as to what I know of the defence forces.
> 
> Perhaps I was involved somehow in the medical treatment of soldiers in Townsville?  Perhaps at Lavarack barracks?  Perhaps even with you?
> 
> Who knows what some people know, and others do not over the anonymity of the internet.  Who also knows which ones prance about using false personas.
> 
> MW




You fail to answer the question.

I see no employment problems with ADF personnel after service.

Post some stats and I will be more sympathetic to your stance.

The NBN is a civilian exercise, lauded by some, not by others.

Soldiering is soldiering.

You were at Lavarack?

gg


----------



## awg

Smurf1976 said:


> In other words, yet another example of why government should do things with an in-house workforce rather than spending more money for a worse result using contractors.
> 
> Blind Freddy could have seen a debacle coming as soon as they knew how the NBN was to be built - the outcome they're getting now is the exact same one that's happened in practically every other government project involving similar works. And it's the exact same situation, underground cabling, that I used to get paid a ridiculous amount (as a public servant at the time) to fix following contractor stuff ups.
> 
> Just wait until the quality of workmanship problems start to emerge. Just wait.... (been there, seen this game before - there will be problems especially with the method they are using to remove the old fibro pits. Also some depth of burial issues too, plus they haven't allowed enough in their estimates to cover unavoidable damage to other services in CBD areas particularly traffic lights which you can't avoid damaging under some circumstances due to the way the sensors are installed. Also there will most likely be a few compaction density issues simply because contractors on big projects like this tend not to disclose the full extent of their works to road owners, leaving them (ie councils and therefore ratepayers) to foot the bill some years later when it sinks).
> 
> On a positive note, it's a great way for some to grab hold of some money. That's your money and mine they're grabbing of course.




my very good contact with 30 yrs experience in telco civil works, now overseeing NBN contract work bemoans the lack of skilled contractors, and initial estimates provided by much less experienced NBN employees of how long work would take. 

I have done this type of work and just cant see that more than a low % of projected residences will end up full-speed connected. When you start grubbing trenches in the ground, the problems and inefficiencies are an eye-opener 

I will warrant that I miss out..wont it start winding down into a different beast from September ?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Well NBNMyths, the silliness and waste of public capital has now been exposed in the Senate.

The gut feeling of los dos muppetos, Conroy and Rudd, in spending the wealth of Australia on a hare brained scheme has been exposed.

It is so easy for those who have never worked in a real job, to have a bright idea, less common for them to be in a position to put it in to practice without any skin in the game.

Digging ditches, which I have done, is not easy.

Doing it in to each and every hamlet and house in a country as vast as Australia is a monumental task.

The NBN will go down in history as the Titanic did.

gg


----------



## Smurf1976

awg said:


> my very good contact with 30 yrs experience in telco civil works, now overseeing NBN contract work bemoans the lack of skilled contractors, and initial estimates provided by much less experienced NBN employees of how long work would take.
> 
> I have done this type of work and just cant see that more than a low % of projected residences will end up full-speed connected. When you start grubbing trenches in the ground, the problems and inefficiencies are an eye-opener



Been there, done my fair share of conduit laying. Dig trench, find this, that and every other obstacle whilst doing so. Lay conduit, apply glue, give the other end a whack with the mallet. Rinse and repeat. All good if you're in the middle of nowhere and it's soil you're digging in but not much fun in any place that has existing water, comms, power, sewer, storm water to consider. End result is that it usually takes longer than most think it ought to simply because there's usually _something_ in the way that wasn't expected.

I'm not sure how common they are elsewhere, but here in Tas there are old abandoned town gas (coal gas) pipes in parts of Hobart and Launceston. Those in Hobart are an outright hazard (those in Launceston seem to be much safer, probably because they were still in use until 1997 and the gas going into them was much better quality) which can put you in hospital if you're not careful. Disused since 1978, breaking them (which is pretty easy given how fragile they are - incredibly so in some cases) releases some pretty nasty substances including cyanide (Workplace Standards have done tests and confirmed that cyanide is present - no idea how that came to be but it's in the pipes). I'm not sure how common these are elsewhere in Australia, but they're a definite hazard for anyone installing new pipes, cables etc in city areas. Thank heavens I don't mess about with them anymore. 

All that said, I'd assume the NBN will largely be using existing conduit for the NBN, at least where it is plastic (of any type) and presumably they'd also re-use old GWI pipe as long as it isn't blocked. As for the rest, well I'm guessing they won't re-use AC (asbestos cement) pipe and I note that they are removing old AC pits too (though I'm unconvinced as to how safely this is being done - maybe it is but having done similar work suffice to say I doubt it). Not sure about old terracotta pipes - they're a damn nuisance to anyone installing other services (power, water, gas, traffic lights, whatever) that's for sure but at least they're not unsafe as such and there's an awful lot of them.


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Well NBNMyths, the silliness and waste of public capital has now been exposed in the Senate.
> 
> The gut feeling of los dos muppetos, Conroy and Rudd, in spending the wealth of Australia on a hare brained scheme has been exposed.
> 
> It is so easy for those who have never worked in a real job, to have a bright idea, less common for them to be in a position to put it in to practice without any skin in the game.
> 
> Digging ditches, which I have done, is not easy.
> 
> Doing it in to each and every hamlet and house in a country as vast as Australia is a monumental task.
> 
> The NBN will go down in history as the Titanic did.
> 
> gg




Yes, it would be a monumental task, if it were actually happening.

But it isn't. The NBN uses existing Telstra conduits where they exist, so no digging there. In the 25% of premises where the existing Telstra lines are overhead, then so will the NBN be. So no digging there. Then there's the 7% of premises where the NBN will be wireless or satellite, so no digging there either. 

Then for those areas where they _do_ need to install a new conduit (Maybe 30% of premises), they are using new technologies like microtrenching. Very little manual labour or surface damage involved:







As a final point, surely not even you would believe that the current copper lines will last and/or be useful _forever_? Meaning that at some stage those lines will _have_ to be replaced. And the cost of that replacement, either using the existing infrastructure or by digging a new trench, will be borne by the network customers, whether that network is owned by the NBN, Telstra or some other company.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> But it isn't. The NBN uses existing Telstra conduits where they exist, so no digging there




Are you saying that where  Telstra FAC conduits and cable pits are still in use, that your NBN Co. will continue to use them?


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Are you saying that where  Telstra FAC conduits and cable pits are still in use, that your NBN Co. will continue to use them?




If by FAC you mean asbestos-containing, then yes (sort of).

Telstra are required to remediate or replace their ducts so NBN Co can use them. As far as I'm aware, this consists of replacing any asbestos-containing pits, and lining asbestos-containing ducts.

Telstra have budgeted around $2bn for the task of making their pit&pipe ready for the NBN: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-for-nbn-rollout/story-fn59niix-1226080208516
http://www.afr.com/p/business/companies/telstra_hit_by_bn_nbn_deal_costs_4ZzSQmy2g5kNCwhFpMYkGN


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> If by FAC you mean asbestos-containing, then yes (sort of).
> 
> Telstra are required to remediate or replace their ducts so NBN Co can use them. As far as I'm aware, this consists of replacing any asbestos-containing pits, and lining asbestos-containing ducts.
> 
> Telstra have budgeted around $2bn for the task of making their pit&pipe ready for the NBN: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-for-nbn-rollout/story-fn59niix-1226080208516
> http://www.afr.com/p/business/companies/telstra_hit_by_bn_nbn_deal_costs_4ZzSQmy2g5kNCwhFpMYkGN




You just don't get it mate.

What a load of crock.

A scheme was announced, and as we go, we find the problems and throw more money at it.

If the NBN were a listed company it would be broke by now.

gg


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> If by FAC you mean asbestos-containing, then yes (sort of).
> 
> Telstra are required to remediate or replace their ducts so NBN Co can use them. As far as I'm aware, this consists of replacing any asbestos-containing pits, and lining asbestos-containing ducts.




FAC is Fibro Asbestos Cement, or it was when I was with Telstra. You say "as far as I am aware". A strange admission for a guy who has assumed the role of NBN mouthpiece on this forum.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Garpal Gumnut said:


> You just don't get it mate.
> 
> What a load of crock.
> 
> A scheme was announced, and as we go, we find the problems and throw more money at it.
> 
> If the NBN were a listed company it would be broke by now.
> 
> gg






Calliope said:


> FAC is Fibro Asbestos Cement, or it was when I was with Telstra. You say "as far as I am aware". A strange admission for a guy who has assumed the role of NBN mouthpiece on this forum.




I certainly do not want some contractor employing a kid who escaped the Pink Batt's fiasco, with a trenching machine coming down my street and in to my yard when there is asbestosis about.

This is complete bollox NBNMyths.

You may be correct, to give you your due, that in a perfect world, this technology, may be feasible.

We do not however live in a perfect world.

The scheme is wildly over budget.

The wireless/satellite companies are lining up to cherry pick the profitable customers.

It proves the point though that just as doctors should be paid by the number of people kept healthy, as in China, and not by the number they cure, the same should be expected of the NBN.

It is not about trenches.

It is about getting a fast cheap internet, safely, at the best price, to the most people.

gg


----------



## So_Cynical

Garpal Gumnut said:


> You may be correct, to give you your due, that in a perfect world, this technology, may be feasible.




May be feasible? 20 year old technology..

Are you Drunk?


----------



## sptrawler

I think the biggest threat from the NBN is it will give kids more reasons to sit on their @rses inside playing computer games.
Rather than being outside playing.

You think type 2 diabietes and heart desease is a problem now, wait and see what happens when the kids can game at bling speed.

What a brilliant achievement.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Garpal Gumnut said:


> You just don't get it mate.
> 
> What a load of crock.
> 
> A scheme was announced, and as we go, we find the problems and throw more money at it.
> 
> If the NBN were a listed company it would be broke by now.
> 
> gg






Calliope said:


> FAC is Fibro Asbestos Cement, or it was when I was with Telstra. You say "as far as I am aware". A strange admission for a guy who has assumed the role of NBN mouthpiece on this forum.






Garpal Gumnut said:


> I certainly do not want some contractor employing a kid who escaped the Pink Batt's fiasco, with a trenching machine coming down my street and in to my yard when there is asbestosis about.
> 
> This is complete bollox NBNMyths.
> 
> You may be correct, to give you your due, that in a perfect world, this technology, may be feasible.
> 
> We do not however live in a perfect world.
> 
> The scheme is wildly over budget.
> 
> The wireless/satellite companies are lining up to cherry pick the profitable customers.
> 
> It proves the point though that just as doctors should be paid by the number of people kept healthy, as in China, and not by the number they cure, the same should be expected of the NBN.
> 
> It is not about trenches.
> 
> It is about getting a fast cheap internet, safely, at the best price, to the most people.
> 
> gg






So_Cynical said:


> May be feasible? 20 year old technology..
> 
> Are you Drunk?




As your favourite politician once said, please explain.

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> FAC is Fibro Asbestos Cement, or it was when I was with Telstra. You say "as far as I am aware". A strange admission for a guy who has assumed the role of NBN mouthpiece on this forum.




I think you misunderstand.

There is no debate about whether Telstra are required to remediate or replace their pit and pipe for the NBN. 

But how they do so is entirely up to Telstra. It's their infrastructure, and it will remain so. I only mention the method, because I read that's how they did it in Brunswick.


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I certainly do not want some contractor employing a kid who escaped the Pink Batt's fiasco, with a trenching machine coming down my street and in to my yard when there is asbestosis about.
> 
> This is complete bollox NBNMyths.
> 
> You may be correct, to give you your due, that in a perfect world, this technology, may be feasible.
> 
> We do not however live in a perfect world.
> 
> The scheme is wildly over budget.
> 
> The wireless/satellite companies are lining up to cherry pick the profitable customers.
> 
> It proves the point though that just as doctors should be paid by the number of people kept healthy, as in China, and not by the number they cure, the same should be expected of the NBN.
> 
> It is not about trenches.
> 
> It is about getting a fast cheap internet, safely, at the best price, to the most people.
> 
> gg




That's a wonderful goalpost move. First complain about the NBN Co digging everything up, then complain about the ducts they will use!


It is Telstra who own the ducts. It is Telstra who will remediate their ducts as and if required. It is Telstra who will pay to do so. It is Telstra who will choose whether to use their own employees, or bring in contractors.


Is it wildly over budget? Would you care to supply a reference or *any* evidence of such. I suggest that claim is about as accurate as the first post in this thread.


The NBN's most profitable customers are those who choose the fastest, biggest plans. Like a terabyte at 100/40. That is volume and speed that is simply not available _at any price_ on wireless or satellite. So how can wireless/sat be taking NBN's most profitable customers?

The fact is that any loss to wireless is at the absolute bottom end of the market. People who only want a phone (no broadband), or only a very light internet users who can get away with the few GB a wireless connection offers.

As for satellite, nobody who has access to a fixed broadband connection would choose a sat connection instead. Outside the fixed network, the NBN satellite service is much cheaper than non-NBN satellite services. When the NBN interim sat service started, it offered 6x the speed at 1/4 the price of the private satellite services. When the permanent NBN sats are launched, they will be 25x faster at 1/4 the price.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> The 3-month delay in the June 2013 figures is disappointing, but I suppose to be expected given what they've been saying for the last couple of months about Syntheo's areas of WA, SA and NT.
> 
> NSW, QLD, ACT, VIC and TAS are all on track AFAIK, and NBN Co have now relieved Syntheo of NT and are going to finish it themselves.
> 
> They have also added two more contractors in NSW and VIC in the last few months, being Visionstream and Downer EDI, again on-budget. I believe they are also looking at adding a second contractor in SA, being the power company which rolled out the Willunga trial site.
> 
> Whole project is still on budget, AFAIK.



Time will tell. 

On the delays so far, it's hard not to be a sceptic.


----------



## sptrawler

Sounds like the bell bottom of a pear shape is developing, doc.


----------



## Calliope

drsmith said:


> Time will tell.
> 
> On the delays so far, it's hard not to be a sceptic.




One thing you can't be sceptical about is NBNMyths' loyalty and support for Conroy and Quigley. When you consider Labor's continual record of failure in delivering success in any enterprise, his faith is quite touching. His faith is of course is based on the assumption that if you pour unlimited billions into a project, then no matter how badly managed, or how long it takes, it must succeed.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> One thing you can't be sceptical about is NBNMyths' loyalty and support for Conroy and Quigley. When you consider Labor's continual record of failure in delivering success in any enterprise, his faith is quite touching. His faith is of course is based on the assumption that if you pour unlimited billions into a project, then no matter how badly managed, or how long it takes, it must succeed.




You just keep on building that strawman up, huh.

I've said repeatedly that I don't have any particular feelings about Conroy.

But Quigley has a long and well respected history in global telecommunications. You don't rise from being a nobody at Alcatel Australia to COO of a multi-billion dollar global company if you are a moron who can't manage a project.


----------



## dutchie

NBNMyths said:


> You just keep on building that strawman up, huh.
> 
> I've said repeatedly that I don't have any particular feelings about Conroy.
> 
> But Quigley has a long and well respected history in global telecommunications. You don't rise from being a nobody at Alcatel Australia to COO of a multi-billion dollar global company if you are a moron who can't manage a project.




But if your working for a whole pack of morons who can't manage any project (let alone their own party) then you can be as clever as ever - but it will still be a dud project.


----------



## pilots

dutchie said:


> But if your working for a whole pack of morons who can't manage any project (let alone their own party) then you can be as clever as ever - but it will still be a dud project.




####but it will still be a dud project#### You for got the word EXPENSIVE, EVERY thing they have done has been a  EXPENSIVE DUD project.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> You just keep on building that strawman up, huh.
> 
> I've said repeatedly that I don't have any particular feelings about Conroy.
> 
> But Quigley has a long and well respected history in global telecommunications. You don't rise from being a nobody at Alcatel Australia to COO of a multi-billion dollar global company if you are a moron who can't manage a project.




I know your spin is very persuasive but the facts are that you can't separate the "nice guy" Quigley from the duplicitous Conroy. They are joined at the hip, and also Quigley didn't leave  Alcate with exactly clean hands.

But let's cut to a third member of this gang, Mike Kaiser, who Conroy recruited on an annual salary of $450,000 in charge of "quality". His main recommendation is that he had to resign from the Qld parliament for electoral fraud. Conroy should have asked George Brandis for a recommendation;



> WHO IS MIKE KAISER?
> “…(He is) a hardened young serial offender - premeditated, systematic,
> amoral, shameless, remorseless - educating and corrupting new generations
> of young Labor activists into the corrupt old culture over which he presided.
> No wonder Mr Beattie struck a chord three years ago when he called him
> ‘scum, scum, scum’.”
> (Source: Senator George Brandis, Liberal MP, ABC Lateline, aired 19/08/2003)




No doubt Conroy can use his particular skills...but "quality" ain't one of them.





How to get a $450,000 job: no ads required - just a nice word from the minister

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...the-minister-20100209-no66.html#ixzz2PGMzChyG


----------



## NBNMyths

dutchie said:


> But if your working for a whole pack of morons who can't manage any project (let alone their own party) then you can be as clever as ever - but it will still be a dud project.






pilots said:


> ####but it will still be a dud project#### You for got the word EXPENSIVE, EVERY thing they have done has been a  EXPENSIVE DUD project.






Calliope said:


> I know your spin is very persuasive but the facts are that you can't separate the "nice guy" Quigley from the duplicitous Conroy. They are joined at the hip, and also Quigley didn't leave  Alcate with exactly clean hands.
> 
> But let's cut to a third member of this gang, Mike Kaiser, who Conroy recruited on an annual salary of $450,000 in charge of "quality". His main recommendation is that he had to resign from the Qld parliament for electoral fraud. Conroy should have asked George Brandis for a recommendation;
> 
> No doubt Conroy can use his particular skills...but "quality" ain't one of them.




Well, aren't we all proficient with the logical fallacies. 

I think "The myth of Governmental competence" is a good place for those who look back on the Howard years through rose coloured glasses:
http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/09/03/keane-essay-the-myth-of-governmental-competence/

That article aside, it's pretty easy not to overspend on projects if you don't undertake very many. The fact is that essentially every major project, be it Government or private, suffers from delays and/or budget overruns. It is a fact of life.


Conroy may well have recruited Kaiser for political reasons. Again, a fact of life (albeit annoying) when it comes to Governments. In case you haven't noticed, the Coalition parties are no different. Just look at the plethora of former Liberal leaders and MPs who have scored plum jobs in NSW over the last 2 years. Not to mention the scandals already hitting the Qld LNP.

In Kaiser's defence, Sen Brandis is hardly a neutral commentator, Kaiser's electrical transgression was 30 years ago as a Uni student, and he does hold a Bachelor of Electrical Engineering and a Bachelor of Economics which would seem to be appropriate qualifications for his role at NBN Co.

Tony Abbott tells us he's a changed man since he was at Uni. That his behaviour and attitudes are not the same now. Could that not be true of Mike Kaiser too? Or is it only Coalition politicians who are able to leave their embarrassing past behind?


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> I think "The myth of Governmental competence" is a good place for those who look back on the Howard years through rose coloured glasses:
> http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/09/03/keane-essay-the-myth-of-governmental-competence/
> 
> That article aside, it's pretty easy not to overspend on projects if you don't undertake very many. The fact is that essentially every major project, be it Government or private, suffers from delays and/or budget overruns. It is a fact of life.



Not everyone who is dissatisfied with this government looks at the Howard years through rose coloured glasses.

Your political horse is dead. The only flogging it's worthy of now is the one it'll cop at the election.

A government that excuses project delays and/or budget overruns as a fact of life deserves nothing more from the electorate.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> Well, aren't we all proficient with the logical fallacies.
> Conroy may well have recruited Kaiser for political reasons. Again, a fact of life (albeit annoying) when it comes to Governments. In case you haven't noticed, the Coalition parties are no different. Just look at the plethora of former Liberal leaders and MPs who have scored plum jobs in NSW over the last 2 years. Not to mention the scandals already hitting the Qld LNP.
> 
> In Kaiser's defence, Sen Brandis is hardly a neutral commentator, Kaiser's electrical transgression was 30 years ago as a Uni student, and he does hold a Bachelor of Electrical Engineering and a Bachelor of Economics which would seem to be appropriate qualifications for his role at NBN Co.




I hadn't heard about Kaiser's "electrical transgression". What did he do? Blow up the lab? It's what he did later which made Peter Beatty describe him as scum. He was forced to resign as a state MP after revelations about branch-stacking in Queensland Labor.

I see you have adopted the party line of blaming everything that goes wrong on the Coalition...blame Howard and Abbott. You say Brandis is not a neutral commentator, but unlike you, what he said was the truth. It is impossible for you to stick to the truth and still follow the Party line, hence your fallacious reasoning.

Conroy, Quigley and Kaiser are all tarred with the same brush.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> I hadn't heard about Kaiser's "electrical transgression". What did he do? Blow up the lab? It's what he did later which made Peter Beatty describe him as scum. He was forced to resign as a state MP after revelations about branch-stacking in Queensland Labor.
> 
> I see you have adopted the party line of blaming everything that goes wrong on the Coalition...blame Howard and Abbott. You say Brandis is not a neutral commentator, but unlike you, what he said was the truth. It is impossible for you to stick to the truth and still follow the Party line, hence your fallacious reasoning.
> 
> Conroy, Quigley and Kaiser are all tarred with the same brush.




I take my hat off at your incredible skill at strawmanning. You are extremely proficient at arguing against points I have never made and positions I don't have.

Damn autocorrect. _Electoral_ transgression. Yes, Kaiser's resignation was about branch stacking. It occurred in 1986, but was not exposed until 2001, at which point he resigned as an MP.

Where did I blame Howard or Abbott for anything? Although if you'd like some Howard-era blame related to the NBN, I'll provide some....

Privatising Telstra as a vertical monopoly was a disaster for consumers.
Allowing the appointment of the "three amigos" to Telstra was also a disaster for consumers (and shareholders).
Allowing Telstra to ride roughshod over other ISPs and the ACCC with regards to ADSL2+ and FTTN was yet another disaster for consumers.

Had these three key policy disasters not occurred, it is highly likely we wouldn't be having a debate about the NBN today.

You quoted Brandis' opinion. He might think it's the truth, and no doubt you do. But two opinions does not a fact make.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> I take my hat off at your incredible skill at strawmanning. You are extremely proficient at arguing against points I have never made and positions I don't have.




Well one position you have made abundantly clear is that you are a Labor Party hack.



> *Where did I blame Howard or Abbott for anything*? Although if you'd like some Howard-era blame related to the NBN, I'll provide some....
> 
> [*]Privatising Telstra as a vertical monopoly was a disaster for consumers.
> [*]Allowing the appointment of the "three amigos" to Telstra was also a disaster for consumers (and shareholders).
> [*]Allowing Telstra to ride roughshod over other ISPs and the ACCC with regards to ADSL2+ and FTTN was yet another disaster for consumers.




More fallacious reasoning. Howard's mistakes excuses Labor's incompetence.
Abbott punching a wall excuses Kaiser's skullduggery.



> You quoted Brandis' opinion. He might think it's the truth, and no doubt you do. But two opinions does not a fact make.




I see...but Conroy's and your opinion do "a fact make".  You obviously think that Conroy's and Gillard's lies are facts. You must be well rusted on to be so gullible.


----------



## NBNMyths

*Playing strawman baseball, Calliope style:*



Calliope said:


> Well one position you have made abundantly clear is that you are a Labor Party hack.




Have I? I believe my statements have been quite clear that while I generally vote Labor, I do not (and have not) always done so. I have also been clear that I'm no huge fan of Conroy.

Supporting the NBN is not the same as supporting Labor. In fact, most of the Australian public, most of the global IT and communications sector and every Federal politician (ie: Labor, Green, Katter, Windsor, Oakeshott, Wilkie, Xenaphon) _except_ for the coalition back the NBN.

*Strike 1.*



> More fallacious reasoning. Howard's mistakes excuses Labor's incompetence.
> Abbott punching a wall excuses Kaiser's skullduggery.




I don't think Labor is running the NBN with incompetence. I never mentioned Abbott's wall punch. I stated that I don't know whether Kaiser's appointment was purely political or whether he was the right man for the job. I also lamented political appointments in general.

*Strike 2.*



> I see...but Conroy's and your opinion do "a fact make".  You obviously think that Conroy's and Gillard's lies are facts. You must be well rusted on to be so gullible.




I only argued that Brandis stated a biased opinion, which you agree with. I never claimed that the opposite was the "fact". I've never written anything in support of PM Gillard, whom I'm also not a massive fan of.

*Strike 3, you're out.*


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> In fact, most of the Australian public, most of the global IT and communications sector and every Federal politician (ie: Labor, Green, Katter, Windsor, Oakeshott, Wilkie, Xenaphon) _except_ for the coalition back the NBN.



Only a fool would not support high speed broadband. The politicians you mention are mainly grubs and grafters



> I don't think Labor is running the NBN with incompetence.




Of course you don't. You follow the Party line.



> I never mentioned Abbott's wall punch.




No? In your defence of Kaiser you said;


> Tony Abbott tells us he's a changed man since he was at Uni. That his behaviour and attitudes are not the same now




What part of Abbott's Uni behavior were you referring to?



> I only argued that Brandis stated a biased opinion, which you agree with. I never claimed that the opposite was the "fact". I've never written anything in support of PM Gillard, whom I'm also not a massive fan of



.
So you're not a "huge fan". of Conroy and you're not a "massive fan" of Gillard.  Moderate to high perhaps.  I think you may be a massive fan of McTernan the king of spin.

Four more strikes against your credibility.


----------



## TheAbyss

Howdy,

Great thread with some very well made points for and against.

I would like to add that high speed internet access is a must have. Whether the NBN is the right model, time will tell. As we have progressed from 2400 baud-56kb modems to ADSL, ADSL 2 and Ethernet, users have found new and innovative uses for the increased bandwidth.

The latest speeds bandied about are 100mb/40mb which are tremendous and provides the platform for the next wave of Business to business technologies. Check out Geospatial augmented reality in your spare time or check out Cornings A day made of Glass 2 (Day made of glass 1 has all been delivered)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZkHpNnXLB0

Without high speed data this technology isn't available.

I personally am excited to see what can be leveraged on the back of this new bandwidth. Picture Cornings glass as what were previously known as CRT Screens, yesterdays Plasma, todays LCD. All tools to provide information and all require input.

If NBN plan A doesn't deliver then they will go for plan b and keep going until it delivers imo. Embrace it and think about how you can use it to your advantage.


Cheers


----------



## drsmith

One quarter of the fibre rollout to be done overhead.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=763786

The embedded video is also an interesting watch.


----------



## TheAbyss

drsmith said:


> One quarter of the fibre rollout to be done overhead.
> 
> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=763786
> 
> The embedded video is also an interesting watch.




The cost of running fibre in a country as geographically large as Australia is a challenging one technically, financially and politically. NBN had to buy the infrastructure from Telstra so they could at least get something started in an acceptable time frame.

The last mile will still be copper for a lot of users however if we ever want fast, reliable and cost effective bandwidth NBN or something similar is a must have.

NBN set the pricing and the resellers get to add their margins but they have to be competitive or die. yes, the floor pricing is higher than most countries but we are not exactly a cheap installation site either.

NBN will turn internet into where mobile phones and plans were early days, resellers everywhere pushing deals. Have to be good for buyers i would think?

See below for who will be reselling NBN besides Telstra.


----------



## medicowallet

TheAbyss said:


> NBN will turn internet into where mobile phones and plans were early days, resellers everywhere pushing deals. Have to be good for buyers i would think?




Except the wholesaler is a monopoly.

MW


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Only a fool would not support high speed broadband. The politicians you mention are mainly grubs and grafters
> 
> Of course you don't. You follow the Party line.
> 
> No? In your defence of Kaiser you said;
> 
> What part of Abbott's Uni behavior were you referring to?
> .
> So you're not a "huge fan". of Conroy and you're not a "massive fan" of Gillard.  Moderate to high perhaps.  I think you may be a massive fan of McTernan the king of spin.
> 
> Four more strikes against your credibility.




You just can't help yourself, can you?

How about instead of continuing to extrapolate, exaggerate or completely make up my political position, you get all radical and debate the pros and cons of the NBN itself, and the alternative policy?


----------



## drsmith

TheAbyss said:


> The cost of running fibre in a country as geographically large as Australia is a challenging one technically, financially and politically. NBN had to buy the infrastructure from Telstra so they could at least get something started in an acceptable time frame.



Perhaps more challenging than the government has anticipated.


----------



## TheAbyss

medicowallet said:


> Except the wholesaler is a monopoly.
> 
> MW




Interesting perspective. NBN is a govt mandated organisation designed to be self funding. They provide to all resellers at a comparative price.


----------



## TheAbyss

drsmith said:


> Perhaps more challenging than the government has anticipated.




Agreed. Given the 10 year roll out plan they may well end up going back to their starting point and rerun the fibre as it has a 15 yr life so repairs and maintenance will be ongoing no doubt. Bit like the painters on the harbour bridge who just keep on going.


----------



## medicowallet

TheAbyss said:


> Interesting perspective. NBN is a govt mandated organisation designed to be self funding. They provide to all resellers at a comparative price.




Which will never deliver as cheap prices as a model which encourages competition at all levels.   I can not really think of a "government" project that is run very efficiently, and as far as I see things like this, they are organisations that encourage mates jobs and corruption.

MW


----------



## Smurf1976

medicowallet said:


> Except the wholesaler is a monopoly.



A fixed communications (or electricity, gas, water, road etc) network is by its' very nature a natural monopoly. Always has been and always will be.


----------



## Smurf1976

TheAbyss said:


> Agreed. Given the 10 year roll out plan they may well end up going back to their starting point and rerun the fibre as it has a 15 yr life so repairs and maintenance will be ongoing no doubt. Bit like the painters on the harbour bridge who just keep on going.



The only way it ought to fail after that time is if they choose the cheapest tender and end up with dodgy cable.

The stuff just doesn't degrade anywhere near that quickly under any normal circumstance.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

re NBN, given all it's problems published, through Senate Estimates and many yet to come.

If it looks like a dawg, and sounds like a dawg, and feels like a dawg.

It is a dawg.

Just google NBN AFR.

The Australian Financial Review is always on the money re government projects and waste.

gg


----------



## sptrawler

The NBN is a massive financial and logistics project, that will be so hard to macro manage that cost, technical and topographical blowouts are bound to happen.
It will take an amazing amount of centralised planning, cost and procurement control.
Also a management system and higherachy that is approachable and flexible to deal with the multitude of issues that will present themselves.

Can someone tell me How Labor and Conroy fit in?lol


----------



## NBNMyths

TheAbyss said:


> Agreed. Given the 10 year roll out plan they may well end up going back to their starting point and rerun the fibre as [highlight]it has a 15 yr life[/highlight] so repairs and maintenance will be ongoing no doubt. Bit like the painters on the harbour bridge who just keep on going.




That's a myth.

Optical fibre has no known mechanism of failure as yet. Corning have lit fibre that has been in stress-test beds for 40 years, with no degradation or failure as yet. In fact, it's transmitting data faster than when it was manufactured due to the multiplexing advances that have occurred over time.

The maintenance cost of a fibre network is considerably lower than a copper network.


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> Which will never deliver as cheap prices as a model which encourages competition at all levels.   I can not really think of a "government" project that is run very efficiently, and as far as I see things like this, they are organisations that encourage mates jobs and corruption.
> 
> MW




Untrue.

As someone else wrote, utility infrastructure is a natural monopoly. It is perfectly logical to have one regulated infrastructure owner, with strong retail competition built on top of that.

In case you haven't noticed, there are no private companies lining up to build parallel electricity, water, gas or communication cable infrastructure. Perhaps you should ask yourself: "why not"?

Optus tried infrastructure competition in the 90s, and it almost sent them broke. Nobody has tried since, and if they have any sense, they won't.

http://www.itnews.com.au/News/235024,optus-targets-nbn-wireless-fans-and-fibre-critics.aspx



> *Optus:*
> "People talk about letting infrastructure competition work. Maybe you should learn a lesson from history," Krishnapillai said.
> 
> "We have empirical evidence of what happened in the late nineties where Optus rolled out a pay TV network down streets in suburban Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane.
> 
> "Telstra went down the same streets, carpet-bombed the business case and effectively Optus and Telstra wrote off over $1 billion through that period. We were losing $300 million a year through that period at Optus.
> 
> "So for those that are very brave to ask - and this is always interesting when people tell other people how to spend their money - for those who are very brave to say we should let infrastructure competition continue, [I say] throw money into it.
> 
> "We've certainly seen empirical evidence that that will not work and that's one of the main reasons we support the NBN."


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Untrue.
> 
> As someone else wrote, utility infrastructure is a natural monopoly. It is perfectly logical to have one regulated infrastructure owner, with strong retail competition built on top of that.
> 
> In case you haven't noticed, there are no private companies lining up to build parallel electricity, water, gas or communication cable infrastructure. Perhaps you should ask yourself: "why not"?
> 
> Optus tried infrastructure competition in the 90s, and it almost sent them broke. Nobody has tried since, and if they have any sense, they won't.
> 
> http://www.itnews.com.au/News/235024,optus-targets-nbn-wireless-fans-and-fibre-critics.aspx




NBNMyths, all the economic activity and business activity seems to be happening here in W.A.
I don't see much action on the street regarding the NBN.
I may be wrong, but I pedal around a lot and only see minimal blue happening.
Don't get me wrong, I would love to see a lot of blue action happening.
Maybe you are seeing a lot in your area?
The Eastern States are much more populuos.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> You just can't help yourself, can you?
> 
> How about instead of continuing to extrapolate, exaggerate or completely make up my political position, you get all radical and debate the pros and cons of the NBN itself, and the alternative policy?




I couldn't give a toss about the NBN or any alternative policy. Turnbull will look after that. I am just surprised that you think a Government comprised mainly of ex union leaders, union officials, union lackeys and union lawyers could have any comprehension of planning, constructing or operating an enterprise, as huge as the NBN.  Especially when Conroy, their second biggest clown (after Emerson) is running the show.

You once said you would stake your reputation on the success of the project. I am still waiting to hear what your reputation is. Is it as a Labor spin-doctor or as a photo-shopper?


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> I couldn't give a toss about the NBN or any alternative policy. Turnbull will look after that. I am just surprised that you think a Government comprised mainly of ex union leaders, union officials, union lackeys and union lawyers could have any comprehension of planning, constructing or operating an enterprise, as huge as the NBN.  Especially when Conroy, their second biggest clown (after Emerson) is running the show.
> 
> You once said you would stake your reputation on the success of the project. I am still waiting to hear what your reputation is. Is it as a Labor spin-doctor or as a photo-shopper?




You're still going I see. The king of logical fallacies. Strawmen, Red herrings, Ad Homs. Maybe if you work at it, you can squeeze a few more in there. Here's a list, just check them off as you go.

In case you care, I did not "stake my reputation on the success of the NBN". I wrote that I would stake my reputation on my belief that _"speed for speed, the retail prices for FTTN will not be cheaper than the NBN."_


Are there any other things you'd like to make up about me today, or are you done?


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> You're still going I see. The king of logical fallacies. Strawmen, Red herrings, Ad Homs. Maybe if you work at it, you can squeeze a few more in there.






> I wrote that I would stake my reputation




Never mind. I rest my case. But as a matter of interest...what *is * this reputation you are prepared to stake?


----------



## drsmith

The ACCC isn't happy with the NBN's pricing and access proposals and in return, NBN Co isn't too happy with the ACCC's response,



> NBN Co said it would look to finalise the undertaking as soon as possible but did not mention whether it was likely to amend the document to note the commission’s concerns.
> 
> “We appreciate that the ACCC has a challenging task in balancing the views of a range of stakeholders in order to achieve a framework that is in the long-term interests of end users,” NBN Co head of regulatory affairs, Caroline Lovell, said in a statement. “We will continue to engage with industry and the ACCC as the remaining issues are resolved to ensure that an appropriate balance is achieved.”




It will be interesting to see how that pans out.

http://www.afr.com/p/national/accc_rejects_nbn_access_terms_gayb16gc7op6VZb37ASDlM


----------



## drsmith

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Just google NBN AFR.




All may not be well between NBN Co and Telstra,

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/telstra_repairs_holding_up_nbn_rollout_ZCq502yd3achkJPEhb5ZjJ


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> The ACCC isn't happy with the NBN's pricing and access proposals and in return, NBN Co isn't too happy with the ACCC's response,
> 
> 
> 
> It will be interesting to see how that pans out.
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/national/accc_rejects_nbn_access_terms_gayb16gc7op6VZb37ASDlM




I have no issue with the ACCC ensuring the SAU provides the best possible outcome for consumers. And I can understand their desire to do so given the experience with Telstra. We don't want a repeat of that.

I'm a little confused by your statement that _"NBN Co isn't too happy with the ACCC's response"_, given the quote from NBN Co. It certainly doesn't sound to me as though they are unhappy:

_“We appreciate that the ACCC has a challenging task in balancing the views of a range of stakeholders in order to achieve a framework that is in the long-term interests of end users,” NBN Co head of regulatory affairs, Caroline Lovell, said in a statement. “We will continue to engage with industry and the ACCC as the remaining issues are resolved to ensure that an appropriate balance is achieved.”_


Oh, and Caliope, my only reputation is that of an on-the-record NBN advocate.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> I'm a little confused by your statement that _"NBN Co isn't too happy with the ACCC's response"_, given the quote from NBN Co. It certainly doesn't sound to me as though they are unhappy:
> 
> _“We appreciate that the ACCC has a challenging task in balancing the views of a range of stakeholders in order to achieve a framework that is in the long-term interests of end users,” NBN Co head of regulatory affairs, Caroline Lovell, said in a statement. “We will continue to engage with industry and the ACCC as the remaining issues are resolved to ensure that an appropriate balance is achieved.”_




It would appear they didn't appreciate the ACCC's perspective in their original submission and now want to  
negotiate somewhat as equals.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> Oh, and Caliope, my only reputation is that of an on-the-record NBN advocate.




Just as I thought...and now it is in tatters along with that of your party.


----------



## TheAbyss

Calliope said:


> Just as I thought...and now it is in tatters along with that of your party.




Any chance you can take your running battle to another room and concentrate on NBN here? Appears to be a lot of playing the man.


----------



## drsmith

The AFR is certainly giving it a lot of stick,

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_at_war_with_contractors_UY69p5MzeTv96l8E0MoVpL


----------



## Calliope

TheAbyss said:


> Any chance you can take your running battle to another room and concentrate on NBN here? Appears to be a lot of playing the man.




Not that it's any of your business, but I have nothing further to say to Myths. I have already proved my point. If he continues his diatribes take it up with him.


----------



## boofhead

Calliope: I don't know if you actually read what you write but all you have proved is you dislike some things but have no proved anything relating to the NBN or NBNMyths. Nothing but poor personal attacks. You know, the Gillard style attacks on Abbott - nothing of substance just personal attacks. RAGE!

The Age has a recent story on it. Talking to some experts in the field. Interestingly Turnball things wireless is the future yet the Coalition are investing in wired. He also invests in telcos overseas that are investing in wired. The mouth is saying something different to actions and planned actions. FUD.

Also of note NBN is reporting revenues in the millions now.


----------



## Calliope

boofhead said:


> Calliope: I don't know if you actually read what you write but all you have proved is you dislike some things but have no proved anything relating to the NBN or NBNMyths. Nothing but poor personal attacks. You know, the Gillard style attacks on Abbott - nothing of substance just personal attacks. RAGE!.




Sorry if I have upset you Boof, but as I said, I have no further interest in The NBN or NBNMyths, having proved my point.


----------



## noco

Is this another Labor Party "WHITE ELEPHANT"? One which looks like costing twice as much as Labor's original estimate.

Conroy and his superiiors will no doubt endeavour to conceal the truth at all costs leading up to the election.


http://www.couriermail.com.au/busin...0-billion-report/story-fn7kjcme-1226614710571


----------



## NBNMyths

noco said:


> Is this another Labor Party "WHITE ELEPHANT"? One which looks like costing twice as much as Labor's original estimate.
> 
> Conroy and his superiiors will no doubt endeavour to conceal the truth at all costs leading up to the election.
> 
> 
> http://www.couriermail.com.au/busin...0-billion-report/story-fn7kjcme-1226614710571




So we are accepting the Coalition's leaked policy document as providing a factual costing of the NBN are we, despite the fact that their estimate isn't based on any evidence that it will cost more than the budget?

We have numerous international builds costing similar amounts to the NBN. We have costings from KPMG-McKinsey of $43bn, we have NBN Co's costings of $37bn, which were assessed as "reasonable" by Greenhill-Caliburn.

Even Turnbull can't make up his mind. He's been saying $50bn for a year or two. Then he said $80bn about a month ago, $100bn at a Blue Mountains community forum 3 weeks ago, and $90bn today.

Is he just making up an appropriately scary number depending on the audience?


----------



## drsmith

Stephen Conroy caught with red underpants on his own head.



> An Australian National Audit Office spokesman confirmed the office had not audited the corporate plan.
> 
> "We audit the financial statements so the expenditures of NBN are properly recorded,'' he said.
> 
> "While we make reference to the corporate plan, we don't audit the corporate plan.''
> 
> Senator Conroy told Sky News this afternoon he had made mistake and mis-spoke, meaning to say the annual report and not the corporate plan.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...0-billion-report/story-e6frg6n6-1226614710571


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Stephen Conroy caught with red underpants on his own head.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...0-billion-report/story-e6frg6n6-1226614710571




It was Greenhill-Caliburn that audited the corporate plan.


----------



## noco

NBNMyths said:


> So we are accepting the Coalition's leaked policy document as providing a factual costing of the NBN are we, despite the fact that their estimate isn't based on any evidence that it will cost more than the budget?
> 
> We have numerous international builds costing similar amounts to the NBN. We have costings from KPMG-McKinsey of $43bn, we have NBN Co's costings of $37bn, which were assessed as "reasonable" by Greenhill-Caliburn.
> 
> Even Turnbull can't make up his mind. He's been saying $50bn for a year or two. Then he said $80bn about a month ago, $100bn at a Blue Mountains community forum 3 weeks ago, and $90bn today.
> 
> Is he just making up an appropriately scary number depending on the audience?




Myths to the rescue once again but you have over looked the fact that Conroy has admotted false claims, also it is not just the Coalition but Macquarie Bank doing some costing as well.

If Rudd said it would complete by 2013 and now Gillard says 2021, how you do expect the cost to remain the same and even worse if it lingers on until 2027?


----------



## sptrawler

Just show me some government project that hasn't blown up in their faces in the last 6 years.
River City Motorway, Bris Connect, Connect East, Shutting down brown coal fired power stations, Re fitting power stations to burn bio fuel.

Notice I didn't mention really botched plans, I didn't think it was required.

There is very few large scale projects that don't run, overtime and over budget.
Just check out BHP's magnetite nickel project in SW of WA, or Sino steels Citi Pacific foray into the NW of WA.

The problem with Government funded blowouts is, the government just keeps pouring money in.
Whereas someone like BHP, will just pull the pin and write off the loss.
It all seems to become personal when it is Government funded and there is no accountability for losses or expenditure.
It then becomes, the government saying yes we can. The opposition saying no you can't. Then the contractor saying of course we can, just sign here.

Not having a go at the NBN, but I've allways said the money would be better spent on sustainable infrastructure.
It's a huge project, that would probably end up in tears for a switched on engineering company, let alone the government.
Fortunately the government has deep pockets, but even they will pull the pin on it IMO.


----------



## NBNMyths

noco said:


> Myths to the rescue once again but you have over looked the fact that Conroy has admotted false claims, also it is not just the Coalition but Macquarie Bank doing some costing as well.





So say the coalition. However, the "Macquarie bank analysis" isn't published anywhere. We only have the Coalition's say-so on what it says, and what factors those alleged costings are based on. (ie: is it a GPON FTTP network, or a 10GPON, or an individual fibre per premises? To give just one factor which would make a massive difference to the cost).



> If Rudd said it would complete by 2013 and now Gillard says 2021, how you do expect the cost to remain the same and even worse if it lingers on until 2027?





Rudd's original NBN was fibre to the node, at a cost to Govt of $4.7bn and a 5-year build. That's the same technology that the Coalition are now saying they'll spend $20bn on, of a total $29bn cost. 

So they thought spending $4.7bn was a waste in 2007, but now think it's a great idea to throw $20bn at the same thing.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Rudd's original NBN was fibre to the node, at a cost to Govt of $4.7bn and a 5-year build. That's the same technology that the Coalition are now saying they'll spend $20bn on, of a total $29bn cost.



Kevin Rudd's fttn though wasn't going to be a fully government funded and owned wholesale network like the NBN so that comparison is like apples and oranges.

The Coalition can only start with what the government has left it.


----------



## MrBurns

Libs NBN policy runs rings around those socialist idiots.

Turnbull did a magnificent presentation, his style was in contract to Tony who also spoke but in that haltering manner, there was a stark comparison there.


----------



## Calliope

MrBurns said:


> Libs NBN policy runs rings around those socialist idiots.
> 
> Turnbull did a magnificent presentation, his style was in contract to Tony who also spoke but in that haltering manner, there was a stark comparison there.




Who would you believe...Turnbull or Conroy's Myths Bluster?



> But Mr Turnbull said the NBN rollout was in chaos and would never be delivered.
> 
> “The project is in a state of near collapse due to the wrong plan and poor management,” he said.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...malcolm-turnbull/story-e6frgaif-1226615540546


----------



## drsmith

MrBurns said:


> Turnbull did a magnificent presentation, his style was in contract to Tony who also spoke but in that haltering manner, there was a stark comparison there.




Is there a link to the whole video ?

I did see a small segment featuring the somewhat stilted introduction from Tony Abbott.

The following is a 4:19 minute segment of Q&A with Malcolm Turnbull.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SzS3Np73wM&feature=player_embedded


----------



## Calliope

Conroy is a piece of work!

[video]http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/news/lateline/video/201304/LATs_ConroyPreRec_0804_512k.mp4[/video]


----------



## MrBurns

drsmith said:


> Is there a link to the whole video ?
> 
> I did see a small segment featuring the somewhat stilted introduction from Tony Abbott.
> 
> The following is a 4:19 minute segment of Q&A with Malcolm Turnbull.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SzS3Np73wM&feature=player_embedded





It's on the abc web site can't post it as I'm on the iPhone


----------



## drsmith

MrBurns said:


> It's on the abc web site can't post it as I'm on the iPhone



Got it. Thanks.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-04-09/coalition-pledges-much-faster-much-better-broadband/4618460


----------



## bellenuit

drsmith said:


> Is there a link to the whole video ?
> 
> I did see a small segment featuring the somewhat stilted introduction from Tony Abbott.
> 
> The following is a 4:19 minute segment of Q&A with Malcolm Turnbull.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SzS3Np73wM&feature=player_embedded





I have only seen this segment, but Abbott looks stupid the way he is staring directly at Turnbull instead of facing the journalists.


----------



## MrBurns

bellenuit said:


> I have only seen this segment, but Abbott looks stupid the way he is staring directly at Turnbull instead of facing the journalists.






drsmith said:


> Got it. Thanks.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-04-09/coalition-pledges-much-faster-much-better-broadband/4618460




.....


----------



## drsmith

bellenuit said:


> I have only seen this segment, but Abbott looks stupid the way he is staring directly at Turnbull instead of facing the journalists.



He probably didn't want to take too many questions. 

The full segment was about 40 min and I thought Malcolm Turnbull presented his case well. Tony Abbott did chip in occasionally, but let Malcolm do most of the talking. Appropriate for someone who is self confessed as being _no Bill Gates_. Overall, it presented well in my view.

As for the merits (or otherwise) of each of the major parties policies, I'm sure that will be the subject of much debate.


----------



## So_Cynical

So_Cynical said:


> (16th-February-2013) This is going to be a mess, politically the noalition cant continue the roll out as planned because they fought so hard against it that to turn around and support it would make them look stupid...so they will have to tinker with it, so it can be re-branded as their own.
> 
> And that's going to lead to a half arsed NBN.




Well we dint have to wait long, its official...a half arsed NBN is what we will get.

Still nice to see the noalition produce a policy for something at last..a half arsed policy is better then nothing, same as a half arsed NBN i suppose.


----------



## MrBurns

So_Cynical said:


> Well we dint have to wait long, its official...a half arsed NBN is what we will get.
> 
> Still nice to see the noalition produce a policy for something at last..a half arsed policy is better then nothing, same as a half arsed NBN i suppose.




the Libs policy is far superior to the rubbish Stephen Conroy is trying to sell us.
Fibre to the premise for everyone, so grandma who sends a few emails a week gets 100mps

Conroy is a dim wit and he is blowing billions of dollars that we'll never get back.

Turnbull is smart, he's been in the business and knows what he's talking about Conroy splutters on about nothing. ......his specialist subject.

You just have to look at the dumb expression on his face to realise he's underqualified mentally to drive a tram.


----------



## NBNMyths

MrBurns said:


> the Libs policy is far superior to the rubbish Stephen Conroy is trying to sell us.
> Fibre to the premise for everyone, so grandma who sends a few emails a week gets 100mps
> 
> Conroy is a dim wit and he is blowing billions of dollars that we'll never get back.
> 
> Turnbull is smart, he's been in the business and knows what he's talking about Conroy splutters on about nothing. ......his specialist subject.
> 
> You just have to look at the dumb expression on his face to realise he's underqualified mentally to drive a tram.




Your argument is based on numerous fallacies.

First, Grandma doesn't have to get 100Mbps on the NBN. She can get 12Mbps and save 30% on what she pays today for ADSL2. 

But when she kicks the bucket and a family move in to her old place, they can choose 25, 50, 100, 250, 500 or 1000Mbps over that same connection Grandma was using, should they so choose.


Malcolm Turnbull got out of "the business" before domestic broadband even existed! He might have been an expert on 56k modems, but there have been one or two changes since those days.

You won't find too many people in "the business" today that think spending $30bn on FTTN is a better investment than $44bn on FTTP.


----------



## FxTrader

MrBurns said:


> the Libs policy is far superior to the rubbish Stephen Conroy is trying to sell us.
> Fibre to the premise for everyone, so grandma who sends a few emails a week gets 100mps




Time to look at Telstra shares again.  So the Libs are going to pay Telstra how many millions of dollars every year to maintain the decaying copper network?  It's a win either way for Telstra who have been hemorrhaging money for years maintaining the CAN with it's declining revenue and high maintenance costs.  Yes indeed, a real forward thinking policy.


----------



## MrBurns

NBNMyths said:


> Your argument is based on numerous fallacies.
> 
> First, Grandma doesn't have to get 100Mbps on the NBN. She can get 12Mbps and save 30% on what she pays today for ADSL2.
> 
> But when she kicks the bucket and a family move in to her old place, they can choose 25, 50, 100, 250, 500 or 1000Mbps over that same connection Grandma was using, should they so choose.
> 
> 
> Malcolm Turnbull got out of "the business" before domestic broadband even existed! He might have been an expert on 56k modems, but there have been one or two changes since those days.
> 
> You won't find too many people in "the business" today that think spending $30bn on FTTN is a better investment than $44bn on FTTP.




Grandma WILL get fibre to the premise..........that costs money, so we have to wait for Grandma to die and PERHAPS the new occupants of the house will send a few emails too, your argument is full of holes like Conroys brain.

Turnbull knows what he's talking about you only argue the Govts policy.......the Govt that have failed at everything they do and you think their application of $40B to this project will be any different ? errrrr sorry $90B


----------



## MrBurns

FxTrader said:


> Time to look at Telstra shares again.  So the Libs are going to pay Telstra how many millions of dollars every year to maintain the decaying copper network?  It's a win either way for Telstra who have been hemorrhaging money for years maintaining the CAN with it's declining revenue and high maintenance costs.  Yes indeed, a real forward thinking policy.




What decaying copper network ?
It may last for years it's an unknown and will be replaced based on need.


----------



## Julia

FxTrader said:


> Time to look at Telstra shares again.  So the Libs are going to pay Telstra how many millions of dollars every year to maintain the decaying copper network?  It's a win either way for Telstra who have been hemorrhaging money for years maintaining the CAN with it's declining revenue and high maintenance costs.



As apparently evidenced by today's rise in TLS SP.


----------



## So_Cynical

MrBurns said:


> he is blowing *billions of dollars that we'll never get back.*




we'll never get back??? you make it sound like the NBN is going to cost us something?


----------



## NBNMyths

MrBurns said:


> What decaying copper network ?




This one:
http://www.thesociety.org.au/home/2012/05/01/worst-of-the-worst-photos-of-australias-copper-network/
Here's a few samples:









Personally, I know that the copper in my street is excellent, because it was replaced last year. But that replacement gave a very good indication of just how bad it is generally.

Although my house (and therefore local copper line) is only 8 years old, my area was built out in 1973 making the street copper ~40 years old. Quite young compared to a lot of areas. It's an area with a lot of rock and very good drainage. Certainly not a challenging environment for copper. About half the copper in my street is underground, the rest is on poles. Then it's underground from the end of my street to the exchange, about 1km away.

Until the replacement, I was getting an ADSL2+ speed of 9Mbps down and 0.4Mbps up. Then, fortunately, a tree fell on the power lines up the road. This brought the power lines down onto the phone lines, causing a short which succeeded in turning the entire bundle for the street into a mass of molten copper and plastic.

I was without phone/internet for 2 weeks, which was a pain. But after that I now "enjoy" speeds of about 15Mbps down and 0.9Mbps up. Now it only takes me 10 hours to send a bunch of photos to Sydney, instead of 16 hours.

Given my experience and the extensive list of photos linked above, I think it's pretty safe to say that there is _a lot_ of the copper network that is well past its best.


----------



## MrBurns

Julia said:


> As apparently evidenced by today's rise in TLS SP.




I think that may have had more to do with the fact that the Libs confirmed they wont be scrapping it.



So_Cynical said:


> we'll never get back??? you make it sound like the NBN is going to cost us something?




Ever known the implementation of a Labor policy that didn't ?

Fact is this will be faster than we have now, it will be up and running quicker and cheaper and best of all, it will be done.


----------



## FxTrader

MrBurns said:


> What decaying copper network ?
> It may last for years it's an unknown and will be replaced based on need.




I worked for Telstra for 13 years and I can assure you it's a costly nightmare to maintain and manage along with the ADSL infrastructure that delivers so called broadband service today over the CAN.  You quite obviously know little or nothing about this and your views on the NBN are clearly steeped in political bias and so the merits of what the current NBN delivers escapes your attention.   Paying Telstra to maintain the CAN is destined to be a short term policy and Telstra shareholders will be the primary beneficiary.  I am certain Turnbull and the Libs know this but are betting the short term savings pitch will have voter appeal.  The current NBN must be dumped since it was not Liberal idea nor would it have ever been.


----------



## MrBurns

NBNMyths said:


> This one:
> 
> Personally, I know that the copper in my street is excellent, because it was replaced last year. But that replacement gave a very good indication of just how bad it is generally.
> 
> .




It's not all like that no point throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

If anyone's unsure ask yourself this......who do you trust, Conroy or Turnbull.....game over.


----------



## Julia

MrBurns said:


> If anyone's unsure ask yourself this......who do you trust, Conroy or Turnbull.....game over.



Um, neither.


----------



## MrBurns

FxTrader said:


> I worked for Telstra for 13 years and I can assure you it's a costly nightmare to maintain and manage along with the ADSL infrastructure that delivers so called broadband service today over the CAN.  You quite obviously know little or nothing about this and your views on the NBN are clearly steeped in political bias and so the merits of what the current NBN delivers escapes your attention.   Paying Telstra to maintain the CAN is destined to be a short term policy and Telstra shareholders will be the primary beneficiary.  I am certain Turnbull and the Libs know this but are betting the short term savings pitch will have voter appeal.  The current NBN must be dumped since it was not Liberal idea nor would it have ever been.




I'm sure it costs a lot to replace it as well.
Most people would be happy with the speed increase provided by the Lib plan those who want more will probably be businesses and they just might have to pay.
My opinion is not really based on a political view but a view of who is going to be charged with implementing the NBN, Labor are proven failures and the Libs seem to get things done.


----------



## Smurf1976

MrBurns said:


> I'm sure it costs a lot to replace it as well.
> Most people would be happy with the speed increase provided by the Lib plan those who want more will probably be businesses and they just might have to pay.



That's a bit like saying you have a worn out car that will manage another 10,000 km at best and then only with extensive maintenance and smoke blowing out the exhaust. Sure, a new car will cost more but pretty soon you're going to have to pay anyway.

If we build the Liberal NBN today, then it will only be a few years until we have to go back and do what is currently planned anyway. At best, the Liberal plan defers the expense by a few years but also increases the final cost due to rework.


----------



## drsmith

Julia said:


> Um, neither.




Perhaps when it to costs, but Malcolm was able to argue the underlying principals again well on the ABC's 7:30 tonight.

He even got Leigh Sales to smile at the end.

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3733411.htm

There's also the shifting sands of technology,



> GREG HOY: The ground in this debate is shifting as street node technology improves allowing individuals or perhaps even governments to later upgrade Telstra's old copper cable to optical fibre. Significantly this has meant one arch critic of the Coalition's plan has become a supporter.
> 
> GRAEME SAMUEL: Back when the ACCC advised the Government on this back in 2009 it was clearly the position that if fibre to the node had been pursued that around, let me just simply say, several billion dollars of nodes would potentially be of little use at some stage in the future as you upgrade it to a full fibre to the premise technology. I think it's only appropriate to acknowledge that. What it means is that if you want, at your option, to convert the copper running from the node to the premises into fibre to get super high fast speed broadband then you can do it.




http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3733409.htm


----------



## MrBurns

Smurf1976 said:


> That's a bit like saying you have a worn out car that will manage another 10,000 km at best and then only with extensive maintenance and smoke blowing out the exhaust. Sure, a new car will cost more but pretty soon you're going to have to pay anyway.
> 
> If we build the Liberal NBN today, then it will only be a few years until we have to go back and do what is currently planned anyway. At best, the Liberal plan defers the expense by a few years but also increases the final cost due to rework.




Fibre will be to the node so it would be a matter of extending it to the premise on the basis of need, not just to everyone regardless of need.


----------



## drsmith

Smurf1976 said:


> That's a bit like saying you have a worn out car that will manage another 10,000 km at best and then only with extensive maintenance and smoke blowing out the exhaust. Sure, a new car will cost more but pretty soon you're going to have to pay anyway.
> 
> If we build the Liberal NBN today, then it will only be a few years until we have to go back and do what is currently planned anyway. At best, the Liberal plan defers the expense by a few years but also increases the final cost due to rework.




Malcolm's Turnbull's analogy.



> MALCOLM TURNBULL: No, you - provision for demand where it is today and in the foreseeable future. You don't - taking the approach of building - investing in infrastructure on the basis that you think It'll be needed in 20 years time, which is what Stephen Conroy is fond of saving, that could be said only by someone who doesn't care about taxpayers' money. You invest in infrastructure to cater for the demand today and in the foreseeable future and build into your plans the flexibility to expand further, if and when or as demand increases and that way, of course you take advantage of the latest developments in technology as you go.


----------



## FxTrader

MrBurns said:


> I'm sure it costs a lot to replace it as well.
> Most people would be happy with the speed increase provided by the Lib plan those who want more will probably be businesses and they just might have to pay.




The estimated speed increase for FTTN is wildly optimistic and will depend on many factors including distance from the node.  For example, I lived in a new estate for a few years with new copper to the street node and less than 500 meters from the exchange (a fiber node).  Even so, with the best ADSL2+ modem on the market and Telstra's ADSL2 service the best average download speed I could achieve was 16Mbs.  Expect many people to be disappointed and any aspiration of Turnbull to be leader again crushed in the process.



> My opinion is not really based on a political view but a view of who is going to be charged with implementing the NBN, Labor are proven failures and the Libs seem to get things done.




Sure, let's give the Libs a shot at delivering the current NBN FTTH solution smarter and at lower cost.  What they have put forward though is a sham and should be exposed as such.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Personally, I know that the copper in my street is excellent, because it was replaced last year. But that replacement gave a very good indication of just how bad it is generally.
> 
> Although my house (and therefore local copper line) is only 8 years old, my area was built out in 1973 making the street copper ~40 years old. Quite young compared to a lot of areas. It's an area with a lot of rock and very good drainage. Certainly not a challenging environment for copper. About half the copper in my street is underground, the rest is on poles. Then it's underground from the end of my street to the exchange, about 1km away.




Again, Malcolm Turnbull,



> LEIGH SALES: Are they still then responsible for maintaining the copper?
> 
> MALCOLM TURNBULL: That is a matter that would be the responsibility of the NBN Co and may well contract Telstra to maintain that copper. *And what you do, just to go through the mechanics here, if you've got an area, this area in front of us is a portion of a suburb, you will form a judgment about the quality of the copper in that area. There may be some that you will remediate, that you will upgrade with copper. There may be an area that perhaps is very wet ground that floods a lot, you've had a lot of maintenance problems. And so you might say alright, we'll run fibre through there.* So what you do is you make sensible, cost effective decisions about the upgrading the network and so that you can do it in a speedy and you've got to remember, under our plan, I mean Labor's got an ad out there saying connecting to Labor's NBN will be free. Can you imagine a bigger falsehood than that? It will be $94 billion to the taxpayer and as we've demonstrated in our policy documents today, it's considerably, on average, at least $300 a year more for people to actually connect to it.




If the copper between the node and the home is overall more degraded than the Opposition anticipates, there will be an obvious impact on their costings. The underlying principal however is sound. 

My bolds.


----------



## MrBurns

FxTrader said:


> Sure, let's give the Libs a shot at delivering the current NBN FTTH solution smarter and at lower cost.  What they have put forward though is a sham and should be exposed as such.




I guess time will tell.
I just don't trust Labor with this project and Conroy ?


----------



## FxTrader

> That is a matter that would be the responsibility of the NBN Co and may well contract Telstra to maintain that copper.




LOL, since Telstra owns the copper who may be paid to maintain it?  NBN Co does not own the CAN, has no interest in trying to maintain it currently and this has never been in scope until today. 



> And what you do, just to go through the mechanics here, if you've got an area, this area in front of us is a portion of a suburb, you will form a judgment about the quality of the copper in that area. There may be some that you will remediate, that you will upgrade with copper.




Deliberate misinformation or just ignorance? You don't "upgrade" with UTP copper.  You can replace it but why would you if you can pull fibre instead, even at a higher cost.  The "quality" of copper in the vast majority of areas is very poor and Turnbull should know this.



> There may be an area that perhaps is very wet ground that floods a lot, you've had a lot of maintenance problems. And so you might say alright, we'll run fibre through there.




LOL, my guess is that you would need to be rowing a boat around your property several months a year before serious consideration is given to run fibre since many such areas are in remote or regional areas.  However, if you're in a marginal electorate you may well get your fibre sooner but not because your spending to much time in your boat.


----------



## So_Cynical

MrBurns said:


> My opinion is not really based on a political view but a view of who is going to be charged with implementing the NBN, Labor are proven failures and *the Libs seem to get things done*.




LOL what is with the political bias of the ASF right, just say it.

Libs getting things done hey...for example?



Smurf1976 said:


> If we build the Liberal NBN today, then it will only be a few years until we have to go back and do what is currently planned anyway.* At best, the Liberal plan defers the expense by a few years but also increases the final cost due to rework.*




This seem to be the consensus view over at whirlpool, a Ferrari up to the cabinet then a clapped out HQ Holden the rest of the way with the full intention of replacing the Holden's over time with Ferraris.

--------------

GRAEME SAMUEL closing statement on the 7.30 report.



			
				GRAEME SAMUEL: said:
			
		

> GRAEME SAMUEL: What we have got is now an acceptance in Australia, that a lot of money in tens of billions of dollars must be invested in high speed broadband available to 100 per cent of the population. And that will lift us out of the mediocrity stakes as far as developed countries are concerned, into one of the more advanced countries in this area. And it is an economic necessity as far as Australia's concerned.


----------



## MrBurns

So_Cynical said:


> LOL what is with the political bias of the ASF right, just say it.
> 
> Libs getting things done hey...for example?.




Getting rid of Australia's worst PM ever....for starters.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> Malcolm's Turnbull's analogy.






> MALCOLM TURNBULL: No, you - provision for demand where it is today and in the foreseeable future. You don't - taking the approach of building -* investing in infrastructure on the basis that you think It'll be needed in 20 years time*, which is what Stephen Conroy is fond of saving, that could be said only by someone who doesn't care about taxpayers' money. *You invest in infrastructure to cater for the demand today and in the foreseeable future and build into your plans the flexibility to expand further,* if and when or as demand increases and that way, of course you take advantage of the latest developments in technology as you go.




Problem is that's exactly what the noalition is going to do, fibre to everywhere but the pole or home...the fibre is for current and future demand.


----------



## drsmith

FxTrader said:


> LOL, since Telstra owns the copper who may be paid to maintain it?  NBN Co does not own the CAN, has no interest in trying to maintain it currently and this has never been in scope until today.




Malcolm Turnbull,



> MALCOLM TURNBULL: Because Telstra is being paid $1,500 or thereabouts per premise as is it cut over to the NBN. So they're in effect being paid for their copper already. Their obligation is to decommission the copper. So what we're proposing to Telstra and we're very confident we can reach agreement here, is to say to them well, "you give us your copper," really the last 500, 800 metres or whatever what they call the D side copper. "You give us your copper and then we will, as premises are - as the NBN's fibre nodes are connected to that copper, those premises will be connected to the NBN and you will be paid the contracted amount."






FxTrader said:


> You don't "upgrade" with UTP copper.  You can replace it but why would you if you can pull fibre instead, even at a higher cost.




He's simply saying that it's a case by case basis. For instance, at a given location, it may only be a section of copper between the node and the home may be degraded. 



FxTrader said:


> LOL, my guess is that you would need to be rowing a boat around your property several months a year before serious consideration is given to run fibre since many such areas are in remote or regional areas.




That might be the case, I don't know. Labor's NBN might equally take longer and cost more to build than they are saying too.


----------



## bellenuit

Smurf1976 said:


> At best, the Liberal plan defers the expense by a few years but also increases the final cost due to rework.




I think that is too complex to call without some detailed cost analysis. It not just defers expenses a few years, which means reduced interest costs, but brings forward revenues which further reduces interest costs. When eventually some of the deferred work must be undertaken, technology may have moved so far forward that waiting might then offer alternatives, possibly more efficient and less costly, than available today.

As Turnbull said at the conference, saying the NBN is future proof is a myth. It may be the most future proof of the technologies available currently, but technology changes so much and so quickly that the most future proof technology has probably not been thought of yet.  Deferring deploying infrastructure that currently is not needed is very prudent in such an environment.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> Problem is that's exactly what the noalition is going to do, fibre to everywhere but the pole or home...the fibre is for current and future demand.



That will be up to the electorate to decide.

It doesn't though diminish the underlying principal.


----------



## tinhat

I try and stay out of these discussions but the sad thing is that we seem destined as a nation to only replace one bad government with another one.

People should just get over the NBN. There can be no doubt that a fully fibre network is the way to go. Yes it's moderately expensive but so is universal health care and we as a nation still surely have some belief in equality of opportunity surely? The copper network in its current state is a disaster and can't handle the 21st century needs of our nation. I get ADSL (not fast ADLS2 because we are so far from the exchange - like it's on the other side of a wide estuary with submarine cable!) -but I get around 1.5Mb download. My neighbour gets dial up only - no ADSL. He's got two kids at school. How can they be at school and be on dial up? As for mobile internet I don't even get mobile in the house!

I downloaded the full score of an opera before I headed of to choir practice tonight. It took a couple of minutes. The neighbours kids have to get through high school and university yet and on dial up! We are neighbours. It's an outrage! It is absurd that because their line is on some different sort of pair gain switching they can't get ADSL. Where I live this story is repeated - one neighbour gets ADSL, the other doesn't.

I understand that it will all be different when there is fibre to the node because at least everyone will be switched at the node. But surely, for a few more dollars per household we can just roll out the fibre into the house. It makes complete sense. My neighbours have two kids of school age. You can't tell me it is not in the national interest to pay a grand or two to get them connected to fibre? I work from home so I need ADSL and I could afford to pay for it, but why should school kids not get the best option over me because I can afford to pay a few bucks more?

It annoys me no end that people don't seem to realise what a fantastically prosperous nation we are. How we are living during very good times as a nation. Why can't we just build this thing? Build infrastructure and scrap all the middle class welfare that has wasted so much of the mining boom since 2004. It's a crime that due to Howard and Rudd/Gillard we have wasted our prosperity on populist vote buying to the extent that we now have a structural budget deficit as we come out of the mining boom. Howard inherited a structural deficit, fixed it, then recreated it. The current labor government have done nothing to fix the structural problems because they don't have the nerve to explain to people that reform must continue from one generation to the next.

My prediction is that we are going to be in for a very unstable period of federal government in Australia. The next government won't have a senate majority. If you think this government is an unstable minority government, wait for the the Abbott government with a minority senate.The Liberals have promised that all the bad things will go away while all the good things will stay. The senate is going to obstruct the government and they won't be able to repeal the carbon tax and all the rest. We will end up with a double dissolution. The second in our nation's history. There will be more activism and protest on the streets than the nation has seen for two generations. And all because we as a nation can't seem to get a decent bunch of politicians that can govern properly.


----------



## drsmith

bellenuit said:


> As Turnbull said at the conference, saying the NBN is future proof is a myth. It may be the most future proof of the technologies available currently, but technology changes so much and so quickly that the most future proof technology has probably not been thought of yet.  Deferring deploying infrastructure that currently is not needed is very prudent in such an environment.




I'm not sure whether it was at the conference, but he also made the following point regarding the value of speed,



> MALCOLM TURNBULL: Speed is only valuable to you in so far as you can use it for something. The value or the utility of broadband does not increase in a linear fashion with the speed.
> 
> In other words, 20 megabits per second is not twice as useful or valuable to you as 10, and 40 is certainly not twice as valuable to you as 20.




http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2013/s3733228.htm


----------



## FxTrader

> MALCOLM TURNBULL: Because Telstra is being paid $1,500 or thereabouts per premise as is it cut over to the NBN. So they're in effect being paid for their copper already. Their obligation is to decommission the copper. So what we're proposing to Telstra and we're very confident we can reach agreement here, is to say to them well, "you give us your copper," really the last 500, 800 metres or whatever what they call the D side copper. "You give us your copper and then we will, as premises are - as the NBN's fibre nodes are connected to that copper, those premises will be connected to the NBN and you will be paid the contracted amount."




Ok, let's dissect this little piece of polly babble.  Yes, Telstra is being paid to decommission each premises end point connection, copper out, fibre in and $1500 thanks.  Now if you say to Telstra "give us your copper" when we connect fibre to a street node and we will pay you $1500 for each copper connection to that node that is "connected to the NBN" (and all will be), Telstra will laugh all the way to the bank (seriously looking at TLS shares again).  Thanks for the quote, this has to be one of the most poorly considered and phrased statements I have seen from Turnbull to date.


----------



## drsmith

FxTrader said:


> Ok, let's dissect this little piece of polly babble.  Yes, Telstra is being paid to decommission each premises end point connection, copper out, fibre in and $1500 thanks.  Now if you say to Telstra "give us your copper" when we connect fibre to a street node and we will pay you $1500 for each copper connection to that node that is "connected to the NBN" (and all will be), Telstra will laugh all the way to the bank (seriously looking at TLS shares again).  Thanks for the quote, this has to be one of the most poorly considered and phrased statements I have seen from Turnbull to date.




Telstra will be happier with the Coalition's plan than Labor's, but not for the reason you suggest.



> MALCOLM TURNBULL: *We're not expecting to pay anything additional for Telstra's copper*.
> 
> LEIGH SALES:* Why is that?*
> 
> MALCOLM TURNBULL: *Because Telstra is being paid $1,500 or thereabouts per premise as is it cut over to the NBN. So they're in effect being paid for their copper already.* Their obligation is to decommission the copper. So what we're proposing to Telstra and we're very confident we can reach agreement here, is to say to them well, "you give us your copper," really the last 500, 800 metres or whatever what they call the D side copper. "You give us your copper and then we will, as premises are - as the NBN's fibre nodes are connected to that copper, those premises will be connected to the NBN and you will be paid the contracted amount."




My bolds.


----------



## FxTrader

drsmith said:


> MALCOLM TURNBULL: Speed is only valuable to you in so far as you can use it for something. The value or the utility of broadband does not increase in a linear fashion with the speed.
> 
> In other words, 20 megabits per second is not twice as useful or valuable to you as 10, and 40 is certainly not twice as valuable to you as 20.




This statement brings to mind something a acquaintance said to me many years ago now regarding hard disk capacity on a personal computer,  "what use could anyone have for a 40 gigabyte hard disk?" 

The obvious point being missed by Turnbull here is that speed (bandwidth) drives product and content innovation.  The greater the bandwidth for ALL users the greater the variety of content and services that can be delivered over the net.  There will likely be many use cases in the future where twice the bandwidth will deliver more than twice the utility or value for a particular service.


----------



## FxTrader

drsmith said:


> Telstra will be happier with the Coalition's plan than Labor's, but not for the reason you suggest.




You completely missed the point.  Telstra is being paid to decommission copper, yes.  But they actually have to do something to get that $1500 and maintain the rest of the CAN in the process.  Under the Libs proposal, Telstra get's paid the same amount to walk away from the cooper en mass once a fibre node is connected, fantastic!  That's what Turnbull appears to be saying.


----------



## drsmith

FxTrader said:


> You completed missed the point.




If I understand this correctly, what the NBN is actually paying for is the duct either way. 



FxTrader said:


> The obvious point being missed by Turnbull here is that speed (bandwidth) drives product and content innovation.  The greater the bandwidth for ALL users the greater the variety of content and services that can be delivered over the net.  There will likely be many use cases in the future where twice the bandwidth will deliver more than twice the utility or value for a particular service.




I think that was Labor's economic rationale.


----------



## drsmith

FxTrader said:


> You completely missed the point.  Telstra is being paid to decommission copper, yes.  But they actually have to do something to get that $1500 and maintain the rest of the CAN in the process.  Under the Libs proposal, Telstra get's paid the same amount to walk away from the cooper en mass once a fibre node is connected, fantastic!  That's what Turnbull appears to be saying.




That may be reading too much specific contractual detail from what he is saying.


----------



## tinhat

FxTrader said:


> Ok, let's dissect this little piece of polly babble.  Yes, Telstra is being paid to decommission each premises end point connection, copper out, fibre in and $1500 thanks.  Now if you say to Telstra "give us your copper" when we connect fibre to a street node and we will pay you $1500 for each copper connection to that node that is "connected to the NBN" (and all will be), Telstra will laugh all the way to the bank (seriously looking at TLS shares again).  Thanks for the quote, this has to be one of the most poorly considered and phrased statements I have seen from Turnbull to date.




The problem with Turnbill and all his ilk is that they somehow don't realise they are no longer in the school first debating team and that the bollocks that flows out of their mouth has even less intellectual rigour than the idiots they are debating against.

Turnbill is a convert to Catholicism out of his own free will. It takes a lonely boy to turn to the Church for comfort. A lot of  the rest of the senior ranks of the Liberal/Country party are Jesuit educated Catholics. The Pope is a Jesuit - God bless him - none of us ever realised that a back night of the church could rule the white knights. There you go, as if it even matters in this day and age.

It seems however that the Jesuits are good at producing good debaters but alas they can't substitute intellectualism for intelligence - despite their historic reputation for brilliant astrology they have little skill in alchemy!

So we have a bunch of intellectual lightweights running the Liberal/Country coalition who don't realise that just because the other team are completely bankrupt of any moral fibre and genuine purpose they too are completely lacking in the intelligence to ever deliver on their own banal platitudes.

Chairman Malcolm of the People's Democratic Republic of Australia. (Revolution now, broadband later).


----------



## moXJO

Wow dud policy libs.


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> Malcolm's Turnbull's analogy.
> "MALCOLM TURNBULL: No, you - provision for demand where it is today and in the foreseeable future. You don't - taking the approach of building - investing in infrastructure on the basis that you think It'll be needed in 20 years time, which is what Stephen Conroy is fond of saving, that could be said only by someone who doesn't care about taxpayers' money. You invest in infrastructure to cater for the demand today and in the foreseeable future and build into your plans the flexibility to expand further, if and when or as demand increases and that way, of course you take advantage of the latest developments in technology as you go."




This seems illogical to me, since when do we build infrastructure based on current demand?  The West Gate Bridge didn't need 4 lanes back in the 70s but it certainly does now.  The NBN is either build it once and build it right or don't build it at all.


----------



## Calliope

overhang said:


> This seems illogical to me, since when do we build infrastructure based on current demand?




Asylum seekers detention centres perhaps?



> MALCOLM TURNBULL: No, you - *provision for demand where it is today and in the foreseeable future.*


----------



## chiff

What I do know is that we had to get Wifi when the copper wires to us were  unreliable.Telstra ,despite many efforts,were unable to provide an acceptable ADSL2 broadband service.


----------



## sydboy007

It will be very interesting to see what the anticipated

* number of nodes will be
* opex to run said nodes
* cost of copper upgrades and maintenance over the next 10 years
* how long Telstra stall in their negotiations with a LNP Govt since they already have a signed contract and would be in no rush to lose their prime asset for anything less that full price.
* how much it will cost to redesign the NBN from the current rollout to a FTTN setup.
* who chooses the "impartial" committe to run the numbers over the two NBNs (I think we all know a Govt will only set up a committee so long as it can set the terms or reference in a way to give the answer they want)


I'm still not sure who "owns" the node.  Is it NBN or ?????

Does a whole area get cut over to a node at the same time, or do you have to request it?

How will they cope with the lack of records detailing exchange main cable pair to pillar then pillar to premises as few of the records are up to date so I can see a lot of time wasted trying to sync these back up - major outages for end users as well.


----------



## sptrawler

overhang said:


> This seems illogical to me, since when do we build infrastructure based on current demand?  The West Gate Bridge didn't need 4 lanes back in the 70s but it certainly does now.  The NBN is either build it once and build it right or don't build it at all.




On that basis, why wasn't it made 6, 8 or 10 lanes? 
By your logic, evenyually you will need them.
Applying the same reasoning, why wasn't the road over the Nullabor made 4 lanes.
Eventually you will need it.

For every piece of infrastructure you build, some other infrastructure doesn't get built, or is defered.

That is unless you just, spend, spend, spend. 
Then you get to a position where nothing gets built.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> MALCOLM TURNBULL: No, you - provision for demand where it is today and in the foreseeable future.







At this growth rate, how long before demand exceeds the ability of the Coalition's obsolete FTTN? Not very long. As always, the "foreseeable future" for the Coalition only gets them to the next election.


----------



## NBNMyths

You can see why they leaked it to their mates at News Ltd a few days ago. They wouldn't want comments like these showing up on the day they released their policy:


Geoff Huston, chief scientist of regional internet registry Asia-Pacific Network Information Centre and a former Telstra employee, said: 







> "What [the Coalition] is trying to say is 'what we do now on the internet is what we will do in the next 30 years'. What stupid nonsense! What we were doing 30 years ago modems could handle," Mr Huston said.
> *"I would side with the view that this [policy] is indeed a lemon."*




Sharing Mr Huston's concerns, senior lecturer at RMIT University's school of electrical and computer engineering, Mark Gregory, said 


> the Coalition's policy would harm the economy and would not future-proof the country's internet infrastructure.
> *''They're going to be putting Australia behind the rest of the world,''* Dr Gregory said of the Coalition's plan.





http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...there-first-20130409-2hjiw.html#ixzz2Q0uLo7nk


----------



## MrBurns

NBNMyths said:


> At this growth rate, how long before demand exceeds the ability of the Coalition's obsolete FTTN? Not very long. *As always, the "foreseeable future" for the Coalition only gets them to the next election*.




Seems your slant on this is based on political bias

My slant on this is based on personal observation, I wouldn't trust Gillard or Conroy with anything let alone a project of this size so unless you think the Greens could handle it it's up to the Libs.....As Always.


----------



## NBNMyths

MrBurns said:


> Seems your slant on this is based on political bias
> 
> My slant on this is based on personal observation, I wouldn't trust Gillard or Conroy with anything let alone a project of this size so unless you think the Greens could handle it it's up to the Libs.....As Always.




I would *LOVE* them to say "We think Labor are managing this project badly. We will take over and build it more efficiently".

But that isn't what they are doing. Of course it's faster and cheaper to build a tent instead of a house. Doesn't mean it's sensible.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> You can see why they leaked it to their mates at News Ltd a few days ago. They wouldn't want comments like these showing up on the day they released their policy:
> 
> 
> Geoff Huston, chief scientist of regional internet registry Asia-Pacific Network Information Centre and a former Telstra employee, said:
> 
> Sharing Mr Huston's concerns, senior lecturer at RMIT University's school of electrical and computer engineering, Mark Gregory, said
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...there-first-20130409-2hjiw.html#ixzz2Q0uLo7nk




Somewhat like quoting, some health experts on  a decission to spending more or less in the health services field.

Or asking AGL or Origin energy if they would like billions of public money spent on "super conductor" development and deployment.

The bias will be obvious, depending on the answer you want.

Running fibre to every house, is a gross waste of money.IMO
The election will prove what the silent majority think.


----------



## MrBurns

NBNMyths said:


> I would *LOVE*
> But that isn't what they are doing. Of course it's faster and cheaper to build a tent instead of a house. Doesn't mean it's sensible.




You forget Labor haven't finished anything , the only project they've finished is trashing our surplus.

We can only afford a tent thanks to the socialist looters and they couldn't even deliver that so step aside and let some responsible people step in.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> I would *LOVE* them to say "We think Labor are managing this project badly. We will take over and build it more efficiently".
> 
> But that isn't what they are doing. Of course it's faster and cheaper to build a tent instead of a house. Doesn't mean it's sensible.




Again an opinion. 
I think the comparison is more like a 4 bedroom 1 bathroom or a massive palace.
I suppose it depends who you are housing.

Then again, maybe everyone will take the palace, if they think someone else is paying for it. I don't suscribe to that belief.

Somewhat like the massive public outdry we are hearing in the press, depends who you listen to and what you want to hear.

This article somewhat puts it in perspective.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/po...i-cry-foul-over-fraudband-20130410-2hkdq.html

Personaly I am of the belief, most people don't care wether it's 50mb/s or 100mb/s. I may be wrong, the election will say.


----------



## drsmith

tinhat said:


> Chairman Malcolm of the People's Democratic Republic of Australia. (Revolution now, broadband later).



He must have done something right.

You're playing the man.


----------



## drsmith

moXJO said:


> Wow dud policy libs.




From the project where it stands the next election, what else could have they done other than FTTH ?

I ask this not as a criticism of the above viewpoint, but as an open question to the floor.


----------



## Ves

sptrawler said:


> Personaly I am of the belief, most people don't care wether it's 50mb/s or 100mb/s. I may be wrong, the election will say.



Except, you, me and every other rational person knows that this issue will not be the one that decides, or even heavily influences the election result.

There's a saying about democracy.   You can take any two idiots, and their shared opinion will always matter more than the most intelligent person in the country.


----------



## McLovin

The government hasn't been able to borrow at such low rates of interest in generations. I say build a decent network that will still be scalable (is that the right IT term?) in 20, 30, 40, 50 years' time. No point building another Spit Bridge, or M5 East. And I'd much rather my money was spent doing something that benefits the country than being squandered on property tax breaks, propping up the super balances of millionaires or being handed out to middle class families so they can afford their annual trip to Bali.


----------



## overhang

sptrawler said:


> On that basis, why wasn't it made 6, 8 or 10 lanes?
> By your logic, evenyually you will need them.
> Applying the same reasoning, why wasn't the road over the Nullabor made 4 lanes.
> Eventually you will need it.
> 
> For every piece of infrastructure you build, some other infrastructure doesn't get built, or is defered.
> 
> That is unless you just, spend, spend, spend.
> Then you get to a position where nothing gets built.




Actually to stick with the roads analogy the coalitions plan is the equivalent of building the bridge with 4 lanes but having a gravel road leading up to the bridge (a gravel road with no maintenance).  Like I say build it once and build it right or don't build it at all.

I'm curious to those of you who have rigorously opposed the NBN from the outset, how do you feel about the coalitions policy?  Do you support the coalitions policy or is this simply a matter that you believe broadband infrastructure should be left to the free market to decide, in which case naturally you'd support the cheaper option between the two parties?


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> I would *LOVE* them to say "We think Labor are managing this project badly. We will take over and build it more efficiently.
> 
> But that isn't what they are doing. Of course it's faster and cheaper to build a tent instead of a house. Doesn't mean it's sensible.




In line with Labor's scorched earth policy, NBN Co, are spending like drunken sailors. The Coalition will be saddled with the dead weight of the billions that NBN has committed to irreversible contracts that are going nowhere. Turnbull said;



> “Tony and I are inheriting the NBN Co. But we're not about just moaning and groaning about the bad decisions made preceding it. What we are going to do is get this job done.
> 
> “And we will bring very fast broadband to all Australians sooner, cheaper and more affordably.
> 
> “*We would not have gone about it this way, and there will be billions of dollars that Labor has wasted that we cannot recover. But we will save many billions of dollars.*”



(My bolds)



> But that isn't what they are doing. Of course it's faster and cheaper to build a tent instead of a house. Doesn't mean it's sensible.




You, of course will be outside the tent. When Conroy, Quigley, Kaiser and company get the bullet after September, your job as NBN Co's cheerleader will also go.


----------



## drsmith

Malcolm Turnbull interview with the ABC's Jon Faine.

http://www.abc.net.au/local/audio/2013/04/10/3733650.htm?site=melbourne&program=melbourne_mornings

Tony Windsor's take,

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...ndsor-thinks-he-knows-more-than-turnbull.html


----------



## Julia

Could some informed person please tell me how practical it is for the copper network to continue to supply the connection from the node to the home?
Some opinions seem to indicate the copper is pretty much stuffed and will need replacing before too long anyway.
Is this correct?

If the copper is fine well into the future, then the cost and time savings of the Coalition's plan seem preferable, but not if they're going to have to backtrack and replace the copper in the foreseeable future.


----------



## NBNMyths

overhang said:


> Actually to stick with the roads analogy the coalitions plan is the equivalent of building the bridge with 4 lanes but having a gravel road leading up to the bridge (a gravel road with no maintenance).  Like I say build it once and build it right or don't build it at all.
> 
> I'm curious to those of you who have rigorously opposed the NBN from the outset, how do you feel about the coalitions policy?  Do you support the coalitions policy or is this simply a matter that you believe broadband infrastructure should be left to the free market to decide, in which case naturally you'd support the cheaper option between the two parties?




Speaking of bridge analogies:


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Speaking of bridge analogies:



Except that to suggest that one has to purchase the fibre service from the node to the home to get any landline based service is just plain wrong.

The Coalition's plan is upgradable to fibre between the node and the home, so perhaps the most valid analogy is having the land set aside to duplicate the bridge in the future.


----------



## drsmith

Julia said:


> If the copper is fine well into the future, then the cost and time savings of the Coalition's plan seem preferable, but not if they're going to have to backtrack and replace the copper in the foreseeable future.




Malcolm Turnbull did address this at least in part. It doesn't detail the proportion of sub-standard copper in the network as a whole, but it does address the Coalition's approach to managing it.



> LEIGH SALES: Are they still then responsible for maintaining the copper?
> 
> MALCOLM TURNBULL: That is a matter that would be the responsibility of the NBN Co and may well contract Telstra to maintain that copper. And what you do, just to go through the mechanics here, if you've got an area, this area in front of us is a portion of a suburb, you will form a judgment about the quality of the copper in that area. There may be some that you will remediate, that you will upgrade with copper. There may be an area that perhaps is very wet ground that floods a lot, you've had a lot of maintenance problems. And so you might say alright, we'll run fibre through there. So what you do is you make sensible, cost effective decisions about the upgrading the network and so that you can do it in a speedy and you've got to remember, under our plan, I mean Labor's got an ad out there saying connecting to Labor's NBN will be free. Can you imagine a bigger falsehood than that? It will be $94 billion to the taxpayer and as we've demonstrated in our policy documents today, it's considerably, on average, at least $300 a year more for people to actually connect to it.




If we assume a worst case scenario that all the copper is in poor repair, then the Coalition would effectively be building Labor's NBN at the obviously greater cost. This is obviously not the case, but it does help to illustrate their approach of minimising cost by using existing infrastructure for the remainder of its useful life wherever possible. In a policy context, it's now really the only substantive difference between the Coalition's and Labor's NBN.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Malcolm Turnbull did address this at least in part. It doesn't detail the proportion of sub-standard copper in the network as a whole, but it does address the Coalition's approach to managing it.
> 
> 
> 
> If we assume a worst case scenario that all the copper is in poor repair, then the Coalition would effectively be building Labor's NBN at the obviously greater cost. This is obviously not the case, but it does help to illustrate their approach of minimising cost by using existing infrastructure for the remainder of its useful life wherever possible. In a policy context, it's now really the only substantive difference between the Coalition's and Labor's NBN.




Tech/speed/need criticisms aside, there is one other gaping hole in the policy which is worth addressing. They claim that they will deliver minimum 25Mbps to every Australian by 2016.

To deliver a minimum 25Mbps means they need to rollout VDSL2 to the entire NBN fibre footprint, because ADSL2+ cannot do that speed. So they are claiming they can:

1) Conduct a cost-benefit analysis (6 months?);
2) Renegotiate the Telstra deal (which took 2 years to be agreed upon);
3) Design a network to deliver 25Mbps to everyone (would require accurate maps of current network, which often don't exist);
4) Tender and let equipment contracts;
5) Negotiate with power utilities and councils
6) Tender and let construction contracts; and
7) ...finally, construct several 10's-of-thousands of FTTN node cabinets, power them, run fibre to them, and deploy VDSL2 equipment into them and make about 10 million fibre-copper connections.

...all in less than 3 years.

Not a snowball's chance in hell.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Tech/speed/need criticisms aside, there is one other gaping hole in the policy which is worth addressing. They claim that they will deliver minimum 25Mbps to every Australian by 2016.




It's a worthy set of questions in itself, but from where Labor stands with the rollout of the current NBN, people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.


----------



## MrBurns

NBNMyths said:


> 1) Conduct a cost-benefit analysis (6 months?);
> 2) Renegotiate the Telstra deal (which took 2 years to be agreed upon);
> 3) Design a network to deliver 25Mbps to everyone (would require accurate maps of current network, which often don't exist);
> 4) Tender and let equipment contracts;
> 5) Negotiate with power utilities and councils
> 6) Tender and let construction contracts; and
> 7) ...finally, construct several 10's-of-thousands of FTTN node cabinets, power them, run fibre to them, and deploy VDSL2 equipment into them and make about 10 million fibre-copper connections.
> 
> ...all in less than 3 years.
> 
> Not a snowball's chance in hell.




Minor details no problem at all, I agree there's not a snowballs chance in hell that Labor could achieve that.


----------



## Calliope

MrBurns said:


> Minor details no problem at all, I agree there's not a snowballs chance in hell that Labor could achieve that.




It's simply a matter of who has more credibility on broadband - Conroy or Turnbull. I would love to see them debate the issue.


----------



## Ves

Can one of the Liberal party experts here please explain to us all the devil-in-the-detail surrounding Turnball's claim that Labour's NBN will cost $94 billion.   I'm sure it's a real zinger and a lesson in utter credibility.


----------



## drsmith

Calliope said:


> It's simply a matter of who has more credibility on broadband - Conroy or Turnbull. I would love to see them debate the issue.




IIRC, QandA were going to have a series of policy specific episodes. One with Conroy or Turnbull would be interesting. No other panellists though. They would just be a distraction.


----------



## sptrawler

McLovin said:


> The government hasn't been able to borrow at such low rates of interest in generations. I say build a decent network that will still be scalable (is that the right IT term?) in 20, 30, 40, 50 years' time. No point building another Spit Bridge, or M5 East. And I'd much rather my money was spent doing something that benefits the country than being squandered on property tax breaks, propping up the super balances of millionaires or being handed out to middle class families so they can afford their annual trip to Bali.




I would go along with you, if there weren't any other pressing infrastructure issues, if the government was running surpluses and if the government wasn't screaming poor.
They can't have it all ways, you can't say it's a great time to max out the credit card because rates are low.
Then in the next breath turn around and say tax reciepts are droping, we've got to increase taxing and find savings. To me it's illogical,
IMO the coalition idea appears a workable compromise.
I can understand the tech wiz users are not happy, they want the best.
From an economic standpoint, businesses, industry and heavy data users get it, the household gets what can supply adequate speeds at a reasonable price.
I must admit, I'm not a heavy or even moderate internet user, so it really doesn't bother me.


----------



## Calliope

Ves said:


> Can one of the Liberal party experts here please explain to us all the devil-in-the-detail surrounding Turnball's claim that Labour's NBN will cost $94 billion.   I'm sure it's a real zinger and a lesson in utter credibility.




Exactly - and Conroy's credibility is shot to ribbons until he can provide an answer to this claim. I am sure he doesn't have the intelligence. His denials are all bluster, because he can't refute it with hard evidence. At the rate NBN costs and over-runs are blowing out, $94 million might be a conservative figure.

But why should they care. As usual the Coalition will have to clean up the mess.


----------



## Ves

Calliope said:


> $94 million might be a conservative figure.



Turnball's own press papers indicate that it is a worst case figure based on a number of scenarios, all happening at once. He, of course, never mentioned that, nor was he questioned on it.  The media don't give a **** where the figure comes from because it's easier to just quote it and assume it's reality.  The public gobbles it up because it's an understandable number. Who cares, really.

And that's exactly what is wrong with modern politics. No one looks behind the quoted figures.


----------



## MrBurns

Ves said:


> Turnball's own press papers indicate that it is a worst case figure based on a number of scenarios, all happening at once. .




Oh... I needed a good laugh    if you haven't noticed the Labor party are certified specialists in achieving the worst case scenario on everything they touch, this would be an easy one for them.


----------



## Ves

MrBurns said:


> Oh... I needed a good laugh    if you haven't noticed the Labor party are certified specialists in achieving the worst case scenario on everything they touch, this would be an easy one for them.



The worst case scenarios aren't dependent on the Labor party.   Thanks for proving you haven't read it.


----------



## MrBurns

Ves said:


> The worst case scenarios aren't dependent on the Labor party.   Thanks for proving you haven't read it.




The big picture is that Labor will stuff it up without any other factors contributing.

There will be cost blowouts but not an uncontrollable disaster unless Labor are running it.


----------



## drsmith

The Coalition's background paper on the NBN,

http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Background.pdf

Their comparison between FFTN and FFTP is on pages 14 and 15.

The assumptions outlining the Coalition's higher costings are also outlined in the latter part of the report.


----------



## MrBurns

drsmith said:


> The Coalition's background paper on the NBN,
> 
> http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Background.pdf
> 
> Their comparison between FFTN and FFTP is on pages 14 and 15.
> 
> The assumptions outlining the Coalition's higher costings are also outlined in the latter part of the report.




Thanks drsmith, quite clear the cost savings are worthwhile but the fact that it will be up and running sooner is a big plus.


----------



## sptrawler

sptrawler said:


> I would go along with you, if there weren't any other pressing infrastructure issues, if the government was running surpluses and if the government wasn't screaming poor.
> They can't have it all ways, you can't say it's a great time to max out the credit card because rates are low.
> Then in the next breath turn around and say tax reciepts are droping, we've got to increase taxing and find savings. To me it's illogical,
> IMO the coalition idea appears a workable compromise.
> I can understand the tech wiz users are not happy, they want the best.
> From an economic standpoint, businesses, industry and heavy data users get it, the household gets what can supply adequate speeds at a reasonable price.
> I must admit, I'm not a heavy or even moderate internet user, so it really doesn't bother me.




To highlight my statements, here's a link to good ole Wayne.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-04-...ates-revenue-warning/4620532?section=business


----------



## Ves

MrBurns said:


> Thanks drsmith, quite clear the cost savings are worthwhile but the fact that it will be up and running sooner is a big plus.




And if it is not up and running will you man up and admit you were wrong?   I doubt it, you will look the other way and pretend it didn't happen like you always do.


----------



## MrBurns

Ves said:


> And if it is not up and running will you man up and admit you were wrong?   I doubt it, you will look the other way and pretend it didn't happen like you always do.




Like I always do ????? 
Stop making things up.

This will be up and running, it's a Lib project not Labor.


----------



## Julia

> Originally Posted by McLovin
> The government hasn't been able to borrow at such low rates of interest in generations. I say build a decent network that will still be scalable (is that the right IT term?) in 20, 30, 40, 50 years' time. No point building another Spit Bridge, or M5 East. And I'd much rather my money was spent doing something that benefits the country than being squandered on property tax breaks, propping up the super balances of millionaires or being handed out to middle class families so they can afford their annual trip to Bali.



Completely agree about the middle class welfare issue, but do we really want to max out the card just because we can?
If you were to continue the same principle more broadly, you'd say "well, we have a lot of hospitals which are old and almost dysfunctional, so let's knock them down and build state-of-the-art new hospitals that will deliver better care." " We owe less than many other countries so it's just fine to do this."

Ditto across all sorts of other issues where service delivery could be hugely improved if cost were no object.

Surely there has to be a point where we place a higher priority on living within our means than necessarily having the latest supa dupa version of everything?



sptrawler said:


> I would go along with you, if there weren't any other pressing infrastructure issues, if the government was running surpluses and if the government wasn't screaming poor.
> They can't have it all ways, you can't say it's a great time to max out the credit card because rates are low.
> Then in the next breath turn around and say tax reciepts are droping, we've got to increase taxing and find savings. To me it's illogical,
> IMO the coalition idea appears a workable compromise.
> I can understand the tech wiz users are not happy, they want the best.
> From an economic standpoint, businesses, industry and heavy data users get it, the household gets what can supply adequate speeds at a reasonable price.
> I must admit, I'm not a heavy or even moderate internet user, so it really doesn't bother me.


----------



## So_Cynical

NBNMyths said:


> I would *LOVE* them to say "We think Labor are managing this project badly. We will take over and build it more efficiently"..




Yep i thought the exact same thing, but that's not what there saying at all, what they are saying is we are going to half **** it.

Fact is the noalition has been dragged kicking and screaming into this and they are determined to wreck it, 3 years of negotiations, 100's of contracts and billions spent all ready and they are gona wreck it.



Julia said:


> Could some informed person please tell me how practical it is for the copper network to continue to supply the connection from the node to the home?
> Some opinions seem to indicate the copper is pretty much stuffed and will need replacing before too long anyway.
> Is this correct?
> 
> If the copper is fine well into the future, then the cost and time savings of the Coalition's plan seem preferable, but not if they're going to have to backtrack and replace the copper in the foreseeable future.




If and when the copper degrades enough it will be replaced by fibre....so really the noalition are just delaying the inevitable.



MrBurns said:


> This will be up and running, it's a Lib project not Labor.




What's the last major infrastructure project they handled?


----------



## Ves

Julia said:


> Completely agree about the middle class welfare issue, but do we really want to max out the card just because we can?
> If you were to continue the same principle more broadly, you'd say "well, we have a lot of hospitals which are old and almost dysfunctional, so let's knock them down and build state-of-the-art new hospitals that will deliver better care." " We owe less than many other countries so it's just fine to do this."
> 
> Ditto across all sorts of other issues where service delivery could be hugely improved if cost were no object.
> 
> Surely there has to be a point where we place a higher priority on living within our means than necessarily having the latest supa dupa version of everything?



Difference between the NBN and hospital infrastructure (and other projects like freeways and roads) is that the projected revenues / rate of return of a project like the NBN is much higher than hospital infrastructure.

The biggest debate, between the Coalition and the government, was originally will the NBN make a profit. I am pretty sure at the moment, it is not being treated as part of the federal budget, because it is considered to be an investment that will see a return made by the government further down the track.


----------



## medicowallet

So_Cynical said:


> If and when the copper degrades enough it will be replaced by fibre....so really the noalition are just delaying the inevitable.




In my business, I was using pentium 3 windows 98 computers when much better and faster technology was available.  I was also using older versions of accounting programs etc.

But guess what, they did the same job, and I got my value for money out of them.

Only an incompetent fool would pay for an asset and then not utilise it whilst they could, and invested the money instead to replace it at a lower cost at a later date.

MW


----------



## bellenuit

Ves said:


> I am pretty sure at the moment, it is not being treated as part of the federal budget, because it is considered to be an investment that will see a return made by the government further down the track.




As far as I understand how it works is that it can be kept off the balance sheet so long as the value of the NBN is not less than the cost to build it. In other words they capitalise the cost to build it and treat it as an asset on the books, that will presumably be depreciated over time, but with the depreciation off set by the revenue it produces. Presumably its value is determined by the NPV of its revenue stream or sell price if sold.

Should this valuation turn out to be less (or more) than the expenditure on it, the difference has to be taken on to the current account as a loss (or profit).

So when they say the NBN will cost us nothing, they are implying that its value, as either an ongoing government  utility realising revenue or its sale price if sold, is more than the expenditure sunk in its construction. Cost blowouts and construction delays will increase the latter, but its income producing capacity is limited to what the consumer will pay for the service. This is why the ACCC is keeping a close eye on it to make sure they can't create an inelastic demand by stifling competition.


----------



## Calliope

Ves said:


> Turnball's own press papers indicate that it is a worst case figure based on a number of scenarios, all happening at once. He, of course, never mentioned that, nor was he questioned on it.




Labor and Conroy can be depended on to deliver "worst case" scenarios. This is one area where your mob seldom fails to deliver.

Sorry Vesup, you are backing the losing team. You'll just have to get over it.


----------



## NBNMyths

MrBurns said:


> Like I always do ?????
> Stop making things up.
> 
> This will be up and running, it's a Lib project not Labor.




How are those new choppers for the Navy going? 

http://www.theage.com.au/news/natio...elicopters-deal/2008/03/05/1204402555584.html


----------



## NBNMyths

MrBurns said:


> Like I always do ?????
> Stop making things up.
> 
> This will be up and running, it's a Lib project not Labor.




Oh, and the North West rail link, too?

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...go-off-the-track/story-e6freuy9-1226581478490

The myth of conservative Government competence lives on, for some.


----------



## Ves

Calliope said:


> Sorry Vesup, you are backing the losing team. You'll just have to get over it.



Nope,  I don't believe in the need to have a "team."   Whilst there is a need for a strong opposition in government because certain policies are downright bad or harmful,  development and progression in modern societies is often stifled because dominant political parties are seen to need to be oppositional no matter the circumstances.   Often they would achieve more by working together and dropping the notion that they are two teams playing against each other.  I'm more interested in discussing the merits of policies than cheerleading.   It's not the modus operandi of most on this forum, but that's what I have to deal with.


----------



## MrBurns

NBNMyths said:


> Oh, and the North West rail link, too?
> 
> http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...go-off-the-track/story-e6freuy9-1226581478490
> 
> The myth of conservative Government competence lives on, for some.




That hasn't been started so we still know in advance of the costs unlike the NBN fiasco.


----------



## MrBurns

NBNMyths said:


> How are those new choppers for the Navy going?
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/news/natio...elicopters-deal/2008/03/05/1204402555584.html




Started in 1897 sorry 1997 article from 2008 grasping at straws, you have to go a long way back to find anything even as small as that compared to Labors gigantic surplus sucking blunders......give up.


----------



## sptrawler

At last, now the self serving, self interest and one eyed hyperbowl and spin has settled, Sensible discussion commences.

http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...ions-nbn-plan-makes-sense-20130410-2hkx2.html

http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...deal-but-prudent-turnbull-20130410-2hkye.html

My guess the result, whoever delivers it will be, will be well short of what either party are proposing.

Costs will constantly blow out to the point where it is eventually abadoned. IMO 

At that point ,new developments will get fibre and older areas will be done as required. Somewhat like the underground power scheme currently being carried out.


----------



## Calliope

Michael Quigley is due for the chop.



> opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull declared that the performance of NBN Co management had been "very unsatisfactory".
> 
> "The fact they have missed so many targets surely is enough evidence for that," Mr Turnbull said.
> 
> NBN Co chief executive Michael Quigley, a former executive at French equipment giant Alcatel-Lucent, was no doubt "a very capable man and respected in the industry" but was "the wrong choice for this job", Mr Turnbull said.
> 
> "He spent his life working for a vendor," he said. "The person who should be running the NBN Co should be someone that has been responsible for a telecom network business or has been involved in the construction of them. Someone who sells electronic kit is not a million miles away from that but is (in) a very, very different business and I think the problems they are having with construction are not unrelated to that.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...e-says-coalition/story-e6frgaif-1226617770635


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Michael Quigley is due for the chop.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...e-says-coalition/story-e6frgaif-1226617770635




If I was Mike Quigley, I'd resign if they really try to cancel the NBN for FTTN "fraudband".

He was retired before the NBN and gave away his first years salary. He obviously doesn't need the money. He stated that he only came out of retirement because he believes in making history with an FTTP NBN.

Why would you want to go down in history instead as the one presiding over a company that switched from modern FTTP to a technology that's obsolete before it's even switched on?

You know those infamous quotes we laugh about today, like _"we don't need the telephone because we have messenger boys"_, and _"there's only a world market for 5 computers"_?

Well, Tony and Malcolm's statement the other day that _"we are absolutely confident that 25megs is going to be more than enough"_ will look just as stupid in 10 years time.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> If I was Mike Quigley, I'd resign if they really try to cancel the NBN for FTTN "fraudband".



As a long time supporter on the ALP's NBN model, I would have thought that there would be some joy on your part that the Coalition is maintaining that basic structure and that their version can be rolled out quicker due to less overall capital works. 

While the Coalition is not all going the way with FTTP, it remains and option for the future. 

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...=21778&page=99&p=765182&viewfull=1#post765182 

A glass that is 1/4 empty is 3/4 full.


----------



## bellenuit

NBNMyths said:


> You know those infamous quotes we laugh about today, like _"we don't need the telephone because we have messenger boys"_, and _"there's only a world market for 5 computers"_




Yep, IBM Watson's quote of there only being a worldwide demand for 5 computers. At that time, the one computer they had built cost tens of millions of dollars. We now know today's demand runs into the hundreds of millions of computers each year. 

If Watson had the foresight of Conroy, he could have built millions of computers at the time, each costing tens of millions of dollars. But instead he used backward thinking and only built what was needed to meet foreseeable demand. And the computers he could have built using the then technology would have been completely future proof, as they used the latest in valve technology and what possibly could come along to replace valves. And look at the great deals he could have got from suppliers by placing a huge order for the supply of the then state of the art components that would meet supply for the next 50 years. Imagine where IBM would be today if they had Conroy in charge. Instead they missed out on the vast revenues they could have got by exploiting the computer age and all they can show for their troubles are 5 obsolete computers.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths;765521Well said:
			
		

> "we are absolutely confident that 25megs is going to be more than enough"[/I] will look just as stupid in 10 years time.




Not as stupid as providing 100megs to the vast majority who have no use for it and at a huge and unnecessary cost. I am afraid that your love for Quigley overrides your commonsense. In any case the Turnbull model will deliver;



> 90 per cent of households will get 50 to 100 megabit downloads and they will get it for one third of the cost of Labor's broadband."




http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2013/04/10/08/53/abbott-denies-coalition-s-nbn-plan-slower

Bellenuit 

You have provided the commonsense that Myths lacks.


----------



## Knobby22

1/3 of the cost? Hard to believe.


----------



## Ves

Knobby22 said:


> 1/3 of the cost? Hard to believe.



That's best case scenario costing on Libs vs worst case scenario costing on Labor.   As  I said previously, it is easy to present figures when no one bothers to question them any more.


----------



## drsmith

On the topic of figures, the discount rate applied to the vast majority of NBN Co $11bn of payments to Telstra is 10%. 

From Malcolm Turnbull's background papers,



> In June 2011 Senator Stephen Conroy claimed the NBN Co and TUSMA payments to Telstra outlined in the two paragraphs above had a combined value of $11 billion in after‐tax June 2010 dollars. But the true present value (and cost to taxpayers) of these payments is in the range of $20‐25 billion if a 7 per cent discount rate (which more appropriately reflects the very minimal risk of non‐payment by the Government and a wholly government‐owned company) is used instead of 8‐10 per cent. The Coalition’s preference for a more honest and accurate estimate of the expense of this deal to the Government and NBN Co does not imply any stance regarding its validity, which was a matter settled by the parties at the time of the negotiation.


----------



## NBNMyths

bellenuit said:


> If Watson had the foresight of Conroy, he could have built millions of computers at the time, each costing tens of millions of dollars. But instead he used backward thinking and only built what was needed to meet foreseeable demand. And the computers he could have built using the then technology would have been completely future proof, as they used the latest in valve technology and what possibly could come along to replace valves. And look at the great deals he could have got from suppliers by placing a huge order for the supply of the then state of the art components that would meet supply for the next 50 years. Imagine where IBM would be today if they had Conroy in charge. Instead they missed out on the vast revenues they could have got by exploiting the computer age and all they can show for their troubles are 5 obsolete computers.




Very poor analogy. 

Unlike tech equipment, which always gets cheaper over time due to economies of scale, the cost of rolling out a physical network only gets _more expensive _over time.

Most of the cost involved in building a FTTP NBN is the physical work of laying the cables, not the cables themselves. So while building FTTP today would cost ~$40bn, building the same network in 20 years will probably cost ~$80bn. On top of the $15-odd billion you'd then throw away in FTTN equipment, cabinets and construction labour.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> As a long time supporter on the ALP's NBN model, I would have thought that there would be some joy on your part that the Coalition is maintaining that basic structure and that their version can be rolled out quicker due to less overall capital works.
> 
> While the Coalition is not all going the way with FTTP, it remains and option for the future.
> 
> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...=21778&page=99&p=765182&viewfull=1#post765182
> 
> A glass that is 1/4 empty is 3/4 full.




Oh, it's better than the 2010 policy, no doubt at all:

Improved headline download speeds; Maintaining NBN Co as a wholesaler; maintaining the rural wireless/sat components; the requirement that the FTTN network be provisioned for a future upgrade to FTTP (so at least they won't have to re-run fibre sections).

However, there are also bad points:

Real speed still highly variable based on distance and copper quality; Poor value for money (cost for capability); Low upload speeds; Removal of universal pricing, to be replaced with caps. (In practise, this inevitably means regional areas will end up paying more than metro areas.)


But the improvement in the policy since 2010 is perhaps the best evidence of just how substandard it still is. In 2010, Turnbull said that 12Mbps was enough for any application.

Yet here we are _just 3 years later_, and he's promising a policy that offers between 25 and 100Mbps. His idea of "adequate" has increased by between 2x and 8x in under 3 years, and we now have 44% of NBN customers choosing 100Mbps speeds.

In 2010, he said there was no foreseeable home usage that would require more than 12Mbps. Last year, the standard for 4kTV was released, requiring 28Mbps per channel. In the next couple of years, 8kTV will be ratified, probably requiring 60-70Mbps per channel.

The thought that by 2020_ "25megs will be more than enough"_ for many users is utterly absurd. 

Think back a decade to 128k ADSL and ask yourself whether you could have imagined that a typical broadband connection of 12Mbps (100x faster!) would be struggling to cope with demand today. Do we really think that demand will suddenly plateau now? I think not.

The coalition (and many on this forum) seem to forget that it takes 10-odd years to replace a network. It is madness to build one provisioned for the demands of today. You build one provisioned for the estimated demands in 10, 20, 30 years time.

A very telling factor is the absolute lack of support amongst the ITC community for the coalition policy. These are the people best qualified to advise on the best solution, and they are (almost to a man) highly critical of the plan to scale back to FTTN. Every projection I have seen from industry heavyweights (like Cisco) indicate that there is no foreseeable end for the demand for higher speeds. yet the Coalition policy is essentially banking on such an end occurring quite soon.

Mark my words. In 10 years, we will massively regret the decision to go with FTTN today.


----------



## sydboy007

I still can't believe MT when he says the NoBN will be able to provide EVERYONE with a minimum of 25Mbs by 2016 - unless there's a little * with the up to again.

There is no way they could install the 70,000+ nodes in just 3 years.  It will probably take a year just to get the vendors to the beauty pageant and road test the nodes.  Love to see how they cope with the Australian summers.

I'd also say after the first year we'll have an idea of just how much extra spending will be required to fix up the copper.  Seems a bit crazy to me to argue you'll build it cheaper because you use the existing copper, only to then have to replace a large portion of it.  May as well run fiber then - oh wait you could maybe get that if you're willing to pay around $5000.

Will be interesting to see how the bush handles this.  The Nationals are going to have to talk fast and use a lot of snake oil to try and sell this to their constituents.

$29 Billion spent on a network that will probably be too slow before they even finish it.  Crap upload speeds will kill off many applications.


----------



## NBNMyths

This just in:


----------



## NBNMyths

After the brief honeymoon period from leaking their policy to News Ltd a couple of days early, the coalition 'NBN' plan has become the subject of almost universal criticism, which has now moved on to comedy and ridicule.

And it just keeps on getting better:


----------



## MrBurns

NBNMyths said:


> After the brief honeymoon period from leaking their policy to News Ltd a couple of days early, the coalition 'NBN' plan has become the subject of almost universal criticism, which has now moved on to comedy and ridicule.
> 
> And it just keeps on getting better:




I'm looking forward to a real laugh on Sept 14th.......


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Mark my words. In 10 years, we will massively regret the decision to go with FTTN today.






NBNMyths said:


> This just in:




It’s good you've been able to acknowledge the likelihood of a Coalition Government coming to power at the next election and smile on the same day.


----------



## drsmith

Myths, 
Responses to your earlier points are highlighted in blue. This was more time efficient than fiddling with quote tags on individual points.

Oh, it's better than the 2010 policy, no doubt at all:

Improved headline download speeds; Maintaining NBN Co as a wholesaler; maintaining the rural wireless/sat components; the requirement that the FTTN network be provisioned for a future upgrade to FTTP (so at least they won't have to re-run fibre sections). 

An acknowledgement of the upgradability. Good.

However, there are also bad points:

Real speed still highly variable based on distance and copper quality; Poor value for money (cost for capability); Low upload speeds; Removal of universal pricing, to be replaced with caps. (In practise, this inevitably means regional areas will end up paying more than metro areas.)

What about the time value of money ?
With cost for capability, value is not linearly proportional to bandwidth.
Upload speeds: This is one where I haven't seen much commentary.
With regard to regional pricing, the Coalition's wholesale price structure is cheaper overall, so that's only relative to their urban prices, not Labor's.

But the improvement in the policy since 2010 is perhaps the best evidence of just how substandard it still is. In 2010, Turnbull said that 12Mbps was enough for any application.

In 2010, the NBN was going to pass 1.3 million premises by June 30 2013.

Yet here we are _just 3 years later_, and he's promising a policy that offers between 25 and 100Mbps. 

Proof that technological advances in data transfer through copper are still ongoing.

His idea of "adequate" has increased by between 2x and 8x in under 3 years, and we now have 44% of NBN customers choosing 100Mbps speeds.

44% of what proportion with an NBN service available of what proportion of the rollout schedule actually achieved ?
To what extent is this early adopters ?

In 2010, he said there was no foreseeable home usage that would require more than 12Mbps. Last year, the standard for 4kTV was released, requiring 28Mbps per channel. In the next couple of years, 8kTV will be ratified, probably requiring 60-70Mbps per channel.

Timing of large scale future market penetration of 4 or 8k HDTV beyond niche ?  

The thought that by 2020_ "25megs will be more than enough"_ for many users is utterly absurd.

The thought that by 2020, Labor's NBN rollout will be anywhere near complete is utterly absurd.

Think back a decade to 128k ADSL and ask yourself whether you could have imagined that a typical broadband connection of 12Mbps (100x faster!) would be struggling to cope with demand today. Do we really think that demand will suddenly plateau now? I think not.

Take myself back a decade and I was paying the same for that 128k ADSL with a download limit of a few gig to where am now paying a similar amount in nominal terms for a service approximately 50x better in both speed and download limits, driven by technological advancement.  The problem here with Labor's plan is that the rollout cost of the technology (fibre) is such that for the capital cost to be recovered and a ROI, many households may be priced out of the higher end plans which you claim to be so essential. This too in a constantly evolving technological environment.

The coalition (and many on this forum) seem to forget that it takes 10-odd years to replace a network. It is madness to build one provisioned for the demands of today. You build one provisioned for the estimated demands in 10, 20, 30 years time.

It doesn't take 10 years (or more) to achieve significant improvements by assessing economic merit and prioritising upgrades on that basis. 

A very telling factor is the absolute lack of support amongst the ITC community for the coalition policy. These are the people best qualified to advise on the best solution, and they are (almost to a man) highly critical of the plan to scale back to FTTN. Every projection I have seen from industry heavyweights (like Cisco) indicate that there is no foreseeable end for the demand for higher speeds. yet the Coalition policy is essentially banking on such an end occurring quite soon.

The Coalition with its policy is not banking on such an end occurring quite soon at all. Also, who is this ITC community ?

Executives of other companies rolling out networks around the world or niche enthusiasts with an interest in the area ?
To the extent that it's the latter, their perspective may differ to that of the public at large.

*As a final point Myths, have you read in full the background document behind the Coalition's plan ?

While it's a political document (all documents of this nature are), as someone with an interest in the area, you would find it interesting.*


----------



## Calliope

Albanese has taken over from Conroy in in trying to launch idiotic pie-in-the-sky high speed projects. 



> *The National Broadband Network has been a case study in the cost blowouts and delays that are endemic to construction projects overseen by government.* Experience suggests the real cost (for high speed rail) would be far greater and the rate of return massively negative. From cross-city tunnels to desalination plants, that is how these things work. Transport Minister Anthony Albanese's fondness for such a boondoggle is a reminder of the Gillard government's scant regard for the sensible use of public funds.



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...n-a-fast-machine/story-e6frg71x-1226618581105

The High Speed Rail of course will never happen here thank goodness. and so will not need the Coalition to come to the rescue and bail it out as they have to do with hugely expensive and wasteful NBN, and other election bribes like the Gonski report into school funding, the National Disability Insurance Scheme and numerous other unfunded projects.

Thanks drsmith for effectively pricking NBNMyths' bluster of nonsense propaganda. He has the hide to talk about comedy and ridicule.


----------



## drsmith

An interesting perspective from north of the equator,



> The Asian operator executives I spoke to in Hong Kong - people who have already built their own FTTH networks - go ashen faced when asked to consider the possibility of deploying similar networks in Australia.




http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...ia-is-a-pipedream-analyst-20130411-2hnl8.html


----------



## drsmith

A brief debate between Malcolm Turnbull and Stephen Conroy on the Today Show,


----------



## Calliope

drsmith said:


> An interesting perspective from north of the equator,
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...ia-is-a-pipedream-analyst-20130411-2hnl8.html




NBNMyths will, of course. ridicule Tony Brown and claim that he and John Clarke are more knowledgeable. They may be, but only in the field of comedy and ridicule.


----------



## NBNMyths

Dr Smith,

We'll have to agree to disagree on much of what you've written. To answer two of your points, however:

I have skimmed the Coalition background paper, and I'll read it more thoroughly when I get a chance.


Who are the ICT community?

Well, so far the following have already spoken out against the Coalition's new NBN policy:

• Geoff Huston M.Sc. - Chief Scientist at APNIC and former Telstra engineer.

• Paul Budde - Global telecommunication network consultant.

• Rod Tucker PhD - Professor at Melbourne Uni and director of NICTA. Recipient of PM Howard's Australia Prize for services to telecommunications.

• Simon Hackett - Founder of Internode

• Steve Dalby - Chief regulatory officer at iiNet

• Dr Mark Gregory - Elec and computer engineering at RMIT.

• Suzanne Campbell, CEO of the Australian Information Industry Association


Then there are these, who have spoken in the recent past, specifically in support of FTTP over FTTN, but have not commented on the coalition's new policy since it was announced:

• Eric Schmidt PhD, CEO of Google (Who are currently building FTTP in Kansas, and have announced they will do so in Houston.)

• Dr Peter Cochrane, former CTO of British Telecom.

• Dr Vint Cerf - Inventor of the internet

• Mark Newton - Former manager of Core Networks and Infrastructure at Internode.

• Optus

• The Internet Industry Association


----------



## Knobby22

I am hopeful, once the Coalition gets in that they will modify the policy again to enable easy access to fibre to the home. 

The big problem they have is Tony's mouth opposing everything. I admire them for changing the policy as much as they have since they were so adamant originally.

I wish Labor would stop proposing big infrastructure items and Superannuation changes as they more they announce them the more Tony feels the need to say no way and paint the Coalition into a corner. , e.g the Melbourne/Sydney train link. 

In my opinion it would be good coalition policy to send Tony on an Antarctic expedition  for 3 months then bring him out closer to the election. He would enjoy it more also.


----------



## Calliope

Is this blatant lie from Juliar's facebook a part of what Myths refers to as "comedy and ridicule?"
http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...thing-you-need-to-know-about-labors-atti.html


----------



## Julia

Knobby22 said:


> I am hopeful, once the Coalition gets in that they will modify the policy again to enable easy access to fibre to the home.
> 
> The big problem they have is Tony's mouth opposing everything. I admire them for changing the policy as much as they have since they were so adamant originally.
> 
> I wish Labor would stop proposing big infrastructure items and Superannuation changes as they more they announce them the more Tony feels the need to say no way and paint the Coalition into a corner. , e.g the Melbourne/Sydney train link.
> 
> In my opinion it would be good coalition policy to send Tony on an Antarctic expedition  for 3 months then bring him out closer to the election. He would enjoy it more also.



Agree on all above points.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Is this blatant lie from Juliar's facebook a part of what Myths refers to as "comedy and ridicule?"
> http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...thing-you-need-to-know-about-labors-atti.html




Actually it's pretty accurate. Certainly more accurate than Abbott's regular false claims, such as "people will pay 3 times more for an NBN plan than they do for ADSL2 today".

Under labor's NBN plan, every home in the fibre footprint receives a fibre connection free of charge. The cost of providing that connection is built in to the monthly charge for the NBN.

Under the coalition plan, you get FTTN for free but if you want a high speed fibre connection, you have to pay for it. Turnbull said as much himself during the policy launch, saying that a similar programme in the UK cost about £3000 per premises.

So let's say you do stump up the $5k for fibre, you will then have to pay the same cost for a 100Mbps plan as you would under the Labor NBN, even though you've already paid for the fibre connection up front. You're $5k worse off, but you don't get any of that back as savings on monthly bills.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Dr Smith,
> 
> We'll have to agree to disagree on much of what you've written. To answer two of your points, however:
> 
> I have skimmed the Coalition background paper, and I'll read it more thoroughly when I get a chance.



It's OK to agree to disagree, but leaving the questions unanswered leaves your comments either unsubstantiated or from a viewpoint so limited as not to be reflective of the broader issue. 

With regard to your list of ICT people, there are also those who are more positive on the Coalitions's plan, one of which I have highlighted above who provides an international context. 

Even Mike Quigley has called for an industry study to determine the best way to build the high-speed internet project.


----------



## drsmith

Knobby22 said:


> I am hopeful, once the Coalition gets in that they will modify the policy again to enable easy access to fibre to the home.



At least it's now an option. 

As for Tony Abbott being sent to Antarctica for 3-months, I would agree, but only if Julia Gillard is sent to the dark side of the moon until after the election.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> So let's say you do stump up the $5k for fibre, you will then have to pay the same cost for a 100Mbps plan as you would under the Labor NBN, even though you've already paid for the fibre connection up front. You're $5k worse off, but you don't get any of that back as savings on monthly bills.



Another question Myths to add to the list above,

Where then does the increase in average wholesale price over time under Labor's NBN when compared to that of the Opposition's come from ?


----------



## Ves

drsmith said:


> but only if Julia Gillard is sent to the dark side of the moon until after the election.



Why not forever?  Good riddance, if you ask me.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Actually it's pretty accurate. Certainly more accurate than Abbott's regular false claims, such as "people will pay 3 times more for an NBN plan than they do for ADSL2 today".
> 
> So let's say you do stump up the $5k for fibre, you will then have to pay the same cost for a 100Mbps plan as you would under the Labor NBN, even though you've already paid for the fibre connection up front. You're $5k worse off, but you don't get any of that back as savings on monthly bills.




So what's wrong with that?
Why should I have to subsidise bling speed, when I don't want it, my wife doesn't want it. My mother and mother in law don't even have computers, but will subsidise it.

How is it any different from people like myself who paid to put in our own insulation, then this government made us subsidise everyone else to put in for free.

Seems to me, that as long as your getting what you want, who gives a rats @rse what anyone else wants. Yet they have to help pay for it.
Jeez you lot are unbelievable. 
Socialism is magic, untill you run out of other peoples money.


----------



## boofhead

I'm sure you use something that is subsidised in someway. So it appears it comes down to opinion/belief about what should and should not be subsidised or what they should be subsidised.


----------



## Ves

sptrawler said:


> So what's wrong with that?
> Why should I have to subsidise bling speed, when I don't want it, my wife doesn't want it. My mother and mother in law don't even have computers, but will subsidise it.
> 
> How is it any different from people like myself who paid to put in our own insulation, then this government made us subsidise everyone else to put in for free.
> 
> Seems to me, that as long as your getting what you want, who gives a rats @rse what anyone else wants. Yet they have to help pay for it.
> Jeez you lot are unbelievable.
> Socialism is magic, untill you run out of other peoples money.



So basically because you don't want it and no one else in your family wants it basically anyone who does is greedy?


----------



## MrBurns

Ves said:


> So basically because you don't want it and no one else in your family wants it basically anyone who does is greedy?




If you want those who don't want it to pay for it YES.


----------



## MrBurns

Close the thread, Labor are finished and so is the waste, unfortunately there's only a deficit remaining so get set for some hard times.


----------



## Ves

MrBurns said:


> If you want those who don't want it to pay for it YES.



I don't want to subsidise middle class families and low-income earners,   I don't want to subsidise super tax breaks,  I don't want this and that, or anything really, and I still pay for it each pay cheque.

Let me guess you're over 60 and have a tax-free pension that I'm subsidising.


----------



## MrBurns

Ves said:


> I don't want to subsidise middle class families and low-income earners,   I don't want to subsidise super tax breaks,  I don't want this and that, or anything really, and I still pay for it each pay cheque.
> 
> Let me guess you're over 60 and have a tax-free pension that I'm subsidising.




Self funded


----------



## sptrawler

Ves said:


> So basically because you don't want it and no one else in your family wants it basically anyone who does is greedy?




No not at all, but I shouldn't have to susidise it for someone else that does.

Like I said, I thought in roof insulation is a great thing, I installed it my roof also put it into the roof of a family member who could not afford to do it.
Then, like I said, these idiots say chuck it in free for everyone. Dumb
It screams" abuse" and was abused.

The same goes with this, if I'm happy with the speed I have now, why shouldn't I be able to elect the cheaper option.
Just because you don't like it? 
I'm not saying your greedy, your saying subsidise what you want.


----------



## Ves

MrBurns said:


> Self funded



Yeah through massive negative gearing benefits over the years I bet.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Another question Myths to add to the list above,
> 
> Where then does the increase in average wholesale price over time under Labor's NBN when compared to that of the Opposition's come from ?




It comes from the prediction that by 2021, more and more customers will be taking up the higher NBN speeds, and adding other services (such as multicast IPTV) increasing the average revenue per user (ARPU) to $64 per month.

The price of the speed tiers remain at around the same level (permitted to increase by _inflation-1.5%_ max pa), so people who don't want faster speeds won't be paying more.

However, as high-end users and business begin to take up premium speeds (such as 1Gbps at $150/month), the ARPU earned by NBN Co increases.

It's almost certainly true that the ARPU under the coalition policy will be lower than under the Labor NBN. But not because a (eg) 25Mbps connection will be any cheaper, but because the services that cost more money are simply not available.


----------



## IFocus

1/4 of the speed for 1/2 the cost seems like a bargain to me

Interesting change from Abbott on position but Turnbul is still discredited by the 1/2 ar$ed scheme.


----------



## Ves

sptrawler said:


> The same goes with this, if I'm happy with the speed I have now, why shouldn't I be able to elect the cheaper option.



I'm sure someone had a big whinge when they put copper in the ground so people could use the phone too.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> So what's wrong with that?
> Why should I have to subsidise bling speed, when I don't want it, my wife doesn't want it. My mother and mother in law don't even have computers, but will subsidise it.
> 
> How is it any different from people like myself who paid to put in our own insulation, then this government made us subsidise everyone else to put in for free.
> 
> Seems to me, that as long as your getting what you want, who gives a rats @rse what anyone else wants. Yet they have to help pay for it.
> Jeez you lot are unbelievable.
> Socialism is magic, untill you run out of other peoples money.






MrBurns said:


> If you want those who don't want it to pay for it YES.




You won't be subsidising them, they will be subsidising you. It is the revenue from high-end users that allow the construction of such an expensive network without increasing the cost for low-end users who don't want or need the speed.

The coalition policy is cheaper to build, but it also forgoes the higher revenue from high-end speeds because those speeds are not available. So the network earns less revenue, making it unlikely that low end speeds will be any cheaper than on the fibre NBN.


----------



## MrBurns

Ves said:


> Yeah through massive negative gearing benefits over the years I bet.




Non.


----------



## waza1960

The NBN scenario is just an example of our great Australian Democracy/Political system working as it should IMO...

   1. Labor instigates the NBN in it's usual manner (incompetently and at huge unnecessary cost) partly due to 
       the Howard Governments inaction over the preceding years.
    2. Abbott government modifies the NBN to arrive at a more affordable and sensible outcome.
  So despite themselves Labor and the Coalition have combined to produce the best outcome


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> You won't be subsidising them, they will be subsidising you. It is the revenue from high-end users that allow the construction of such an expensive network without increasing the cost for low-end users who don't want or need the speed.
> 
> The coalition policy is cheaper to build, but it also forgoes the higher revenue from high-end speeds because those speeds are not available. So the network earns less revenue, making it unlikely that low end speeds will be any cheaper than on the fibre NBN.




You know as well as I know that is rubish: 
I have a Telstra $30/mth mobile phone plan, had it for years, never gone over $30. I'm happy, bet I can't get it now.
My wife had a $12/mth phone plan with free calls to any landline after 7pm. We cancelled it recently because we didn't use it. Bet you can't get it now.
My internet, line rental, free calls to landlines, free calls to any mobile. $70/month. Bet you can't get it now.

Smoke and mirrors isn't my bag, I've seen too much in my life, I'm old enough to know $hit from clay without having to taste it.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> It's almost certainly true that the ARPU under the coalition policy will be lower than under the Labor NBN. But not because a (eg) 25Mbps connection will be any cheaper, but because the services that cost more money are simply not available.






NBNMyths said:


> It is the revenue from high-end users that allow the construction of such an expensive network without increasing the cost for low-end users who don't want or need the speed.



And thus we get to the hub of the problem with Labor's inflexible plan in a changing technological environment and their lack of consideration of the value of money.

To recover the costs associated with the build, the higher end plans which we supposedly need in the near future will be priced beyond the reach of many households.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Sorry I've lost track of how much this lemon will cost.

What are the estimates for it's cost?

gg


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> It comes from the prediction that by 2021, more and more customers will be taking up the higher NBN speeds, and adding other services (such as multicast IPTV) increasing the average revenue per user (ARPU) to $64 per month.
> 
> The price of the speed tiers remain at around the same level (permitted to increase by _inflation-1.5%_ max pa), so people who don't want faster speeds won't be paying more.
> 
> However, as high-end users and business begin to take up premium speeds (such as 1Gbps at $150/month), the ARPU earned by NBN Co increases.
> 
> It's almost certainly true that the ARPU under the coalition policy will be lower than under the Labor NBN. But not because a (eg) 25Mbps connection will be any cheaper, but because the services that cost more money are simply not available.




What a crock...you are an expert in trying to whitewash Labor lies into  appearing plausible. Neither you nor your idiot mentor Conroy can refute that by the time in the distant future (certainly not 2021:rolleyes) when NBN rolls over and dies because of mismanagement and waste, costs will have blown out to $94 Billion. 

The Coalition has no alternative but to rein them in and replace the amateurs running the show and try to salvage something workable from the train wreck.


----------



## IFocus

drsmith said:


> And thus we get to the hub of the problem with Labor's inflexible plan in a changing technological environment and their lack of consideration of the value of money.




Wrong its the other way around the problem with the Coalitions plan there is no flexibility with speed just a dead end with limited upside.

As for value for money what happen to the Coalitions position of its all to expensive they were just going to put in some back haul fibre etc.



> To recover the costs associated with the build, the higher end plans which we supposedly need in the near future will be priced beyond the reach of many households.




Wrong again i.e. 10 years ago no body in their right mind would have paid for today's speeds (for the lucky on ADSL2).


----------



## Aussiejeff

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Sorry I've lost track of *how much this lemon will cost*.
> 
> What are the estimates for it's cost?
> 
> gg




This is a BIG lemon, GG. It will leave a terribly bitter taste in many a taxpayer's mouth if continual feeding of artificial growth hormone by farmer CONroy is left unchequed. 

One cannot say at this point in time what the end-damage may be. Stock up on Alka-Seltzer????


----------



## IFocus

Alan Kohler sees the glass 1/2 full


How Malcolm Turnbull saved the NBN



> Malcolm Turnbull, with the help of the polls, has turned the Liberals into an NBN party. His plan isn't perfect, but it's better than dismantling the whole thing, writes Alan Kohler.
> 
> It won't make it into his Wikipedia entry, and he won't get tweets of congratulation from techies, but Malcolm Turnbull's great achievement over the past two and a half years has been to save the National Broadband Network.






> But anyway, whether it was the polls or Malcolm's silver tongue, there was Tony Abbott yesterday at a pay TV studio beside a hologram of a footballer as he launched the Coalition's NBN policy and basked in the wonders of broadband communications *as if he invented it*: "We believe in a national broadband network and we will deliver a better (one)."






> Last August I wrote that the Coalition's NBN policy was "madness" and would have to be dumped, mainly because a new deal would have to be negotiated with Telstra against the background of an election promise. Telstra, I believed, would have the Abbott government over a barrel.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-04-10/kohler-how-malcolm-turnbull-saved-the-nbn/4619868


----------



## sptrawler

Ves said:


> I'm sure someone had a big whinge when they put copper in the ground so people could use the phone too.




So that's the answer, compulsory enema.
Vespuria, when you take away choice, you take away options and take away rights.
I love your replies on super, because you are aware of implications, because of your experience.
I doubt you have much experience regarding a massive project like this, Conroy doesn't.
Check out Leighton's track record and they are experts.

Just another shipwreck, looking for rocks to land on.


----------



## Calliope

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Sorry I've lost track of how much this lemon will cost.
> 
> What are the estimates for it's cost?
> 
> gg




Turnbull says $94 billion. Conroy blusters but can't refute it. Just remember  the Labor Government is composed mainly of union leaders, union officials, union hacks and Labor lawyers. None of these have the slightest idea on running a profitable enterprise, only slush funds.

To disasters like Bats, Boats, BER, and Budget add N*B*N. The B stands for balls-ups.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> You know as well as I know that is rubish:
> I have a Telstra $30/mth mobile phone plan, had it for years, never gone over $30. I'm happy, bet I can't get it now.



http://www.kogan.com/au/mobile/
$29/month, Telstra 3G network, unlimited calls, 6GB data.




> My internet, line rental, free calls to landlines, free calls to any mobile. $70/month. Bet you can't get it now.
> 
> Smoke and mirrors isn't my bag, I've seen too much in my life, I'm old enough to know $hit from clay without having to taste it.



https://www.pennytel.com.au/penny-broadband/nbn-deals
$60/month, 25Mbps, Unlimited national calls, unlimited mobile calls, unlimited calls to 5 international countries, unlimited data.


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Sorry I've lost track of how much this lemon will cost.
> 
> What are the estimates for it's cost?
> 
> gg




Labor say $37.4bn capex, $44.1bn peak funding.

The libs say $71bn capex, $94bn peak funding.


The lib's new alternative plan is $20.4bn capex, $29.5bn peak funding.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> http://www.kogan.com/au/mobile/
> $29/month, Telstra 3G network, unlimited calls, 6GB data.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.pennytel.com.au/penny-broadband/nbn-deals
> $60/month, 25Mbps, Unlimited national calls, unlimited mobile calls, unlimited calls to 5 international countries, unlimited data.




Including line rental?

Unlimited mobile calls to any mobile?

Just googled your Kogan $29 plan, limited access 7.2mb/s. and 2g access apparently, so that is a smoke and mirrors.
Please correct me if i'm wrong.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> What a crock...you are an expert in trying to whitewash Labor lies into  appearing plausible. Neither you nor your idiot mentor Conroy can refute that by the time in the distant future (certainly not 2021:rolleyes) when NBN rolls over and dies because of mismanagement and waste, costs will have blown out to $94 Billion.
> 
> The Coalition has no alternative but to rein them in and replace the amateurs running the show and try to salvage something workable from the train wreck.




Funny, you make constant steaming rants like that and accuse me of being politically motivated. Look in the mirror, buddy.


The NBN cost has been forecast at ~$40bn by KPMG-McKinsey, NBN Co, and Greenhill-Caliburn, and such a cost ties with similar projects overseas.

Conversely, we only have Turnbull's word for his estimate, since the study he uses is apparently a secret.

There is little more that NBN Co can do to appease people like you, and in all honestly I don't think you would believe _any_one, or _any_ organisation on the topic, since it opposes your obvious political position.


----------



## drsmith

Calliope said:


> Turnbull says $94 billion. Conroy blusters but can't refute it.




After some perusal by Malcolm Turnbull on the Today Show today, he's sticking to about $2.4k as to what it's costing per premise. Judging by the exact words and the body language, it might be costing a little more than that, right now.

Below is the transcript. It's at the and of the following Youtube video I posted earlier in the day.





> LISA WILKINSON:
> Ahh, unfortunately we’re going to have to leave it there –
> MALCOLM TURNBULL:
> No but Stephen should have to answer one question, he should tell us how much Stephen is it actually costing you to pass and connect a premise with fibre today? How much?
> LISA WILKINSON:
> OK you’ve got ten seconds Stephen Conroy.
> MALCOLM TURNBULL:
> How much?
> STEPHEN CONROY:
> Oh well he ignored your question, here’s the BT website that Malcolm likes to quote, £3,500 –
> MALCOLM TURNBULL:
> No he won’t answer the real question
> STEPHEN CONROY:
> The answer to Malcolm’s question is about $2,400 Malcolm.
> MALCOLM TURNBULL:
> Right now?
> STEPHEN CONROY:
> Which is the first lie exposed, the first lie exposed by you.
> MALCOLM TURNBULL:
> OK.  We’ll see whether Quigley steps that up in the committee hearing.
> LISA WILKINSON:
> OK gentlemen.
> MALCOLM TURNBULL:
> You’re on the hook now Stephen.  It will be interesting.
> LISA WILKINSON:
> Alright we’re going to have to leave it there.  We do very much appreciate you both taking the time this morning. Let the debate continue.
> MALCOLM TURNBULL:
> We will.
> LISA WILKINSON:
> Malcolm Turnbull thanks very much.  Stephen Conroy thank you there from Melbourne.
> STEPHEN CONROY:
> Thanks very much Lisa.
> LISA WILKINSON:
> OK.
> MALCOLM TURNBULL:
> Thank you Lisa.




http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/media/transcripts/transcript-today-show-12-april-2013/


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Including line rental?
> 
> Unlimited mobile calls to any mobile?
> 
> Just googled your Kogan $29 plan, limited access 7.2mb/s. and 2g access apparently, so that is a smoke and mirrors.
> Please correct me if i'm wrong.




Pennytel: Yep, no line rental. Sorry, not unlimited calls to mobiles. Either 150 calls or 500 minutes per month.

Kogan is speed limited to 7.2Mbps, but it uses Telstra 3G not 2G. Just not HSPDA+ which is what theoretically gives Telstra customers more speed.

Aldi mobile also use Telstra's network, but are slightly more expensive than Kogan for that deal. They do have $15 and $30 365-day prepaid plans though, which are great for low volume users. And like Kogan, you still get the advantage of Telstra's coverage. https://www.aldimobile.com.au/


I'm with Telstra and a mate is with Kogan both on iPhones, and we did a side-by-side speedtest and his tested faster than mine. Because it's incredibly rare that you can get real-world speeds of more than 7.2Mbps anyway.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> Labor say $37.4bn capex, $44.1bn peak funding.
> 
> The libs say $71bn capex, $94bn peak funding.
> 
> 
> The lib's new alternative plan is $20.4bn capex, $29.5bn peak funding.




That is too bloody expensive.

We could have four Snowy schemes up North here, in Queensland and the Northern Territory, producing energy and food for Australia,and still have change to keep a few blokes in Adelaide making Holdens for that amount of money.

What a bloody waste when we could have wireless.

gg


----------



## So_Cynical

IFocus said:


> 1/4 of the speed for 1/2 the cost seems like a bargain to me




But its not...more like we will be getting the noalition's ANBN (Almost National Broadband Network) for about 75% of the cost of the Govt's NBN but with max speeds 75% slower...dud deal.

I reckon this is the beginning of the End for 1 vote Tony, if this is the best the noalition can come up with after 3 years to think about it... what's to come? surely the general population will start to wake up and realise these guys are a joke.


----------



## DB008

Stay away from Kogan Mobile.

They are now booting off customers willy-nilly and that 6gb data per month is also capped at 400mb per day.

NBN Myths, as an avid WP user/reader, l am surprised you have openly supported/positively mentioned them in your previous post.


'Unlimited' hey?
1)







> At this point you might be wondering what this is all about. If you haven't already heard, Mr Kogan's firm, Kogan Mobile, has been discontinuing the services of prepaid mobile customers who Kogan believe have made too many calls, sent too many texts or used too much data.
> http://www.boroondarareviewlocal.com.au/story/1376767/beyond-limits-kogan-mobile-under-fire/




2)







> When it sounds too good to be true ...
> http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/mobiles/when-it-sounds-too-good-to-be-true--20130320-2geoe.html


----------



## DB008

sptrawler said:


> Including line rental?
> 
> Unlimited mobile calls to any mobile?
> 
> Just googled your Kogan $29 plan, limited access 7.2mb/s. and 2g access apparently, so that is a smoke and mirrors.
> Please correct me if i'm wrong.




Kogan is 2G + 3G Telstra network - but it's on the Telstra Wholesale network (with capped/limited speed and coverage), doesn't have full Telstra network access.

Boost Mobile is $40 per month & on the full Telstra network. 3G, with a 4G SIM loophole which may be closed any day. http://www.boost.com.au/frontend/home.aspx


----------



## Ves

sptrawler said:


> I love your replies on super, because you are aware of implications, because of your experience.



Of course you've had all the experience in the world because you're a wise old sage.   Seriously, could you get any more condescending?  

I've been watching some of your replies in threads recently and I'm definitely not the first person you've tried this little number on.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Pennytel: Yep, no line rental. Sorry, not unlimited calls to mobiles. Either 150 calls or 500 minutes per month.
> 
> Kogan is speed limited to 7.2Mbps, but it uses Telstra 3G not 2G. Just not HSPDA+ which is what theoretically gives Telstra customers more speed.
> 
> Aldi mobile also use Telstra's network, but are slightly more expensive than Kogan for that deal. They do have $15 and $30 365-day prepaid plans though, which are great for low volume users. And like Kogan, you still get the advantage of Telstra's coverage. https://www.aldimobile.com.au/
> 
> 
> I'm with Telstra and a mate is with Kogan both on iPhones, and we did a side-by-side speedtest and his tested faster than mine. Because it's incredibly rare that you can get real-world speeds of more than 7.2Mbps anyway.



Myths, I'm a pleb, but I travel up to the goldfields and the wifes $12 plan dropped out about 20k's out of Perth.

we were paying $12 a month for free calls to any landline in Australia after 7pm. But we really don't want or need to talk to someone all the time. So we cancelled it.
Same with the NBN the computer geeks that want the fastest now, I can wait.lol
I remember a mate in my apprenticeship, he bought the first Phillips cd player $1500, we thought $hit.
Do you want to buy it, he still has it.

By the way not being funny, not being nasty, the nicest person you would ever meet, 57 years old doesn't own a house. But thinks the NBN is magic, bless him.


----------



## Julia

Ves said:


> Yeah through massive negative gearing benefits over the years I bet.



  Perhaps you could offer your basis for making such an assumption?
How presumptuous and how rude.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> Funny, you make constant steaming rants like that and accuse me of being politically motivated. Look in the mirror, buddy.




And you're not politically motivated? Pull the other leg "buddy".




> The NBN cost has been forecast at ~$40bn by KPMG-McKinsey, NBN Co, and Greenhill-Caliburn, and such a cost ties with similar projects overseas.




"Similar projects overseas" are not run by a government of union hacks and  amateurs like Conroy and Quigley to whom cost blow-outs come naturally.



> Conversely, we only have Turnbull's word for his estimate, since the study he uses is apparently a secret



.
At the rate they are going $94 billion is probably a conservative estimate, unless you have some secret study proving Turnbull wrong.



> There is little more that NBN Co can do to appease people like you, and in all honestly I don't think you would believe _any_one, or _any_ organisation on the topic, since it opposes your obvious political position.




They could easily "appease" me by Conroy and you as their defender, coming clean on costs and construction blowouts. My political position, unlike yours, does not depend on acceptance of the assurances of idiots like Conroy. You say you are not a "huge" fan of Conroy and not a "massive" fan of Gillard. I on the other hand consider him a nasty little man. Time will tell whose judgment is right.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Garpal Gumnut said:


> That is too bloody expensive.
> 
> We could have four Snowy schemes up North here, in Queensland and the Northern Territory, producing energy and food for Australia,and still have change to keep a few blokes in Adelaide making Holdens for that amount of money.
> 
> What a bloody waste when we could have wireless.
> 
> gg






Calliope said:


> And you're not politically motivated? Pull the other leg "buddy".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Similar projects overseas" are not run by a government of union hacks and  amateurs like Conroy and Quigley to whom cost blow-outs come naturally.
> 
> .
> At the rate they are going $94 billion is probably a conservative estimate, unless you have some secret study proving Turnbull wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> They could easily "appease" me by Conroy and you as their defender, coming clean on costs and construction blowouts. My political position, unlike yours, does not depend on acceptance of the assurances of idiots like Conroy. You say you are not a "huge" fan of Conroy and not a "massive" fan of Gillard. I on the other hand consider him a nasty little man. Time will tell whose judgment is right.




Kogan, bogan, speeds, copper, I'm over it.

How much is this bloody thing costing and is it on track with the estimated coats?

gg


----------



## sptrawler

Ves said:


> Of course you've had all the experience in the world because you're a wise old sage.   Seriously, could you get any more condescending?
> 
> I've been watching some of your replies in threads recently and I'm definitely not the first person you've tried this little number on.




I'm fine with that, if I think someone has more understanding/knowledge than me I defer to them.
Most of my knowledge is through the school of hard knocks and experience.
I will not say something, I can't back up by experience or by links to media posts and I will defer to anyone that has formal qualifications.
This is ,as far as I'm concerned, a bunch of people having a conversation. 
I enjoy it, I find it stimulating,I don't see myself as a guru, but love to debate the ones that do.
When , like yourself in the super debate, you prove to be abreast of the subject and more knwledgable than I, I accept that. By the way will lead to further questions.
Also it doesn't mean you are right all the time without question.
It means, give a honest answer that is viable and I'll believe it, serve up a $hit butty i won't eat it.


----------



## Ves

Julia said:


> Perhaps you could offer your basis for making such an assumption?
> How presumptuous and how rude.



Of course he'll deny it all the way to the bank, but I've seen him talking about it before.  Not really presumptuous.  Nice of you to stick up for your little Liberal buddy, but I'm sure he can handle himself, Julia.  If he can give it out I'm sure he won't mind taking it.


----------



## So_Cynical

Good to see the ASF right has come out to play in this thread...always nice to see so many hidden posts.


----------



## Ves

sptrawler said:


> I'm fine with that, if I think someone has more understanding/knowledge than me I defer to them.
> Most of my knowledge is through the school of hard knocks and experience.
> I will not say something, I can't back up by experience or by links to media posts and I will defer to anyone that has formal qualifications.
> This is ,as far as I'm concerned, a bunch of people having a conversation.
> I enjoy it, I find it stimulating,I don't see myself as a guru, but love to debate the ones that do.
> When , like yourself in the super debate, you prove to be abreast of the subject and more knwledgable than I, I accept that. By the way will lead to further questions.
> Also it doesn't mean you are right all the time without question.
> It means, give a honest answer that is viable and I'll believe it, serve up a $hit butty i won't eat it.



Thanks sptrawler - that's a fair enough post.  We probably just got our knickers in a knot.


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> Stay away from Kogan Mobile.
> 
> They are now booting off customers willy-nilly and that 6gb data per month is also capped at 400mb per day.
> 
> NBN Myths, as an avid WP user/reader, l am surprised you have openly supported/positively mentioned them in your previous post.
> 
> 
> 'Unlimited' hey?
> 1)
> 
> 2)




Hmm, interesting. I hadn't read anything on WP, but like all of the unlimited plans out there, they do have "fair use" limits I suppose, and there will always be cranky customers.

My mate has been with Kogan for a few months now and has no complaints at all. He makes a pretty typical number of calls I guess, and uses maybe 5GB of data per month. He also has an older phone on Telstra, and the two get the same levels of coverage so I don't believe there is any coverage limit with the Telstra wholesale.

I am considering getting their test SIM myself when my contract is up to test it thoroughly, but I want to see whether they have an Iridium roaming agreement first, as that's one of the main reasons I'm with Telstra.

I have two of the Aldi SIMs in GPS devices, and they get coverage as good as my iPhone which is with Telstra directly.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> http://www.kogan.com/au/mobile/
> $29/month, Telstra 3G network, unlimited calls, 6GB data.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.pennytel.com.au/penny-broadband/nbn-deals
> $60/month, 25Mbps, Unlimited national calls, unlimited mobile calls, unlimited calls to 5 international countries, unlimited data.




So you now have qualified this post?

Somewhat disjointed, somewhat obtuse, somewhat labor like. 
I'm disapointed, I expected more from you myths.
I've had a lot of respect for your honest posts.


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> That is too bloody expensive.
> 
> ...What a bloody waste [highlight]when we could have wireless.[/highlight]
> 
> gg




No, we couldn't. At least not _instead of _the NBN.

Wireless is incapable of providing the bandwidth required to replace urban fixed line networks. Doesn't matter how much the technology improves, it still comes down to the physics of radio via air _versus_ light via glass.

That's why there isn't a single country or telco on the planet proposing to replace metropolitan fixed networks with wireless. It simply cannot do the job.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> So you now have qualified this post?




Yes. Apologies, last time I looked at the Pennytel plan I'm pretty sure it was unlimited calls to mobiles, but when I checked just now, they had imposed the 150 call/500 minute limit.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> No, we couldn't. At least not _instead of _the NBN.
> 
> Wireless is incapable of providing the bandwidth required to replace urban fixed line networks. Doesn't matter how much the technology improves, it still comes down to the physics of radio via air _versus_ light via glass.
> 
> That's why there isn't a single country or telco on the planet proposing to replace metropolitan fixed networks with wireless. It simply cannot do the job.




I'd reply but I've had infractions for speaking my mind and as a result now agree with everything you say. Let's roll it out. 

gg


----------



## sydboy007

MrBurns said:


> Close the thread, Labor are finished and so is the waste, unfortunately there's only a deficit remaining so get set for some hard times.




I'll just say Adelaide Darwin rail line bestowed on us from Howard.

Talk about waste and mismanagement!


----------



## IFocus

So_Cynical said:


> But its not...more like we will be getting the noalition's ANBN (Almost National Broadband Network) for about 75% of the cost of the Govt's NBN but with max speeds 75% slower...dud deal.
> 
> I reckon this is the beginning of the End for 1 vote Tony, if this is the best the noalition can come up with after 3 years to think about it... what's to come? surely the general population will start to wake up and realise these guys are a joke.




The rumour awhile ago was Abbott promised Murdoch he would kill off the NBN as its a direct threat to News Ltd.

I think the extremely fair and factual  coverage by News of the NBN completely dispels this rumour..........


----------



## IFocus

sydboy007 said:


> I'll just say Adelaide Darwin rail line bestowed on us from Howard.
> 
> Talk about waste and mismanagement!




Thats really unfair Syd, of course it was only built after a complete business case appraisal was completed to ensure there was a complete return  on investment.........


----------



## sydboy007

malcolm seems to be squirming already over the questions he's beign asked.

Then therei's the outright lies he's been telling along with Abbott.

Examples of the lies:

* Constantly claiming the NBN will cost $94B when that is the most unlikely costing the LNP has been able to come up with (whilst they have not been open in how they came up with those figures)

* While MT was at the Marcus Oldham College TA tweeted 'Under Labor they get no NBN.  A priority under us"  The college is scheduled to received fiber NBN.  Note to MT and TA - ALL premises in Telstra band 1 and band 2 exchange areas WILL RECEIVE FIBER NBN.  So, either they are outright lying, or they are not particularly competent in an important policy area.

* During an interview with Alan Jones last week MT did not correct any of the factually incorrect statements made by AJ.  In fact MT went so far as to say "Well Alan I have to agree with everything you’ve said there.  It is a very, very sorry – all you’ve done is state the facts."

So for all those who love to tag JU-LIAR, how about standing up and criticising Tony and Malcolm for their outright lies???


----------



## sydboy007

I wonder if TA and MT have calculated the cost of upgrading the electricity network to run their NoBN?

IF we take the 60,000 nodes as a rough estimate, factor in they will run 24/7, consuming say 300 watts an hour (it would not surprise me if the figure is quite a bit higher) and we have some staggering electricity consumption:

60000 * 300 * 24 * 365 = 157,680 megawatts per year

Considering a fibre transmission users a laser consuming a few fraction of a watt - around 40 milliwatts or less - you can see how much higher the running costs will be of an FTTN, not to mention the fact that nodes are actively powered devices and will have a far higher failure rate than a passive optical network.

I would argue that most of us have seen just how fast our power bills have been climbing, and the rate is prob not going to slow too much over the next decade.  Electricity is going to be come a major cost increase of the NoBN.

The we have the 480, 000 car batteries in the nodes that will need to be replaced around every 3 years.  That's nearly 1.5 million over a 10 year period.  The expensive part will be the labour involved in replacing them, rather than the cost of the batteries themselves.  Just have to ask AT&T about their exploding FTTN cabinets to see what can happen when you get a bad batch.

It also seems that anyone in an MDU that is in a cable area will NOT be getting access to faster speeds till at least 2019 and maybe not even then unless they are willing to pay for it themselves.


----------



## drsmith

IFocus said:


> As for value for money what happen to the Coalitions position of its all to expensive they were just going to put in some back haul fibre etc.



One can equally ask what happened to the 1.3 million properties the NBN was going to pass by June 30 this year, but we know the answer to that.



IFocus said:


> Wrong its the other way around the problem with the Coalitions plan there is no flexibility with speed just a dead end with limited upside.
> 
> Wrong again i.e. 10 years ago no body in their right mind would have paid for today's speeds (for the lucky on ADSL2).



The impression I get from these responses is that you've chipped in without too much understanding of the underlying discussion.


----------



## Calliope

drsmith said:


> One can equally ask what happened to the 1.3 million properties the NBN was going to pass by June 30 this year, but we know the answer to that.
> 
> The impression I get from these responses is that you've chipped in without too much understanding of the underlying discussion.




Turnbull explains it so simply in today's paper so that even galahs have no excuse for their ignorance.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...realistic-choice/story-e6frg6zo-1226619379754


----------



## IFocus

Calliope said:


> Turnbull explains it so simply in today's paper so that even galahs have no excuse for their ignorance.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...realistic-choice/story-e6frg6zo-1226619379754




As has been expressed here by pro Coalition supporters it is a political statement based on lack of or straight facts or miss information  which is fine as long as you understand its the political argument not the technical facts argument.

Note I am not praising Labor's political position either.  

A classic was the statement in the video DR posted earlier that the Coalitions project was 5 times faster and Labors 10 times faster than present....... go figure.

I do acknowledge that Turnbull has moved the Coalition towards a NBN and that he has left the door open (funnily not mentioned in the general media) to move further towards FTTH.

Still there is no avoiding its a bit like connecting modern car front end to a 1956 FJ rear end with the hope you can screw 10 times the horse power out of the back end using future technology.


----------



## drsmith

Calliope said:


> Turnbull explains it so simply in today's paper so that even galahs have no excuse for their ignorance.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...realistic-choice/story-e6frg6zo-1226619379754




The point I've been focusing on is its impact of affordability and thus the ability of households to financially access the higher end plans,



> We also modelled NBN revenues. NBN Co assumes it can increase broadband access revenues by 9.2 per cent a year in real terms, and in doing so increase the share of household income devoted to fixed-line telecoms by 60-70 per cent. Our more realistic assumption (shared by independent telecoms analysts) is that its share of the wallet will stay constant.






> The NBN's corporate plan admits Labor intends to triple wholesale charges across the next decade. That means the retail price for broadband will increase to at least $90 a month on average by 2021 for someone hooking up to the NBN.




The Coalition's assumption is that revenue per user is constant as a share of GDP (equivalent to annual growth of 3.5% in inflation‐adjusted terms), as opposed to Labor's 9.2%.


----------



## drsmith

IFocus said:


> As has been expressed here by pro Coalition supporters it is a political statement based on lack of or straight facts or miss information  which is fine as long as you understand its the political argument not the technical facts argument.



It's a political statement yes, but is that a generic criticism of have you actually checked the information that supports it ?



IFocus said:


> Note I am not praising Labor's political position either.
> 
> A classic was the statement in the video DR posted earlier that the Coalitions project was 5 times faster and Labors 10 times faster than present....... go figure.




He made others too that were no doubt exaggerations, in particular regarding the speed of the rollout, but as you note above, this happens on both sides of the political fence.

Kevin Rudd for example,

http://delimiter.com.au/2013/04/13/...feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+Delimiter+(Delimiter)


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> The point I've been focusing on is its impact of affordability and thus the ability of households to financially access the higher end plans,
> 
> The Coalition's assumption is that revenue per user is constant as a share of GDP (equivalent to annual growth of 3.5% in inflation‐adjusted terms), as opposed to Labor's 9.2%.




I don't see a problem with the assumption that households will choose to spend more on home communication costs.

Once the NBN reaches a reasonable level of cover services like IP TV will become a decent sized market, companies like Netflix will be able to offer HD movie downloads, RSPs can start offering hosted services like backup or even virtual computers you can access of a lower powered device.

As for affordability, the current cost of 100Mbs plans is amazingly cheap.  While it's not quite apples to apples, just do a search for a metro ethernet service and see how ridiculously expensive they are.  RSPs are offering 100Mbs plans from around the $80 mark, going up to around $130 with 1TB of data.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I don't see a problem with the assumption that households will choose to spend more on home communication costs.
> 
> Once the NBN reaches a reasonable level of cover services like IP TV will become a decent sized market, companies like Netflix will be able to offer HD movie downloads, RSPs can start offering hosted services like backup or even virtual computers you can access of a lower powered device.
> 
> As for affordability, the current cost of 100Mbs plans is amazingly cheap.  While it's not quite apples to apples, just do a search for a metro ethernet service and see how ridiculously expensive they are.  RSPs are offering 100Mbs plans from around the $80 mark, going up to around $130 with 1TB of data.




The problem will be not as to whether households chose to spend more, but the extent to which they can afford to spend more against other priorities. The greater the extent to which the government needs to recover capital costs through increased prices for higher end plans, the more households there are that are faced with this consideration.

What is amazingly cheap to some can be unaffordable to others with limited discretionary funds. What also seems amazingly cheap now may not in the future, depending on advances in technology.

Further to this point is a response I made to one of NBNMyths's posts a few days ago. His point is in black, my response in blue.



drsmith said:


> Think back a decade to 128k ADSL and ask yourself whether you could have imagined that a typical broadband connection of 12Mbps (100x faster!) would be struggling to cope with demand today. Do we really think that demand will suddenly plateau now? I think not.
> 
> Take myself back a decade and I was paying the same for that 128k ADSL with a download limit of a few gig to where am now paying a similar amount in nominal terms for a service approximately 50x better in both speed and download limits, driven by technological advancement.  The problem here with Labor's plan is that the rollout cost of the technology (fibre) is such that for the capital cost to be recovered and a ROI, many households may be priced out of the higher end plans which you claim to be so essential. This too in a constantly evolving technological environment.


----------



## Julia

sydboy007 said:


> I don't see a problem with the assumption that households will choose to spend more on home communication costs.



You seem to be looking at this just from your own point of view.  There are hundreds of thousands of people struggling to pay, eg, electricity bills, who do not want or need high speed internet, quite happy with what they have, and absolutely do not want to be forced to pay more.


----------



## sydboy007

Julia said:


> You seem to be looking at this just from your own point of view.  There are hundreds of thousands of people struggling to pay, eg, electricity bills, who do not want or need high speed internet, quite happy with what they have, and absolutely do not want to be forced to pay more.




The NBN doesn't make them.  It's a choice.

As I have said a number of times my Dad is saving over $40 a month after moving to the NBN as he no longer needs a land line and the VOIP calls he gets are cheap - 10C untimed landline calls is hard to beat.

A lot of people DO choose to spend a reasonable share of their income on entertainment and communication services.


----------



## Calliope

IFocus said:


> Still there is no avoiding its a bit like connecting modern car front end to a 1956 FJ rear end with the hope you can screw 10 times the horse power out of the back end using future technology.




On Insiders this morning ( the usual stacked deck) was the similar sneering attitude of David Marr to Turnbull's NBN as is displayed on this forum.

For my part the attraction of the Coalition's proposal is that I would get it in my lifetime, and at 25 to 50 megs it would be at a speed much faster than 90% of the population needs. And the option is there for an update from copper to fibre up your driveway in the future. Leaving this an option will mean a savings of $60 billion on Conroy's never-never plan.


----------



## Smurf1976

Now the unions are getting upset about safety on the job (specifically relating to asbestos).

http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2013/04/14/376933_tasmania-news.html

For the record, I've seen what these contractors do and it's not something that I would accept personally. It's legal on paper, but shortcuts are taken in practice to save time and money at the expense of safety. Been there, seen this game before. 

That said, Kevin Harkins is playing another game of his own too......


----------



## drsmith

Regarding the rollout, the most interesting sentence in the following article is the last,

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-short-of-target/story-e6frg6n6-1226619523095



> An NBN Co spokesman said there was confidence the 190,000 to 200,000 target would be met. "That's the target that we and our construction partners are working towards," he said.




If correct, it's at the lower end of the recently downward revised 190,000 to 220,000 target.


----------



## bellenuit

The absurdity of overspending on this one infrastructure project at the expense of other items has been highlighted by the announced cuts to Universities. Education was touted as the big beneficiary of ultra high speed broadband, but what's the point if students are deterred from going to Uni by the increased costs that will be imposed upon them. Education would not have lost out under the coalition proposals, as education facilities, along with greenfield sites, have been identified as those who would get FTTP.


----------



## drsmith

More on the rollout from the AFR,

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_co_to_pay_for_training_to_speed_5OioDwUuTcFYdasesrJQMP


----------



## Julia

bellenuit said:


> The absurdity of overspending on this one infrastructure project at the expense of other items has been highlighted by the announced cuts to Universities. Education was touted as the big beneficiary of ultra high speed broadband, but what's the point if students are deterred from going to Uni by the increased costs that will be imposed upon them. Education would not have lost out under the coalition proposals, as education facilities, along with greenfield sites, have been identified as those who would get FTTP.



Agree.  Ditto medicine.  The much touted E-Health program is full of problems, with many of the doctors who have attempted to engage in it having their computers crash, and others - liking the idea - have set up appropriately at their end but are unable to connect.
How surprising:  a Labor initiative that has been stuffed up!


----------



## IFocus

bellenuit said:


> The absurdity of overspending on this one infrastructure project at the expense of other items has been highlighted by the announced cuts to Universities.




How? The funding is from entirely different sources.


----------



## bellenuit

IFocus said:


> How? The funding is from entirely different sources.




The interest on the bonds is part of the current account (unless they are capitalising that too). The face value of the bonds will eventually have to be paid back. Should, as will likely be the case, the NBN get sold for a lot less than its cost to build, the face value of the bonds owing will be less than the revenue from its sale, so the difference will have to be funded from general revenue.

At the end of the day it all falls back on the taxpayer.


----------



## Calliope

IFocus said:


> How? The funding is from entirely different sources.




There is only one source...the taxpayer. Are you so out of Focus that you can't see that the taxpayer will be footing the bill for the Gillard/Conroy NBN, even though Gillard says it's FREE. No way in the world can they recoup the run-out cost of $94 billion from revenue despite what Myths says.


----------



## noco

I listened to a report by Professor Michael Porter on the Bolt Report this morning and he does make a lot of sense.

I think the Labor Party have been a little lose with the truth in what can or cannot be achieved with the NBN roll out.

The Coalitions proposal appears to be far more economical and almost as effiecient and as the Professor explains, it is possible to install a node or box in a street and you can then have the choice of connecting through copper and receive 50 MGS or pay the extra to go all the way with fibre to receieve up to 100 MBS.





http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/the_bolt_report_today31/


----------



## NBNMyths

noco said:


> I listened to a report by Professor Michael Porter on the Bolt Report this morning




Oh, so you're the guy who watches it.


----------



## Smurf1976

bellenuit said:


> Should, as will likely be the case, the NBN get sold for a lot less than its cost to build, the face value of the bonds owing will be less than the revenue from its sale, so the difference will have to be funded from general revenue.



If any future government is dumb enough to privatise the NBN then they and those who elected them deserve everything they get.

The cost of building the NBN in the first place is, to a significant extent, just the cost of having privatised Telstra and allowed them to profit mine the infrastructure. Only a fool would do it again.....


----------



## Calliope

Smurf1976 said:


> If any future government is dumb enough to privatise the NBN then they and those who elected them deserve everything they get.
> 
> The cost of building the NBN in the first place is, to a significant extent, just the cost of having privatised Telstra and allowed them to profit mine the infrastructure. Only a fool would do it again.....




"profit mine the infrastructure." ???:screwy:


----------



## bellenuit

Smurf1976 said:


> If any future government is dumb enough to privatise the NBN then they and those who elected them deserve everything they get.




Isn't that the policy of both Labor and the coalition?

Anyway they don't have to sell it to take the loss (if there is one) to the current account. It will be valued using standard financial techniques (NPV of revenue stream etc) and if that value is less than the accumulated costs, the difference will be taken to the current account.


----------



## Some Dude

Can anyone more informed than I on this issue comment on this point?



			
				The Register said:
			
		

> The question is: what about the copper the coalition's plan will rely on to bring broadband into the majority of homes? On our reading of the policy, its contribution to operational expenditure seems to be ignored completely.
> 
> We make that assertion on the basis of the fact that in the 2011-2012 financial year, Telstra's direct operational expenditure (opex) on fixed broadband was around $AU1.3 billion. But the PSTN – which runs the copper – was a separate line item, consuming another $1.93 billion in opex, for a total of $3.23 billion a year


----------



## drsmith

Some Dude said:


> Can anyone more informed than I on this issue comment



The Coalition's plan in their background paper had opex/year at $90 per premises for FTTN vs $60/year for FTTP.

There was no additional detail in the report beyond that that I recall.


----------



## Calliope

The Gillard/Conroy/NBNMyths version of NBN is history.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> The Gillard/Conroy/NBNMyths version of NBN is history.
> 
> View attachment 51773




Not history, just future. Except for those lucky enough to be in areas already under construction of course.

I fully expect the coalition to win in September. All it means is that in 10 years time when the luddites are all senile and the next generation is voting, we'll look back at Tony and Mal's prophetic "25Megs is enough" with comedic incredulity, and spend another $40bn fixing up the mistake.

Such is life.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Not history, just future. Except for those lucky enough to be in areas already under construction of course.
> 
> I fully expect the coalition to win in September. All it means is that in 10 years time when the luddites are all senile and the next generation is voting, we'll look back at Tony and Mal's prophetic "25Megs is enough" with comedic incredulity, and spend another $40bn fixing up the mistake.
> 
> Such is life.




Maybe they will be the ones who have lost the industry they worked in. Then at least they can online game to kill time, while they wait for the 'clean technology' industries to start up and provide employment.

As you say, such is life.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> Such is life.




Such is sour grapes.


----------



## Some Dude

NBNMyths said:


> I fully expect the coalition to win in September. All it means is that in 10 years time when the luddites are all senile and the next generation is voting, we'll look back at Tony and Mal's prophetic "25Megs is enough" with comedic incredulity, and spend another $40bn fixing up the mistake.




I remember a hardware salesmen who was working with me at the time (1996) that a 10GB drive was all you would ever need and no one could possibly come up with a reason for why you would need more in a typical home computer.

I remember when Telstra implemented 3GB caps to their plans in 2001 and reading comments that anyone who needed more than 3GB was either downloading things they shouldn't be or at best over using a limited resource.

I'm sure we can dig out more anecdotes.


----------



## Calliope

Some Dude said:


> I'm sure we can dig out more anecdotes.




Why not, it's more interesting.



> On 28 January 1896, Walter Arnold of East Peckham, Kent became the first person in Great Britain to be successfully charged with speeding. Travelling at approximately 8 mph, he had exceeded the 2 mph speed limit for towns. Fined 1 shilling (5p) plus costs, Arnold had been caught by a policeman who had given chase on a bicycle *so began one of the most lucrative ways of making money by Local Authorities and the Exchequer*


----------



## bellenuit

Some Dude said:


> I remember a hardware salesmen who was working with me at the time (1996) that a 10GB drive was all you would ever need and no one could possibly come up with a reason for why you would need more in a typical home computer.
> 
> I remember when Telstra implemented 3GB caps to their plans in 2001 and reading comments that anyone who needed more than 3GB was either downloading things they shouldn't be or at best over using a limited resource.
> 
> I'm sure we can dig out more anecdotes.




If you are talking 1996, I think you must be referring to a 10MB drive, not a 10GB. I think the IBM PC Junior, I think it was called, had an external 10M drive that cost well over $1K. 

However, the coalition's plan doesn't limit you to 25MB/sec and they haven't said that is all one would ever need. This is a straw man argument.  Their plan will give equivalent speeds to Labor's NBN for greenfield sites, educational institutes and hospitals (though I don't know if the latter two must pay extra to get FTTP installed). Industries and individuals who also want top speeds can get it if they are willing to pay extra for it. 

What they have said is that they can deliver 25MB/sec to most homes a lot sooner and cheaper that the NBN can deliver their product. 25MB/Sec is sufficient to meet foreseeable needs of most households. When that is no longer the case and households need more, households will of course be able to upgrade to FTTP or whatever technology is most suited at that time (and who knows, it may well not be fibre).

It is an entirely sensible approach.


----------



## boofhead

bellenuit said:


> If you are talking 1996, I think you must be referring to a 10MB drive, not a 10GB. I think the IBM PC Junior, I think it was called, had an external 10M drive that cost well over $1K.




1996, not 1986. I'm sure you'll be able to find ads for computer being sold in about that time frame (1996) coming with 2-4 GB HDDs. I know the Pentium 1 with MMX purchased in 1998 came with 3.2 GB Maxtor HDD.


----------



## Calliope

boofhead said:


> 1996, not 1986. I'm sure you'll be able to find ads for computer being sold in about that time frame (1996) coming with 2-4 GB HDDs. I know the Pentium 1 with MMX purchased in 1998 came with 3.2 GB Maxtor HDD.




My first computer, a Windows 3.1 with Intel 486 DX-33, MS-DOS 6, which I purchased in 1990 had a hard drive of 857 megabytes.


----------



## NBNMyths

bellenuit said:


> If you are talking 1996, I think you must be referring to a 10MB drive, not a 10GB. I think the IBM PC Junior, I think it was called, had an external 10M drive that cost well over $1K.
> 
> ...
> 
> What they have said is that they can deliver 25MB/sec to most homes a lot sooner and cheaper that the NBN can deliver their product. 25MB/Sec is sufficient to meet foreseeable needs of most households. When that is no longer the case and households need more, households will of course be able to upgrade to FTTP or whatever technology is most suited at that time (and who knows, it may well not be fibre).





Dates and capacities are way out.

My first Mac was entry level at the time and included a 40MB hard drive. That was in about 1992. By 1996, a 1GB drive was pretty standard at the entry level. 10GB would have been available in 1996, but with a pretty high price tag.

I do remember the guy I bought my LC off building an external SCSI drive with a 160MB capacity for another friend, and laughing about how anyone could want such a massive drive for household needs. 40MB was sufficient to meet foreseeable needs for most households, he said. Or something like that. 

Of course there really was no specifications available that would require more at that time. Today however, we already have a video standard ratified and in use which requires 28Mbps. I guess some people can only "foresee" when facing backwards.


----------



## Some Dude

bellenuit said:


> If you are talking 1996, I think you must be referring to a 10MB drive, not a 10GB. I think the IBM PC Junior, I think it was called, had an external 10M drive that cost well over $1K.




Where I was supplied systems (software and hardware) to businesses running AutoCAD and required larger than house hold drive requirements which is how the conversation started. When I first started in 1987, the 386 was just coming into our development pipeline and the 20 MB drive that we used was considered amazing.


----------



## sptrawler

Some Dude said:


> I remember a hardware salesmen who was working with me at the time (1996) that a 10GB drive was all you would ever need and no one could possibly come up with a reason for why you would need more in a typical home computer.
> 
> I remember when Telstra implemented 3GB caps to their plans in 2001 and reading comments that anyone who needed more than 3GB was either downloading things they shouldn't be or at best over using a limited resource.
> 
> I'm sure we can dig out more anecdotes.




I remember when single lane roads, were big enough to carry the traffic flows, now they are choked: Does that mean all roads built in Australia, should be built to carry three times their current flow requirements?

Trains are being used more and more to reduce truck trafic and obvious ineffeciencies, yet we only have one single freight track across Australia. Therefore trains have to sit idle in sidings, waiting for the train comining in the opposite direction to go by. Does that mean we need duplicate tracks everywhere?


----------



## Some Dude

sptrawler said:


> Does that mean we need duplicate tracks everywhere?




If a pattern of usage and demand can be identified that warrants what you suggest and will be beneficial in some economic sense, then yes.


----------



## sptrawler

Some Dude said:


> If a pattern of usage and demand can be identified that warrants what you suggest and will be beneficial in some economic sense, then yes.





The arguement, surrounds the issue, of do all houses need it?
Where does that pass your suggested criteria. I'm confused


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> I remember when single lane roads, were big enough to carry the traffic flows, now they are choked: Does that mean all roads built in Australia, should be built to carry three times their current flow requirements?




I have three arguments:

1.
It depends. If you had a usage graph that looked like this:




...and a group of the foremost international computer and telecommunication experts telling you that such an upgrade was the most prudent option, then you would probably take their advice.


2.
Is it better value for money to spend $30bn on a road that will last maybe 10 years before it requires an additional $40bn upgrade, or $44bn now to build a road that (based on our knowledge of the technological capabilities) will likely not require a major upgrade in our lifetimes? Is it better to spend the $30bn (~$3,000 per premises) on the basic upgrade, and then charge households who want to "go the whole hog" another ~$3,000 (~$6,000 ea total), or simply spend ~$4000 letting everyone "go the whole hog" as they see fit?


3.
Your argument could just as easily apply to the coalition's plan. I'm sure there are many people for whom, right now, the 'road' doesn't need _any_ upgrade at all. So why do anything? Why do an upgrade that only some people want or need? Why not wait until _everybody_ needs the 'road' upgrade, and then do it? People who want fibre today can get it if they have a spare $5-20k and $1k per month, or so.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Not history, just future. Except for those lucky enough to be in areas already under construction of course.
> 
> I fully expect the coalition to win in September. All it means is that in 10 years time when the luddites are all senile and the next generation is voting, we'll look back at Tony and Mal's prophetic "25Megs is enough" with comedic incredulity, and spend another $40bn fixing up the mistake.
> 
> Such is life.



In 10 years time, the NBN might still be getting rolled out, $40bn over budget and superseded.

That's if Labor wins. :


----------



## MrBurns

drsmith said:


> In 10 years time, the NBN might still be getting rolled out, $40bn over budget and superseded.
> 
> That's if Labor wins. :




Exactly I don't know what you're all arguing about do you really expect Labor to finish anything ?


----------



## Some Dude

drsmith said:


> In 10 years time, the NBN might still be getting rolled out, $40bn over budget and superseded.




What would FTTP be superseded by? Especially in the context of existing copper network that FTTN would need?


----------



## drsmith

Some Dude said:


> What would FTTP be superseded by? Especially in the context of existing copper network that FTTN would need?



Even if it wasn't, 2 out of 3 would still be pretty bad.


----------



## sptrawler

Some Dude said:


> What would FTTP be superseded by? Especially in the context of existing copper network that FTTN would need?




The arguement is does the premise require fibre? will it ever require fibre?
At present, definitely not, however if a house wants it they can pay for it.
Will it require it in the future who knows?

Take Kalgoorlie for instance, I think the superpit has a life expectancy of 10years left. There is every reason to believe in 20 years it will be a lot smaller than it is now, so a lot of the roll out there`will be a waste.

There are a lot of people who get all romantic about having bling speed internet, the question is, why?

I supose for the same reason a lot of people buy 315kw bright purple Commodore SS cars with brembo 6 spot carbon fibre brakes. 
I don't have one, you might and I guarantee you can get to the shops a lots faster than me, so what! My car still gets me there in a timely manner.


----------



## drsmith

For interest, some blog articles of the Coalition's NBN costings,

http://www.zdnet.com/au/coalitions-nbn-analysis-needs-more-analysis-7000013977/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/14/coalition_broadband_plan/


----------



## Some Dude

sptrawler said:


> Will it require it in the future who knows?




Based on the usage and demand patterns to date, what's your best guess?


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> For interest, some blog articles of the Coalition's NBN costings,
> 
> http://www.zdnet.com/au/coalitions-nbn-analysis-needs-more-analysis-7000013977/
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/14/coalition_broadband_plan/




The zdnet article is well worth a read.

I find it quite suite scary that the LNP have a policy that is based mainly on the fact that using the copper will save costs over rolling out fibre, yet cannot answer simple questions like:

* How much copper will need to be replaced?

* What kind of testing will be performed to determine if the copper is up to standard, and who will do this testing?  Will the test results be freely available?  Will copper replacement information be freely available?

* How long will it take to determine the vendor for the nodes?  Do they plan to use a single vendor or go multi vendor?

* How long will it take to redesign the NBN from a fibre rollout to an FTTN rollout?

* When will the first node be installed?

* At what point will the rollout hit it's peak monthly install of nodes?

* How long from a node being installed till a premise is connected?

* How come everything with the NBN will go wrong, but everything with the NoBN will go perfectly right? (LNP have just as poor track record at infrastructure delivery as any other political party eg Sydney Airport line or Adelaide Darwin rail line)

* When does MT expect to have a new agreement with Telstra signed and access to the copper secured?  Will this new agreement have to be voted on by shareholders?


----------



## sptrawler

Some Dude said:


> Based on the usage and demand pattern to date, what your best guess be?




For the people I know who don't bother with the internet at all, my guess is they don't want it.

Look if I was a mad keen internet user, computer user or it related to my work or profession, I would probably be banging the drum also.

As I'm not, I just see it like anything else you build, it has to makes sense in an outcomes verses investment.

If it was critical everyone needed it and couldn't manage without it, well then do it. However that isn't the case, lots of people don't use it, if they do want to use it, it is allready available.

What we are talking about is the difference between, bloody good and absolutely brilliant.

Somewhat like comparing a commodore with a ferrari, they both do the job the ferrari does it faster.
The commodore will get you where you want to go and also pick up the shopping. The ferrari does all that and you can race it on the weekend.
I'm happy with the commodore, you want a ferrari, I'm o.k with that, but you shouldn't expect me and everyone else to pay for it, when it isn't necessary.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> The arguement is does the premise require fibre? will it ever require fibre?
> At present, definitely not, however if a house wants it they can pay for it.
> Will it require it in the future who knows?
> 
> Take Kalgoorlie for instance, I think the superpit has a life expectancy of 10years left. There is every reason to believe in 20 years it will be a lot smaller than it is now, so a lot of the roll out there`will be a waste.
> 
> There are a lot of people who get all romantic about having bling speed internet, the question is, why?
> 
> I supose for the same reason a lot of people buy 315kw bright purple Commodore SS cars with brembo 6 spot carbon fibre brakes.
> I don't have one, you might and I guarantee you can get to the shops a lots faster than me, so what! My car still gets me there in a timely manner.




If you get a better service, and it doesn't cost you any more, then what's the problem?

At least when you sign up for a cheap 12Mbs plan you get that speed.  I think in my work place I'm the only person who gets that kind of speed (only just).  Most of my colleges are < 6Mbs with relatively unstable lines.  They're usually ringing up when it rains to be put back onto a stability profile for a few days till things dry out again.

It is a user pays network, and so far it seems people DO want the higher speeds, so let them subsidise the people who want to keep a basic internet connection, and heck those people can be a lot better off if they cancel their land line and go VOIP.  My Dad's $40 a month better off by doing that.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> Somewhat like comparing a commodore with a ferrari, they both do the job the ferrari does it faster.
> The commodore will get you where you want to go and also pick up the shopping. The ferrari does all that and you can race it on the weekend.
> I'm happy with the commodore, you want a ferrari, I'm o.k with that, but you shouldn't expect me and everyone else to pay for it, when it isn't necessary.




I find that comparisson to focus on only 1 small aspect of the NBN.

The biggest issue is that it provides a highly reliable service.  I know too many people with unreliable ADSL, and I see far far too many problems at work for customers due to rotting copper.

We have small businesses who are off the air for 3+ days because of copper line faults.  In QLD and Northern NSW it can take 10 workings days at the moment to get a field tech to test a line.  I would argue the NBN will reduce that to 10-15% of the current faults.  No idea what the productivity improvement will be, but it would certainly be a huge extra dividend on top of all the other benefits.


----------



## Some Dude

sptrawler said:


> Look if I was a mad keen internet user, computer user or it related to my work or profession, I would probably be banging the drum also.
> 
> As I'm not, I just see it like anything else you build, it has to makes sense in an outcomes verses investment.




I absolutely agree, if it is worth the investment. But given that you are not a "mad keen internet user, computer user or it related to my work or profession", why would you not take on board more favourably the positions of those who are far more intimately familiar with regard to what is expected to be needed for the country as whole, not just for them now, but also for the next generation?


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> The zdnet article is well worth a read.
> 
> I find it quite suite scary that the LNP have a policy that is based mainly on the fact that using the copper will save costs over rolling out fibre, yet cannot answer simple questions like:
> 
> * How much copper will need to be replaced?
> 
> * What kind of testing will be performed to determine if the copper is up to standard, and who will do this testing?  Will the test results be freely available?  Will copper replacement information be freely available?
> 
> * How long will it take to determine the vendor for the nodes?  Do they plan to use a single vendor or go multi vendor?
> 
> * How long will it take to redesign the NBN from a fibre rollout to an FTTN rollout?
> 
> * When will the first node be installed?
> 
> * At what point will the rollout hit it's peak monthly install of nodes?
> 
> * How long from a node being installed till a premise is connected?
> 
> * How come everything with the NBN will go wrong, but everything with the NoBN will go perfectly right? (LNP have just as poor track record at infrastructure delivery as any other political party eg Sydney Airport line or Adelaide Darwin rail line)
> 
> * When does MT expect to have a new agreement with Telstra signed and access to the copper secured?  Will this new agreement have to be voted on by shareholders?




With time frames, nobody seems to be worried about the NBN times.

With copper issues one would expect that faults will be by exception as is the case now. When it is connected if the home owner is happy with the internet response, everything moves on. 
If the home owner isn't, one assumes the pair is checked and repaired, renewed or replaced by fibre.
The big saving will be, all the homes that don't care one way or another and are transferred seamlessly.
With the NBN, every one is done regardless if they require it or not, that is unbelievable overkill. Every dump every highrise block of units retrofitted. It is just dumb.IMO


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> For interest, some blog articles of the Coalition's NBN costings,
> 
> http://www.zdnet.com/au/coalitions-nbn-analysis-needs-more-analysis-7000013977/
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/14/coalition_broadband_plan/




If the register is right then it looks like MT has been either very tricky or totally incompetent with his OPEX figures.

Close to $2B wrong for 2014 and 2015.

It's a shame most of the media are not giving the same kind of scrutiny to the LNP Fraudband as they have done to the NBN.

I wonder if they used the same mob who gave the LNP the $10B costing black hole prior to the last election to do their figures for Fraudband???


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> With time frames, nobody seems to be worried about the NBN times.




Because the LNP are making time frames a HUGE issue with the NBN and a central selling point for their Fraudband.

I for one find it almost impossible to believe they can rollout 60,000 nodes by the end of 2016 to anyone not getting fixed wireless or satellite, or lucky enough to have FTTP installed.

So if you are going to criticise the NBN for it, then they should have pretty detailed rollout schedules in place so the punters know how much sooner they will get their upgrade.


----------



## Some Dude

sydboy007 said:


> It's a shame most of the media are not giving the same kind of scrutiny to the LNP Fraudband as they have done to the NBN.




Do you mean the media organisation and subsidiary outlets that helped launch the policy?


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> Because the LNP are making time frames a HUGE issue with the NBN and a central selling point for their Fraudband.
> 
> I for one find it almost impossible to believe they can rollout 60,000 nodes by the end of 2016 to anyone not getting fixed wireless or satellite, or lucky enough to have FTTP installed.
> 
> So if you are going to criticise the NBN for it, then they should have pretty detailed rollout schedules in place so the punters know how much sooner they will get their upgrade.




I agree with that completely, it doesn't matter which one goes ahead, it will be a slow process.
The logistics are huge, however it obviously would be quicker if you don't have to run to the premise then install new equipment.
But as you say fabricating and fitting out 60,00 cabinets in 3 years doesn't sound plausible either.

My guess is if Libs do FTTN, it will take 6 - 10 years, but will be completed.
If they continue with FTTP it will eventually be so drawn out, difficult and expensive, it will be abandoned or carried out like the underground power retrofit.
Where suburbs are selected by the state of the overhead system and upgraded by priority.
Then the local government and ratepayers are charged as their area is done.
Only my thoughts.


----------



## Ves

Some Dude said:


> Do you mean the media organisation and subsidiary outlets that helped launch the policy?



The same media companies that have, and still stand to lose a lot, from the increased movement away from traditional media?


----------



## DB008

If you are going to do/build/undertake something, do it right, do it right first time. I have followed this rule for a while now.

Why 'double handle' and do it twice.

Save time/money.

Governments aren't very good at this, private sector is 'usually' much better. If you live in Sydney, you only have to look at the M2/M4 upgrade. Should have been done right first time!

NBN ~$40 billion?
Telstra spending $1 billion per year on copper upkeep.
Australian GDP $1.37 trillion (2011).

No brainer to install a NBN (of some sort).

Australia is a 'huge' country, not very densely populated.

FTTN?
FTTH?

If past history is anything to go by, technology advances at an alarming rate.
I still remember downloading 5mb MP3's songs that took forever. Now we can get 10gb, 1080p movies faster.

Build it, but do it right, first time.
The Libs NBN plan doesn't look very convincing to be honest, 25mbps.....
ALP is a like a drunker sailor on a night out, first night back on shore (regarding the money they are wasting on various schemes)....max of 100mbps, when Google is already rolling out 1gbps in Kansas with Texas the next state to get it.

Google Fiber might even be fully rolled out in the USA before the ALP NBN is completed....


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> I find that comparisson to focus on only 1 small aspect of the NBN.
> 
> The biggest issue is that it provides a highly reliable service.  I know too many people with unreliable ADSL, and I see far far too many problems at work for customers due to rotting copper.
> 
> We have small businesses who are off the air for 3+ days because of copper line faults.  In QLD and Northern NSW it can take 10 workings days at the moment to get a field tech to test a line.  I would argue the NBN will reduce that to 10-15% of the current faults.  No idea what the productivity improvement will be, but it would certainly be a huge extra dividend on top of all the other benefits.




But even with the FTTN, businesses will get fibre to the premise.
There seems to be trouble for people to differentiate between houses and businesses.
The issue I have is every house and block of flats IMO don't need it.
Businesses do and the coalition is saying, they will get fibre to the premise.
Just not all residential properties.


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> If you get a better service, and it doesn't cost you any more, then what's the problem?
> 
> At least when you sign up for a cheap 12Mbs plan you get that speed.  I think in my work place I'm the only person who gets that kind of speed (only just).  Most of my colleges are < 6Mbs with relatively unstable lines.  They're usually ringing up when it rains to be put back onto a stability profile for a few days till things dry out again.
> 
> It is a user pays network, and so far it seems people DO want the higher speeds, so let them subsidise the people who want to keep a basic internet connection, and heck those people can be a lot better off if they cancel their land line and go VOIP.  My Dad's $40 a month better off by doing that.




Again, *even with the coalitions plan, your workplace gets fibre*.

The difference is normal houses, resedential houses, won't.

Sorry for the bolds, but you keep saying businesses keep copper, when according to MT they get fibre.


----------



## Trentb

DB008 said:


> Google Fiber might even be fully rolled out in the USA before the ALP NBN is completed....




Does anyone have an answer to why fiber can be rolled out by private companies like google to cities in other countries but couldn't be in Australia?

The "Australia is much bigger" argument comes up alot. However, I think the failing with that argument is the mass of Australian population is located in Capital cities and a few regional cities. 

I've always wondered why the government couldn't have subsidised an NBN rollout for regional area's below a certain population cutoff and left the major cities open for private NBN equivalent rollouts.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> If the register is right then it looks like MT has been either very tricky or totally incompetent with his OPEX figures.
> 
> Close to $2B wrong for 2014 and 2015.



If you are referring to maintenance of the copper network, that's covered under capex on page 16 of the background paper. 

Lower opex in 2014 and 2015 might be related to the rollout schedule of the Coalition's FTTN.


----------



## So_Cynical

bellenuit said:


> What they have said is that they can deliver 25MB/sec to most homes a lot sooner and cheaper that the NBN can deliver their product. 25MB/Sec is sufficient to meet foreseeable needs of most households. When that is no longer the case and households need more, households will of course be able to upgrade to FTTP or whatever technology is most suited at that time (and who knows, it may well not be fibre).
> 
> It is an entirely sensible approach.




It is an entirely sensible approach and i wish the Howard Govt had committed to such a plan when it was appropriate to do so 7 or 8 years ago...how however its a different story, now we have contracts in place, plans well established, equipment purchased, homes, schools and businesses connected.

What would of been an entirely sensible thing to do 7 or 8 years ago is now in the face of the NBN reality, a half arsed outcome arrived at for purely political reasons.


----------



## bellenuit

Some Dude said:


> What would FTTP be superseded by? Especially in the context of existing copper network that FTTN would need?




It could very well be that the existing copper may meet the speed needs of households in the future if they continue to come up with new technologies that can run over it. We have already seen increased speeds over copper achieved as they went to ADSL 1 then ADSL 2 etc. 

But as to your question what would FTTP be superseded by, isn't that the whole point in favour of the coalitions policy. They are not betting the farm on what will be available 10 or 15 years from now. We simply don't know, so it makes sense to not overspend up front.


----------



## Calliope

Trentb said:


> Does anyone have an answer to why fiber can be rolled out by private companies like google to cities in other countries but couldn't be in Australia?




Because Google is not controlled by Conroy.


----------



## Julia

sydboy007 said:


> Because the LNP are making time frames a HUGE issue



Please, sydboy, the *LNP* only exists as a single party in Queensland.
Nationally, it's the Coalition of the Liberal and National Parties, viz "The Coalition".


----------



## Some Dude

bellenuit said:


> It could very well be that the existing copper may meet the speed needs of households in the future if they continue to come up with new technologies that can run over it. We have already seen increased speeds over copper achieved as they went to ADSL 1 then ADSL 2 etc.
> 
> But as to your question what would FTTP be superseded by, isn't that the whole point in favour of the coalitions policy. They are not betting the farm on what will be available 10 or 15 years from now. We simply don't know, so it makes sense to not overspend up front.




Granted Telstra have a vested interest but from 2003:



			
				Alan Kohler said:
			
		

> A month ago, before a Senate committee inquiry into broadband competition, Telstra's Bill Scales and Tony Warren rather let the cat out of the bag.
> 
> Warren, group manager, regulatory strategy, told the committee: "I think it is right to suggest that ADSL is an interim technology. It is probably the last sweating, if you like, of the old copper network assets. In copper years, if you like, we are at a sort of transition - we are at five minutes to midnight."
> 
> A few minutes later his boss, Bill Scales, attempted to bury this bit of candour: "The only point of clarification, just so that there is no misunderstanding, is that when we think about the copper network, we are still thinking about 10 years out. So five minutes to midnight in this context . . ."
> 
> Dr Warren (chiming in): "Doesn't mean five years."
> 
> Mr Scales: "It does not. It could be 10 or even 15 years, just to get some context into that."
> 
> Phew. That was close. Telstra's copper will be sweated for a few years yet, thanks very much.
> 
> Trouble is, in world terms, Telstra is flogging a sick horse, if not quite a dead one, and the world is rapidly moving towards FTTH - including in Australia. TransACT has laid fibre to the home in Canberra; Western Power subsidiary Bright Telecommunications is doing it in Perth.




My understanding is that most in the industry know exactly what it is.


----------



## DB008

Calliope said:


> Because Google is not controlled by Conroy.




LOL


----------



## So_Cynical

bellenuit said:


> It could very well be that the existing copper may meet the speed needs of households in the future if they continue to come up with new technologies that can run over it. We have already seen increased speeds over copper achieved as they went to ADSL 1 then ADSL 2 etc.




How do you reckon they will get light pulses to travel at the speed of light down copper wire???


----------



## Some Dude

So_Cynical said:


> How do you reckon they will get light pulses to travel at the speed of light down copper wire???




Well that quantum entanglement technology is just around the corner


----------



## bellenuit

So_Cynical said:


> How do you reckon they will get light pulses to travel at the speed of light down copper wire???




I don't get your point. You you don't need to increase speed to increase throughput. You can, for instance have better compression technology, so the same amount of information can be sent using less bits. In video delivery for example, the emerging High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC) standard or H.265 is designed to offer almost double the compression efficiency of H.264, reducing storage and bandwidth costs.


----------



## So_Cynical

bellenuit said:


> I don't get your point. You you don't need to increase speed to increase throughput. You can, for instance have better compression technology.




Point is that if you have fibre you get current technology light speed, no compression or any other rubbish needed to achieve high speeds and or increase throughput etc...i mean the back bone is fibre for a reason.


----------



## bellenuit

So_Cynical said:


> Point is that if you have fibre you get current technology light speed, no compression or any other rubbish needed to achieve high speeds and or increase throughput etc...i mean the back bone is fibre for a reason.




Ok. But nobody disagrees that fibre is faster. The point is it costs a lot more to install to every home and there are ways to get acceptable speeds for a lot less. The coalition plan doesn't preclude getting faster speeds when they are eventually needed whether it be new technology that better utilises copper, installing fibre or something from left field that is being worked on in the labs that we don't know about yet.


----------



## Some Dude

bellenuit said:


> Ok. But nobody disagrees that fibre is faster. The point is it costs a lot more to install to every home and there are ways to get acceptable speeds for a lot less. The coalition plan doesn't preclude getting faster speeds when they are eventually needed whether it be new technology that better utilises copper, installing fibre or something from left field that is being worked on in the labs that we don't know about yet.




Any theoretical technology that is being worked on in the labs will be used in the backbone first, and one is not being used yet. Betting that a left field technology will appear does not seem like a viable option. Fibre is the next step and one day it will be replacing the copper network in it's entirety to the home. Why do it piecemeal which will cost so much more per residence instead of one standardised rollout?


----------



## sydboy007

Julia said:


> Please, sydboy, the *LNP* only exists as a single party in Queensland.
> Nationally, it's the Coalition of the Liberal and National Parties, viz "The Coalition".




Julia

considering the meakness of the Nationals in the face of Fraudband, you could be right.

Still, they shack up together so cozy it's hard not to see them as the LNP, or maybe the LnP to show just how weak the Nationals really are.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> I agree with that completely, it doesn't matter which one goes ahead, it will be a slow process.
> The logistics are huge, however it obviously would be quicker if you don't have to run to the premise then install new equipment.
> But as you say fabricating and fitting out 60,00 cabinets in 3 years doesn't sound plausible either.
> 
> My guess is if Libs do FTTN, it will take 6 - 10 years, but will be completed.




Then why not spend the money to do it once, than to go through two drawn out network upgrades.

I can see Fraudband costing as much as the NBN simply because it loses the scale economics of a single fibre rollout.

Malcolm can't even get his first 2 years OPEX right, so really how can we take the rest of his calculations with anything but a huge amount of skepticism!


----------



## moXJO

So_Cynical said:


> Point is that if you have fibre you get current technology light speed, no compression or any other rubbish needed to achieve high speeds and or increase throughput etc...i mean the back bone is fibre for a reason.




I agree do it once and do it right. Labor has good ideas but it really stuffs up on the rollouts. Their nbn is far better then the libs and while costing more, I believe there are better productivity gains and tech advancements to offset any costs.


----------



## Calliope

moXJO said:


> I believe there are better productivity gains and tech advancements to offset any costs.




You have hit the nail on the head. The Turnbull model offers 25 -50mgs rollout for everyone, but the "better productivity gains and tech advancements to offset costs" from 100mgs are available to any business for around $5000...which is chickenfeed.

It's like flying economy or first class. If you want superior service you pay for it.


----------



## bellenuit

Some Dude said:


> Any theoretical technology that is being worked on in the labs will be used in the backbone first, and one is not being used yet.




That's a huge call to make. What about, say, community wide wifi? Wifi that would not be limited to just inside the premises, but could extend over a greater area, perhaps the same footprint that will be covered by the street boxes that join the FTTN back bone to the local copper. The requirements for the last mile are very different to what is needed for the backbone, so you cannot assume that there will be no independent developments that might be suited to the former but inappropriate to the latter.



> Betting that a left field technology will appear does not seem like a viable option.




But you are not betting the farm on that. That is just one of several possibilities, as I mentioned. 



> Fibre is the next step and one day it will be replacing the copper network in it's entirety to the home. Why do it piecemeal which will cost so much more per residence instead of one standardised rollout?




Again you are making assumptions that may very well not be the case. Doing fibre to a premise now may well be cheaper than installing just to a street node now and eventually upgrading the copper part to fibre 10 years down the track. But few installations are happening NOW. The reality is likely to be that the coalition's NBN will be bringing in revenue a lot sooner and costing less in interest than Labor's NBN, so you would have to ensure that the revenue increase coupled with reduced costs do not more than cover the total extra cost of the double installation to say the Labor version is cheaper. And that is on cost/premises basis. What about all those premises that are happy with the speeds that they get under the coalition plan? They don't require a second upgrade. 

And what about the cost of doing bad fibre installations?  We already have had stories about how few NBN installers have been properly trained. 

I think it is too difficult to make a call on what is cheaper and too difficult to make a call on what is going to be the requirements and technology 10 years hence.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Malcolm can't even get his first 2 years OPEX right, so really how can we take the rest of his calculations with anything but a huge amount of skepticism!



In drawing that conclusion for those two years (FY2014 and FY2015), has the late 2014 start date of the large scale rollout of the Opposition's FTTN model been considered ?

I made a reference to this in response to one of your posts yesterday.


----------



## Some Dude

bellenuit said:


> That's a huge call to make.




True, my bad. I was referring to technologies that will increase signal speed e.g. fibre optic vacuum, that would be potentially beneficial for large scale purposes.



bellenuit said:


> What about, say, community wide wifi? Wifi that would not be limited to just inside the premises, but could extend over a greater area, perhaps the same footprint that will be covered by the street boxes that join the FTTN back bone to the local copper. The requirements for the last mile are very different to what is needed for the backbone, so you cannot assume that there will be no independent developments that might be suited to the former but inappropriate to the latter.




A decision will need to be made at some point, one can't wait for what might come around the corner forever. None of the technologies you suggest to my knowledge provide any such possibility for an economical deployment to the distance and population requirements?




bellenuit said:


> But you are not betting the farm on that. That is just one of several possibilities, as I mentioned.




I disgaree with the characterisation of "betting the farm on it". The decisions have costs, and both proposals are not insubstantial, but to characterise fibre optic as betting the farm on it as if we will regret it because some magic technology may come along is problematic for me. One one hand we have observations that most homes won't need the bandwidth (I disagree with this also), and then on the other hand we should hold out for something faster and better?



bellenuit said:


> Again you are making assumptions that may very well not be the case. Doing fibre to a premise now may well be cheaper than installing just to a street node now and eventually upgrading the copper part to fibre 10 years down the track. But few installations are happening NOW. The reality is likely to be that the coalition's NBN will be bringing in revenue a lot sooner and costing less in interest than Labor's NBN, so you would have to ensure that the revenue increase coupled with reduced costs do not more than cover the total extra cost of the double installation to say the Labor version is cheaper. And that is on cost/premises basis. What about all those premises that are happy with the speeds that they get under the coalition plan? They don't require a second upgrade.




I think your premise there is faulty. You may not want it but why constrain the future users because of your requirements now. Where I do think you could have a point is on coverage. I was talking to someone today who models these situations and they made the point that substantial savings could be had by lowering the coverage rate from 93% to another figure (say 85% for discussion sake). In this manner, they briefly demonstrated how the system would be significantly cheaper (closer to the coalitions stated cost) but still get to the vast majority of the population with the benefits of fibre optic.

And what about the cost of doing bad fibre installations?  We already have had stories about how few NBN installers have been properly trained. 



bellenuit said:


> I think it is too difficult to make a call on what is cheaper and too difficult to make a call on what is going to be the requirements and technology 10 years hence.




Most of the professionals in the field I have discussed it with seem to disagree that it is to difficult to make a call.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> In drawing that conclusion for those two years (FY2014 and FY2015), has the late 2014 start date of the large scale rollout of the Opposition's FTTN model been considered ?
> 
> I made a reference to this in response to one of your posts yesterday.




If that's the case then seriously, 25Mbs minimum speed for EVERYONE getting FTTN is not possible.  That would make the rollout share of 2016 at over half the FTTN footprint.

I've used a graph from ofcom - MT should be happy with it since he holds up BTs FTTN network as something for Australia to aspire to.

Ignore VDSL2 as MT has not indicated we'll be using 2 copper pairs to provide for that kind of service.  If he is then the costs are going to climb at more than double the current rate as he will need to be replacing a LOT more copper.

The good thing about this ofcom graph is that it's more about real world results than the theoretical graphs you see.

So to give us all 25Mbs we will need to be within 900M of a node.

To get up to that magical 50Mbs minimum means we need to be around 200M from a node.

Compare that to the theoretical graph which shows 50Mbs at around 1000M and 25Mbs at 1250M

I bet I know which graph MT is making his cost saving assumptions on.

The only way you can go from 25 to 50Mbs is to connect users up to 1 node further away, then reconnect to a closer node a few years later if you are getting less than 50Mbs.  Seems like a lot of double handling to me.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> If that's the case then.........



No ifs, that's their plan.

Start the major component the FTTN in late 2014 and complete 65% of their FTTN rollout by the end of 2016. This start time therefore offers a potential explanation for the low opex referred to in FY's 2014 and 2015. As to whether they can do it in that timeframe and the actual capability achieved is a matter separate to the maintenance cost of the copper. 

I highlighted those two articles for two reasons. The first one seemed to summarise concisely the costing detail of the Coalition's plan and the author in my view offered in an unbiased perspective. The second article (the one to which you refer) appears to draw conclusions about the Coalition's costings without analysing them in enough depth.

The Coalition policy document and background paper are both well worth reading in full. That puts some of this third party commentary into the appropriate context and might in itself directly identify questions with their costings.

Just take a deep breath before you go to the link below and you'll be OK. 

http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/


----------



## IFocus

drsmith said:


> No ifs, that's their plan.
> 
> Start the major component the FTTN in late 2014 and complete 65% of their FTTN rollout by the end of 2016. This start time therefore offers a potential explanation for the low opex referred to in FY's 2014 and 2015. As to whether they can do it in that timeframe and the actual capability achieved is a matter separate to the maintenance cost of the copper.
> 
> I highlighted those two articles for two reasons. The first one seemed to summarise concisely the costing detail of the Coalition's plan and the author in my view offered in an unbiased perspective. The second article (the one to which you refer) appears to draw conclusions about the Coalition's costings without analysing them in enough depth.
> 
> The Coalition policy document and background paper are both well worth reading in full. That puts some of this third party commentary into the appropriate context and might in itself directly identify questions with their costings.
> 
> Just take a deep breath before you go to the link below and you'll be OK.
> 
> http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/




The coalitions time line has been ridiculed by the tech heads over on whirlpool and looking at the numbers from my own project experience its miles out.


----------



## IFocus

bellenuit said:


> It could very well be that the existing copper may meet the speed needs of households in the future if they continue to come up with new technologies that can run over it. We have already seen increased speeds over copper achieved as they went to ADSL 1 then ADSL 2 etc.




No one and I mean no one builds projects based on possible future technology development.

There is no business case that will stand up to this it is only trotted out as political bait for the punters (not implying you are a punter).

Its of course possible but you cannot engineer for this out come.

The problem with the coalitions scheme is its for now not the future by any known measurement. 

Whether when in government Turnbull can move Abbott further to FTTH remains to be seen but Turnbull would know in his heart the different cost between to two schemes wont warrant the saving to build the Coalitions.

It has the potential to be the proverbial albatross around the Coalitions neck down the road.


----------



## Calliope

IFocus said:


> It has the potential to be the proverbial albatross around the Coalitions neck down the road.




Yes like all other Labor schemes. They have the proverbial "bad tenants" and will "trash the joint" before they leave.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> The Coalition policy document and background paper are both well worth reading in full. That puts some of this third party commentary into the appropriate context and might in itself directly identify questions with their costings.
> 
> Just take a deep breath before you go to the link below and you'll be OK.
> 
> http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/




Had a read of the background paper and would question a few things

* FTTN OPEX at $90 / premises with FTTP at $60 - most articles I've read have put the running costs of FTTN as at least 50% cheaper than FTTN.

* Brownfield*FTTP*is*restricted*to*areas*with*degraded*or*maintenance‐intensive*copper - how many premises do they estimate this to be?  Considering reusing the current copper is a major claim to the lower costs of Fraudband there should be a % figure provided.

* It*takes*approximately*4*quarters*for*activity*at*NBN*Co*to*fully*reflect*changed*policy - if Malcolm is able to achieve this I'll take my hat off to him.  To be able to redesign the network rollout, run tenders and pick suppliers, renegotiate with Telstra and Optus will be pretty hard to achieve in 1 year.  I think there was a 3+ month period between the deal with Telstra getting board approval and the shareholder vote.

So it looks like MT has say 6 quarters to roll out around 39000 nodes.  Not sure how he is going to achieve a fast rollout when his policy seems to indicate it will be a bit piecemeal to fix up the broadband "balckspots" first.


----------



## sydboy007

Calliope said:


> Yes like all other Labor schemes. They have the proverbial "bad tenants" and will "trash the joint" before they leave.




Just for un, can you please provide an example of infrastructure built by the Liberals that was on time and on budget?


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> Just for un, can you please provide an example of infrastructure built by the Liberals that was on time and on budget?




"Just for un" do your *own* research.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Had a read of the background paper and would question a few things.




My responses in blue,

* FTTN OPEX at $90 / premises with FTTP at $60 - most articles I've read have put the running costs of FTTP as at least 50% cheaper than FTTN.

Does this include the maintenance cost of the copper, any links ?

* Brownfield*FTTP*is*restricted*to*areas*with*degraded*or*maintenance‐intensive*copper - how many premises do they estimate this to be?  Considering reusing the current copper is a major claim to the lower costs of the Coalition's NBN, there should be a % figure provided.

Obviously if it's more than they expect, their rollout will be take longer and be more expensive. The flipside is that a greater proportion of premises will be FTTP. The advantage in their approach is the flexibility of being able to utilise the copper where it is still serviceable.

* It*takes*approximately*4*quarters*for*activity*at*NBN*Co*to*fully*reflect*changed*policy - if Malcolm is able to achieve this I'll take my hat off to him.  To be able to redesign the network rollout, run tenders and pick suppliers, renegotiate with Telstra and Optus will be pretty hard to achieve in 1 year.  I think there was a 3+ month period between the deal with Telstra getting board approval and the shareholder vote.

We'll have to wait for the detail, but it wouldn't surprise me if these targets are too ambitious. We know by what we have seen so far that Labor's are. Malcolm at least has the advantage of not starting from scratch, knowing Telstra's overall expectations from the current deal and I suspect won't be going into negotiations with Telstra from a hostile starting point with red underpants in hand. As to whether a shareholder vote would be required remains to be seen. 

So it looks like MT has say 6 quarters to roll out around 39000 nodes.  Not sure how he is going to achieve a fast rollout when his policy seems to indicate it will be a bit piecemeal to fix up the broadband "balckspots" first.

Page 8 of their main policy document quotes the end of 2016 as the end of the first phase. That would therefore be 8Q if we include 2015 and 2016. As for blackspots, does the document say piecemeal or are you making an assumption ?


----------



## NBNMyths

sydboy007 said:


> Just for un, can you please provide an example of infrastructure built by the Liberals that was on time and on budget?






Calliope said:


> "Just for un" do your *own* research.




Now there's a nice typical response when you can't come up with an answer.

I was actually wondering the same thing myself. The right are always only too happy to criticise the Labor Government for projects they undertake, but it seems to me that the few major infrastructure projects or capital purchases undertaken in the Howard years didn't fare any better. Perhaps it's easier to remember the Labor ones, simply because they have a crack at so many more projects?


I'm quite open to being corrected (you never know, maybe I have a selective memory  ), but I can't think of any major infrastructure project or capital purchase programme undertaken by the Howard-led coalition that was completed on time and/or budget.

I await a big serving of humble pie, which I'm sure Calliope will be only too happy to dish up if he can find any in the pantry.


----------



## sydboy007

In response to Dr Smith a couple of posts up

FTTN OPEX at $90 / premises with FTTP at $60 - most articles I've read have put the running costs of FTTP as at least 50% cheaper than FTTN.

Does this include the maintenance cost of the copper, any links ?

see below table taken from page 14 of the backgroup document.  Since they are referring to Opex under a heading "HOW DOES FTTP NOW COMPARE TO FTTN NOW AND FTTP LATER?" I would take that to mean the continuing costs including copper maintenance.  If not then they need to make this a lot clearer.

 Brownfield FTTP is restricted to areas with degraded or maintenance‐intensive copper - how many premises do they estimate this to be? Considering reusing the current copper is a major claim to the lower costs of the Coalition's NBN, there should be a % figure provided.

Obviously if it's more than they expect, their rollout will be take longer and be more expensive. The flipside is that a greater proportion of premises will be FTTP. The advantage in their approach is the flexibility of being able to utilise the copper where it is still serviceable.

This will then turn certain areas into those with superior broadband over areas that are stuck with HFC cable or FTTN copper speeds.  Depending on what % of each we get to will determine what kinds of applications are chosen to be developed.  If you have the majority of the country on 25Mbs then I would say a lot of developments overseas will bypass us as we'll be falling further behind a lot of Asia and the USA.

Page 8 of their main policy document quotes the end of 2016 as the end of the first phase. That would therefore be 8Q if we include 2015 and 2016. As for blackspots, does the document say piecemeal or are you making an assumption ?

From page 6 of the Broadband policy document.  Unfortunately they've copy protected the file so I can't do a copy paste.  It does state that those areas with poorest broadband receive priority.  The only way to proritise those areas is to do the rollout in a less efficient way, otherwise you are not prioritising the rollout to bring the worst areas up to speed.


I'd like to add that Malcolm claims Labor has done little to help these areas over the last 5 years, yet the LNP had 11 years in office and pretty much did nothing.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Now there's a nice typical response when you can't come up with an answer.
> 
> I was actually wondering the same thing myself. The right are always only too happy to criticise the Labor Government for projects they undertake, but it seems to me that the few major infrastructure projects or capital purchases undertaken in the Howard years didn't fare any better. Perhaps it's easier to remember the Labor ones, simply because they have a crack at so many more projects?
> 
> 
> I'm quite open to being corrected (you never know, maybe I have a selective memory  ), but I can't think of any major infrastructure project or capital purchase programme undertaken by the Howard-led coalition that was completed on time and/or budget.
> 
> I await a big serving of humble pie, which I'm sure Calliope will be only too happy to dish up if he can find any in the pantry.




Cheap shot myths, the Howard led coalition did undertake a massive capital programme. 

The first project was to reign in spending, that was a carry over from Labor, then run a surplus.

They then used the surplus, to pay down left over deficit, that was accrued by Labor.

Then when that was paid off, they used the surplus, to reduce personal and company tax rates.

When that was done they put $80B into the future fund and kept $20B surplus in the coffers.

Then arrives the goon show, WOW, look at us now, chuck another billion here chuck another billion there, who gives a ratz. 
I want it here and I want it now, who gives a $hit live for today, pass the ouzo.

Jeez we obviously come from a different age, maybe a different planet.

Also guess what you will be able to make the same cheap shot, after the Coalition get voted out next time. 
Because it will take their whole term in office to pay off this crap.

The answer is, to vote the goons back in and keep travelling around the 's' bend, into uncharted territory.lol


----------



## drsmith

In response to Syd,

FTTN OPEX at $90 / premises with FTTP at $60 - most articles I've read have put the running costs of FTTP as at least 50% cheaper than FTTN.

Does this include the maintenance cost of the copper, any links ?

see below table taken from page 14 of the backgroup document.  Since they are referring to Opex under a heading "HOW DOES FTTP NOW COMPARE TO FTTN NOW AND FTTP LATER?" I would take that to mean the continuing costs including copper maintenance.  If not then they need to make this a lot clearer.

Page 16 might make it clearer. That's where copper maintenance is discussed. I referred to this in a post two days ago.

 Brownfield FTTP is restricted to areas with degraded or maintenance‐intensive copper - how many premises do they estimate this to be? Considering reusing the current copper is a major claim to the lower costs of the Coalition's NBN, there should be a % figure provided.

Obviously if it's more than they expect, their rollout will be take longer and be more expensive. The flipside is that a greater proportion of premises will be FTTP. The advantage in their approach is the flexibility of being able to utilise the copper where it is still serviceable.

This will then turn certain areas into those with superior broadband over areas that are stuck with HFC cable or FTTN copper speeds.  Depending on what % of each we get to will determine what kinds of applications are chosen to be developed.  If you have the majority of the country on 25Mbs then I would say a lot of developments overseas will bypass us as we'll be falling further behind a lot of Asia and the USA.

That's bit of a is a bit of a different topic, but the situation you describe will be far worse at the end of 2016 under Labor's plan as there will still be large areas of the country that their rollout hasn't even reached. 

Page 8 of their main policy document quotes the end of 2016 as the end of the first phase. That would therefore be 8Q if we include 2015 and 2016. As for blackspots, does the document say piecemeal or are you making an assumption ?

From page 6 of the Broadband policy document.  Unfortunately they've copy protected the file so I can't do a copy paste.  It does state that those areas with poorest broadband receive priority.  The only way to proritise those areas is to do the rollout in a less efficient way, otherwise you are not prioritising the rollout to bring the worst areas up to speed.

In practice, conflicting objectives can be managed. 

I'd like to add that Malcolm claims Labor has done little to help these areas over the last 5 years, yet the LNP had 11 years in office and pretty much did nothing.

You can add it. It does nothing to add or detract from the relative merits of the two plans.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> I await a big serving of humble pie, which I'm sure Calliope will be only too happy to dish up if he can find any in the pantry.




Why should I help you and Sid out to support a Labor government of union hacks? You are right about the humble pie, I will be glad to help serve it up to you in September. Your mob have only five months left to trash the joint.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Why should I help you and Sid out to support a Labor government of union hacks? You are right about the humble pie, I will be glad to help serve it up to you in September. Your mob have only five months left to trash the joint.




Wow. You can't even name one project from 11 years of Government.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Wow. You can't even name one project from 11 years of Government.




Did you miss my post on where the money was spent myths?
 It would appear you want to see spend, spend, spend.
 That has to be weighed up against income from the spend.
I think Labor is selling a dud, you may have skin in the game.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> Wow. You can't even name one project from 11 years of Government.




You will be wowing on the other side of your face come September. Ah,	_schadenfreude,_ I can't wait for it.


----------



## sptrawler

The good thing about the NBN is it can't be measured against anything.

Now the carbon tax can be.

http://www.theage.com.au/business/carbon-trading-scheme-facing-strife-20130417-2i0k0.html

Like all of the governments schemes, it's a disaster.lol How many dirty brown coal plants look like shutting down.lol

So will be the NBN, great idea, great spin, bucket loads of money. Turns to crap.

Like I've said, I hope labor get in next election, they deserve to wear their legacy.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> Did you miss my post on where the money was spent myths?
> It would appear you want to see spend, spend, spend.
> That has to be weighed up against income from the spend.
> I think Labor is selling a dud, you may have skin in the game.




1- 30% of the Labour debt was from the previous Treasurer Howard

2 - Roughly 70% of the debt was paid for by asset sales, so not really that much hard work

3 - The LNP had the wonderful life of a Govt with nominal GDP running in front of real GDP.  It is quite easy to throw the money around and brag you are a wonderful economic manager under those circumstances.  The structural deficit under the previous LNP Govt got a bit worse, especially when Howard went on his spend-a-thon in the final term.


----------



## sydboy007

Responding to Dr Smith

_That's bit of a is a bit of a different topic, but the situation you describe will be far worse at the end of 2016 under Labor's plan as there will still be large areas of the country that their rollout hasn't even reached. _

Depends.  You have already admitted you are sceptical of the FTTN rollout schedule, so slowing down the FTTP rollout then building up the FTTN rollout will prob see less people upgraded by 2016.

_In practice, conflicting objectives can be managed._

Yes, but there's no denying that if you don't upgrade black spots first, then they are not really being true to what they say in their policy document.

I'm also curious on how they will go about the process of replacing faulty copper.  

At what point do they know if it's faulty?  Who will do the testing (hopefully not current techs who can barely fix an open circuit kind of fault). 

If it's faulty is it replaced with copper or fibre?  Will it turn into a lottery where if you have dud copper you will get free fibre?  

If enough is faulty then do they just run fibre direct from the exchange, or do they install a node then fibre from there?  Who pays for this?


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> You will be wowing on the other side of your face come September. Ah,	_schadenfreude,_ I can't wait for it.




I've already said I expect a change of Government in September. I believe I wrote something along the lines of "such is life". Governments change. In another 6 or 9 years, it will probably change back, and likely 6 or 9 years after that, it will change back again. In case you haven't noticed, it's been happening since Federation.

What I find most amusing though, is that despite all the blustering about Labor's "project management incompetence", you cannot think of even a single example where the Coalition did any better.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> What I find most amusing though, is that despite all the blustering about Labor's "project management incompetence", you cannot think of even a single example where the Coalition did any better.




I am glad you get some amusement, when, after your months of bluster and propaganda for NBN Co, you have reverted to the Gillard/Conroy practice of blaming the Coalition for Labor's failures to deliver, after inheriting a Coalition budget surplus of $21 billion.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Responding to Dr Smith
> 
> _That's bit of a is a bit of a different topic, but the situation you describe will be far worse at the end of 2016 under Labor's plan as there will still be large areas of the country that their rollout hasn't even reached. _
> 
> 1) Depends.  You have already admitted you are sceptical of the FTTN rollout schedule, so slowing down the FTTP rollout then building up the FTTN rollout will prob see less people upgraded by 2016.
> 
> _In practice, conflicting objectives can be managed._
> 
> Yes, but there's no denying that if you don't upgrade black spots first, then they are not really being true to what they say in their policy document.
> 
> 3) I'm also curious on how they will go about the process of replacing faulty copper.
> 
> At what point do they know if it's faulty?  Who will do the testing (hopefully not current techs who can barely fix an open circuit kind of fault).
> 
> If it's faulty is it replaced with copper or fibre?  Will it turn into a lottery where if you have dud copper you will get free fibre?
> 
> If enough is faulty then do they just run fibre direct from the exchange, or do they install a node then fibre from there?  Who pays for this?




1) That's what I feel will be the case, but that's as a general criticism of public projects and in particular when there's a lot of politics involved.

If however you insist on being partisan, then by what miracle is Labor going to get their NBN back on schedule ?

2) They never said they would prioritise black spots at the expense of all other objectives and no reasonable person would expect that they would.

3) That's a technical point upon which they haven't provided the detail beyond the broad principal of maintaining the copper where it is serviceable. Hopefully, it will be better than this,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-04-...dreds-of-goodna-residents/4636472?section=qld

Labor's too is a lottery as to when householders get it. Up to 8-years vs the Coalition's <4 for min 25mb/s if they are on schedule and goodness knows how long if they are not.

The overall impression I now get from your responses is that you wish to engage only in a partisan discussion around the edges of their policy detail rather than on the actual detail the Coalition has provided.

That's perhaps reflective of the lack of substantive fault you've been able to establish in the central detail itself.


----------



## drsmith

On page 16 of the background paper, Malcolm Turnbull discusses the maintenance cost of the copper as follows,



> NBN’S PERMANENTLY HIGHER CAPEX COSTS
> 
> In closing this discussion of some of the technical and economic considerations involved in broadband upgrade , it should be noted the very high capital costs of Labor’s FTTP NBN commitment don’t stop with ‘completion’ of the rollout.
> 
> As close study of a graphic illustrating capex after 2021 on page 74 of NBN Co’s 2012‐2015 Corporate Plan makes clear, the three NBN networks are forecast to require no less than $10.5 billion of capex in the six years after the NBN is ‘finished’.
> 
> Only $4.5 billion appears to be for extending the NBN’s coverage to newly built premises (assuming the forecast 1.3 million of these between 2021 and 2028 cost the same, on average, to serve as NBN Co forecasts for the 13.2 million it will have passed or covered by 2021.)
> 
> So what exactly does the other $6 billion of capex over six years represent? At face value, it appears an additional $1 billion of investment will need to be invested in the NBN each year on an ongoing basis – presumably to upgrade active electronics used in the FTTP network and the various elements of the fixed wireless and satellite networks.
> 
> Supporters of Labor’s NBN are fond of claiming the gradually rising maintenance costs for the copper network (currently estimated to be around $750 million a year, although Telstra does not disclose this figure) are a compelling reason to shift to FTTP.
> 
> Sometimes it is even claimed savings from copper maintenance on their own virtually pay for the upgrade. On the contrary, TUSMA’s $6.4 billion commitment to Telstra for the USO preserves the copper network serving the most remote 7 per cent of premises in Australia until 2032 – by far the most costly part of the copper to maintain will be in service and maintained at taxpayer expense for at least another twenty years.
> 
> And on top of that, close scrutiny of the NBN Co financial forecasts reveals an additional $1 billion of ongoing annual capex after the NBN is ‘completed’ – a materially larger sum than the $750 million currently spent on copper upkeep.
> 
> Together, these two realities demonstrate the utter falsehood of claims that a key economic gain from the NBN is money saved from not having to maintain the copper.


----------



## drsmith

More on the Goodna incident,



> Goodna councillor Paul Tully says the manager of a local pizza store is "spitting chips" because the business can't take phone or online orders.
> 
> Other owners of service stations, a pet store and a psychology clinic had also complained, he said.
> 
> Mr Tully said goodwill towards the NBN in Goodna was diminishing and affected businesses should be compensated for loss of income.
> 
> Contractors had already annoyed residents by being abusive to householders, blocking access to driveways and not replacing turf on lawns that were ripped up, he said.
> 
> "Everyone was happy that we were the first rollout in Ipswich and there was a lot of goodwill when it started but it's slowly disappeared and it's probably all gone now," he told AAP.




One has to wonder whether NBN's contractors are now rushing the job in order to meet rollout targets.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/br...cuts-phone-cable/story-e6frf7kf-1226623441919


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> I am glad you get some amusement, when, after your months of bluster and propaganda for NBN Co, you have reverted to the Gillard/Conroy practice of blaming the Coalition for Labor's failures to deliver, after inheriting a Coalition budget surplus of $21 billion.




Ummm. I see that, unable to answer what should be a rather simple request, you've reverted to your standard MO of adhom attacks and strawman arguments. I expected nothing less, of course. 

I haven't blamed the coalition for anything yet. Come back to me in 10 years, and I might have something for you.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Did you miss my post on where the money was spent myths?
> It would appear you want to see spend, spend, spend.
> That has to be weighed up against income from the spend.
> I think Labor is selling a dud, you may have skin in the game.




Yes I did. And I have no issue with it. However, it's somewhat beside the point. I'm looking for an example of the Howard Government undertaking an infrastructure project that went to plan.

I had actually assumed there must be a few examples after 11 years of Government, but I'm yet to be presented with one.

It's not that they didn't do _anything_. There was the Darwin-Alice railway, but that didn't turn out very well.

My point, which seems so far to be accurate, is that the Coalition were no better at project management than the ALP. I still await presentation of any evidence to the contrary. So why do we assume that their management of the NBN will be any better than the ALP's?


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> I still await presentation of any evidence to the contrary.



Border protection.

Have you got around to a detailed read of the Coalition's NBN documentation yet ?


----------



## So_Cynical

NBNMyths said:


> I had actually assumed there must be a few examples after 11 years of Government, but I'm yet to be presented with one.






drsmith said:


> Border protection.




lol outstanding success at saying no hardly rates as project management....we already know how good the noalition is at saying no. 

And with their ANBN plan they are really just saying no to the NBN.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> lol outstanding success at saying no hardly rates as project management....we already know how good the noalition is at saying no.



Labor makes it look like a failed project.

They couldn't even maintain it let alone fix it.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> Ummm. I see that, unable to answer what should be a rather simple request, you've reverted to your standard MO of adhom attacks and strawman arguments. I expected nothing less, of course.
> 
> I haven't blamed the coalition for anything yet. Come back to me in 10 years, and I might have something for you.




Never mind Myths. You're a big boy now. You'll get over it. You never know... in time you might come to love FTTN.
You might even adjust to the fact that Turnbull can make Conroy look like the idiot that he is with his red underpants.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Border protection.
> 
> Have you got around to a detailed read of the Coalition's NBN documentation yet ?




That's not an infrastructure project.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> That's not an infrastructure project.




Actually, it was at least in part. Detention centres had to be built.

I'm wondering why all the distractions. Have you lost interest in the NBN ?


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> That's not an infrastructure project.




Could you tell me an infrastructure project, this government has accomplished?

Yet they have gone from net surplus, to massive net debt, in real terms.

You may see paying down debt as a non achievement, I guess it's a generational thing.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Yes I did. And I have no issue with it. However, it's somewhat beside the point. I'm looking for an example of the Howard Government undertaking an infrastructure project that went to plan.
> 
> I had actually assumed there must be a few examples after 11 years of Government, but I'm yet to be presented with one.
> 
> It's not that they didn't do _anything_. There was the Darwin-Alice railway, but that didn't turn out very well.
> 
> My point, which seems so far to be accurate, is that the Coalition were no better at project management than the ALP. I still await presentation of any evidence to the contrary. So why do we assume that their management of the NBN will be any better than the ALP's?




That is pretty dumb, how the hell can you commit to an infrastructure project when you inherit a massive deficit?

First you have to unwind the running current account and then you have to put in place savings. 
Then when it turns around you have to use surpluses to stimulate growth.
When that growth turns into surpluses you move ahead.
Jeez, I really gave you a lot of credit. 
Obviously misplaced IMO

Any dumb @rse government can spend money, that's easy.
Show me what these goons have done, other than promise the world, delivered nothing, increased taxing and shot everything to $hit.


----------



## drsmith

It will be interesting to see what this reveals,



> NBN Co's announcement comes as the company's chief executive, Mike Quigley, prepares to spend Friday being interrogated by a parliamentary committee over roll-out delays.




http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...happen-by-end-of-the-year-20130418-2i32b.html

From the man with the red underpants in hand,



> At a Labor function last night Conroy slammed Opposition Spokesperson Malcolm Turnbull's Labor NBN costings as "bull****", and told this reporter that NBN Co CEO Mike Quigley would "set the record straight" tomorrow on the current anticipated delays and cost blowouts.




http://www.itwire.com/it-policy-new...l-nbn-costings-tomorrow-says-conroy-exclusive

1Gb service to be available by the end of the year.



> The service will rival those offered by Google Fiber in the United States as well as fibre networks in Singapore, Hong Kong and South Korea. Sony-backed internet service provider So-net claimed to become the world’s fastest residential broadband provider this week as it launched a two-gigabit service in Japan for approximately $50 a month.
> 
> However, NBN Co’s service is likely to be more expensive than those available in Asia, with its latest corporate plan stating it would charge a wholesale price of $150 per month for the service – four times the price of the maximum 100 Mbps speeds the government monopoly offers today.
> 
> The equipment used to deliver those speeds also means that few homes in a given street are likely to achieve those gigabit speeds simultaneously.




http://www.afr.com/p/technology/broadband_speeds_will_be_times_faster_2jDgGQdxO7HBOaOeC71mYM


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> 1) That's what I feel will be the case, but that's as a general criticism of public projects and in particular when there's a lot of politics involved.
> 
> If however you insist on being partisan, then by what miracle is Labor going to get their NBN back on schedule ?
> 
> 2) They never said they would prioritise black spots at the expense of all other objectives and no reasonable person would expect that they would.
> 
> 3) That's a technical point upon which they haven't provided the detail beyond the broad principal of maintaining the copper where it is serviceable. Hopefully, it will be better than this,
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-04-...dreds-of-goodna-residents/4636472?section=qld
> 
> Labor's too is a lottery as to when householders get it. Up to 8-years vs the Coalition's <4 for min 25mb/s if they are on schedule and goodness knows how long if they are not.
> 
> The overall impression I now get from your responses is that you wish to engage only in a partisan discussion around the edges of their policy detail rather than on the actual detail the Coalition has provided.
> 
> That's perhaps reflective of the lack of substantive fault you've been able to establish in the central detail itself.




I'm not sure how I'm being partisan.  It's been nearly 5 years without an opposition broadband policy.  They've harped on about the Government yet we've only been able even have a semblance of a debate for the last 1.5 weeks as to what the LNP are offering.  I'm finding their policy document is making me ask more questions after answering a few.

2) Then at least they need to provide the rollout schedule to 2016, since the NBN has provided that detail already.  I will say again that if you don't at least provide an estimate of how much copper needs to be replaced, then how can you claim to have a costed policy when the majority of cost savings are due to recycling the use of the copper currently in place?  Surely a 10% change in copper replacement will have a significant impact on rollout schedule and costs? Is the current costings of Fraudband based on no copper replacement??

3) So the Govt is now responsible for anything a private company does on their behalf.  If that is not being partisan I don't know what is.  I do hope you will hold the LNP to the same if their Fraudband is forced on us.

I would argue up to 8 years seems a lot more realistic than what the LNP is saying at present.  You seem to have hinted you at least partially agree with this.

Malcolm has provided no estimate as to how long negotiations with Telstra will take.  No estimate as to ACCC involvement on the deal, no estimate on how much copper needs to be replaced, no information as to the process on copper replacement, no rollout schedule.

So far we have Malcolm telling us his Fraudband will be rolled out on time and on budget, but the ALPs NBN will have no such chance, and anything and everything that can go wrong will, so then he quotes the most UNLIKELY costing he could come up with and states it as if it WILL be the outcome that occurs.

If that's not partisan politics then what is??

Throw on top of this the outright LIES being told my Tony and Malcolm eg Tony stating that Oldham College in Geelong was not getting any upgrade to broadband infrastructure, when they are due to be connected to fibre on the NBN.  You can google his tweet.  

So Dr Smith, when is it a lie and when is it incompetence to provide the public with false information?  Considering Malcom was as the college that day, the required level of incompetence is quite breath taking.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> That is pretty dumb, how the hell can you commit to an infrastructure project when you inherit a massive deficit?
> 
> First you have to unwind the running current account and then you have to put in place savings.
> Then when it turns around you have to use surpluses to stimulate growth.
> When that growth turns into surpluses you move ahead.
> Jeez, I really gave you a lot of credit.
> Obviously misplaced IMO
> 
> Any dumb @rse government can spend money, that's easy.
> Show me what these goons have done, other than promise the world, delivered nothing, increased taxing and shot everything to $hit.




IF the ALP had had tax revenue as high as Howard had, then I'd find it easier to blame them for the deficit.

Howard had the highest taxing Govt in the histroy of Australia.  The current ALP Govt has never had tax revenues as high as the lowest level of the previous LNP Govt - see below graph.

So either Howard taxed us too much, or the ALP isn't taxing us enough.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I would argue up to 8 years seems a lot more realistic than what the LNP is saying at present.  You seem to have hinted you at least partially agree with this.



Where ?

Pls show quote.


----------



## moXJO

sydboy007 said:


> IF the ALP had had tax revenue as high as Howard had, then I'd find it easier to blame them for the deficit.
> 
> Howard had the highest taxing Govt in the histroy of Australia.  The current ALP Govt has never had tax revenues as high as the lowest level of the previous LNP Govt - see below graph.
> 
> So either Howard taxed us too much, or the ALP isn't taxing us enough.




 costello’s last budget had revenue of 245b and expenditure of 235b. in 2012 the govt has forecast revenue of 376b and similar expenditure. This means that revenue has risen by 52% from 2007 and expenditure has risen by 60%.

Heres some more 







> expendiure as a % of GDP was 25.4% in 2010-11, 25.3% in 2011-12
> and forecast to be 24.3% of GDP in 2012/13.
> Compare that to costello’s projected expenditure in 2010-11 of 21.8% of GDP. A quick flick through the data also shows that fed expendure was around 22.5% of GDP in 2000/01 falling to 20.8% in 2003/4
> 
> AND crucially costello forecast for revenue of 287b in 2010/11 but infact actual revenue according to the budget papers has labor receiving revenue of 309.9b. So they had 22b more than projected AND they still overspent by 51.5 billion


----------



## drsmith

On time and on budget now according to Mike Quigley. Is that though with red underpants on his head ?

They're certainly going to have to kick it up even to get within the revised range of 190,000 to 220,000.



> The document shows NBN Co had passed approximately 68,000 existing homes and businesses by the end of March, slightly up from the 46,100 premises it said it passed three months prior but well below initial targets aimed at passing 286,000 premises by June 30.




They're also now considering retaining the dreaded copper in apartments,



> NBN Co is reviewing alternative ways of connecting apartments to the national broadband network, despite Labor’s commitment to connecting every home and business directly with optic fibre cabling.
> 
> The government monopoly’s chief technology officer Gary McLaren told a parliamentary hearing overseeing the NBN on Friday he was studying the use of fibre-to-the-basement technology instead of fibre-to-the-home.
> 
> Long advocated by the Coalition and part of its proposed alternative network, the technology connects fibre to the basement of an apartment before using existing copper wiring to get broadband into apartments.
> 
> It is seen as a cheaper and easier way of connecting apartments to faster broadband, particularly in older buildings where it may be difficult to install new cables.
> 
> Labor’s broadband policy is to connect fibre optic cabling into every single apartment in the fibre footprint.
> 
> The review comes despite Communications Minister Stephen Conroy calling the Coalition’s plan to use the same technology a “disgrace”.




http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_co_reviewing_apartment_fibre_DGpDLGsnhLSz5b5bhMdK6I


----------



## drsmith

This, also from the Fairfax press,



> Mr Quigley talked the committee through 19 pages of pie charts with breakdowns of costs.
> 
> ''I'm here to give the committee some confidence that $37.4 billion is the right number,'' he said.
> 
> However, Mr Quigley's estimated costs remained contentious. For example, on the amount it costs to connect a premises with fibre, Mr Quigley's forecast costs for future connections were about one-third of the price of what it had been costing to date.




http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opi...ghts-to-coalitions-policy-20130419-2i4c5.html


----------



## moXJO

NBNMyths said:


> Yes I did. And I have no issue with it. However, it's somewhat beside the point. I'm looking for an example of the Howard Government undertaking an infrastructure project that went to plan.
> 
> I had actually assumed there must be a few examples after 11 years of Government, but I'm yet to be presented with one.
> 
> It's not that they didn't do _anything_. There was the Darwin-Alice railway, but that didn't turn out very well.
> 
> My point, which seems so far to be accurate, is that the Coalition were no better at project management than the ALP. I still await presentation of any evidence to the contrary. So why do we assume that their management of the NBN will be any better than the ALP's?




Project management perhaps not, policy roll out was a lot better though. Think Timor intervention, Gun buyback, IR reforms, gst, foresight on mining boom etc. Almost (if not) all of labors big policies have failed to some degree, the majority seem to go badly. I was in support of a few of their policies until the just seem to let them fall apart and move on. Labor just needed one or two big policies that they got right instead of the weekly announcements followed by failure we get now.


----------



## drsmith

NBN report to parliamentary Joint Committee,

http://www.nbnco.com.au/assets/media-releases/2013/report-to-parliamentary-joint-committee.pdf

Cost per brownfields premise is on page 5. Beyond the first release sites, the costs are estimates for sites currently under  construction. The actual cost per premise beyond first release is therefore unknown at this stage.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Have you got around to a detailed read of the Coalition's NBN documentation yet ?




For some reason I've been unable to post from my Mac to this thread for the last few days. Keep getting a cloudshare error page, whatever that is.

Anyway, to cover a few points since then:

Yes, I've read the background notes. 

The notes are more a critique of the Labor NBN than anything to do with the Coalition policy. It's really relegated to the last couple of pages. 

It's funny that Malcolm thinks it will be impossible for NBN Co to meet a pass rate of 6800 premises/day after 2 years of trials and 5 years of ramping up, but he thinks the Coalition can manage to actually migrate (not just pass) 24,000 premises to VDSL/FTTN per day for two years, after a couple of months of trials and zero ramp up. That equates to physically connecting _and_ testing _and_ migrating the ISP billing/service of an average 3,000 connections per hour, every working day for 2 years....About 1 per second.  I've said it before, and I'll say it again: _Not a snowball's chance in hell._

=====

NBN Co have always said that doing Fibre to the basement of apartment blocks was an option, albeit one they don't favour. This is not a new idea, and it is not anything like the coalition's FTTN plan. The copper used in such a situation would be under 100m long, and in far better condition that 500m of copper that's been in a water-filled trench on the street for 50 years.

=====

Turnbull's claim that the cost of maintaining copper has not been disclosed by Telstra, and is estimated to be $750m pa is incorrect. I was listening to a parliamentary hearing last year (sorry, can't remember if is was house or senate), where the Telstra rep testified that the cost of maintaining copper was "well into the billions" per year.

Mal's spin on the TUSMA contract is a good indication. Even assuming the rural section is the most expensive to maintain per line (likely), what sort of voodoo maths leads one to conclude that a cost of $6.4bn ($320m pa) NPV to maintain ~7% of the current network, equates to $750m for 100% of it? Especially considering that there's a very good chance that a huge chunk within that 7% will abandon their copper lines during the 20-year period anyway, removing their cost completely.

=====

Turnbull's claims criticising NBN Co's projected capex in the years post-2021 are atrocious.

NBN Co are simply assuming that our desire for ever-increasing bandwith will continue into the future, and indicating what such upgrades to the NBN may cost, even with a capability in 2021 of 1Gbps for fibre and 25Mbps for wireless/sat.

Turnbull on the other hand, is presenting a policy that simply stops in 2019 with people at 50-100Mbps for FTTN and 25Mbps for wireless and sat. His plan doesn't indicate any provision for additional capex post-2019, because there is no plan post-2019. How can you criticise the NBN for projecting upgrades when your own policy doesn't consider future requirements _at all_?

If he thinks it's bad that a 1Gbps network will need another $6bn of capex for upgrades, what on earth does he foresee as the additional capex required for his network? Or is he assuming that people will be happy with 25-100Mbps in 10 years time, and no further upgrades will be required?

If he's right, then the $6bn forecast by NBN Co won't be required at all. If he's wrong, then the capex required to upgrade his network will be closer to $40bn than 6.  Either way, he's hardly in a position to criticise.


----------



## Calliope

Your loyalty to the Conroy/Quigley rollout is admirable Myths. Nevertheless come September your heroes will be consigned to irrelevancy.


----------



## IFocus

Why? Why does the opposition want an NBN?




> Without knowing why the opposition wants an NBN we cannot know – and we cannot check – whether they have selected the right policy for the technology they have chosen for their version.
> 
> *If you don't know why you want an NBN, how can you develop the right policies and strategies to achieve what I assume they agree is necessary*, a national digital infrastructure outcome?







> The fact that it aims to include competition in its infrastructure rollout could indicate the opposition indeed sees NBN Co as a national utility. If infrastructure competition is allowed then that competition will concentrate on the most lucrative markets – along the same lines as we see now around developments in ADSL2+ and HFC upgrades.
> 
> If that level of cherry-picking is allowed then there will be no way for NBN Co to deliver a positive financial outcome, as it will be left servicing only the areas that are not commercially viable – roughly 50 per cent of all broadband connections.
> 
> *It follows then that the NBN Co under the opposition will not be based on providing any serious commercial return.*



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...want-an-nbn-20130419-2i4fg.html#ixzz2QxPAmP8S


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> For some reason I've been unable to post from my Mac to this thread for the last few days. Keep getting a cloudshare error page, whatever that is.



Thanks for the reply. I'll assume the other posts you've made over the past few days were from something other than your Mac. 

Questions/comments in blue,

Anyway, to cover a few points since then:

Yes, I've read the background notes. 

The notes are more a critique of the Labor NBN than anything to do with the Coalition policy. It's really relegated to the last couple of pages. 

It's funny that Malcolm thinks it will be impossible for NBN Co to meet a pass rate of 6800 premises/day after 2 years of trials and 5 years of ramping up, but he thinks the Coalition can manage to actually migrate (not just pass) 24,000 premises to VDSL/FTTN per day for two years, after a couple of months of trials and zero ramp up. That equates to physically connecting _and_ testing _and_ migrating the ISP billing/service of an average 3,000 connections per hour, every working day for 2 years....About 1 per second.  I've said it before, and I'll say it again: _Not a snowball's chance in hell._

Are you saying that the Coalition's rollout schedule is technically unachievable and if so, what specific technical background do you have to make that judgement ?

=====

NBN Co have always said that doing Fibre to the basement of apartment blocks was an option, albeit one they don't favour. This is not a new idea, and it is not anything like the coalition's FTTN plan. The copper used in such a situation would be under 100m long, and in far better condition that 500m of copper that's been in a water-filled trench on the street for 50 years.

Their political master, Stephen Conroy would beg to differ.



> Under Labor everyone living in apartments and units will get Labor's NBN – a world-class communications system, fibre to their apartment, unit, home.




http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...pposition-on-nbn-in-flats-20130419-2i3y1.html

What's happening here is that NBN Co are realising that in an economic sense, the Copper in not necessarily redundant yet as a whole. This interestingly is Malcolm Turnbull's principal. What NBN Co's acknowledgement above does is make Stephen Conroy and Labor look increasingly isolated in their point of view on the existing copper.

=====

Turnbull's claim that the cost of maintaining copper has not been disclosed by Telstra, and is estimated to be $750m pa is incorrect. I was listening to a parliamentary hearing last year (sorry, can't remember if is was house or senate), where the Telstra rep testified that the cost of maintaining copper was "well into the billions" per year.

It would be interesting to see the transcript to understand the quantum, breakdown (if any) and the context.

Mal's spin on the TUSMA contract is a good indication. Even assuming the rural section is the most expensive to maintain per line (likely), what sort of voodoo maths leads one to conclude that a cost of $6.4bn ($320m pa) NPV to maintain ~7% of the current network, equates to $750m for 100% of it? Especially considering that there's a very good chance that a huge chunk within that 7% will abandon their copper lines during the 20-year period anyway, removing their cost completely.

Is that 7% of the network by premises, or by length of Telstra's copper to serve those connections ?
What condition is that portion of the copper in, relative to the rest ?
Has the abandonment of the copper lines over time that you refer been factored into the underlying TUSMA contract value ?
What is the discount rate on the TUSMA contract value and how would that differ from, say the cost of Labor over time ?

The reality my not be as simple as the picture painted above. 

=====

Turnbull's claims criticising NBN Co's projected capex in the years post-2021 are atrocious.

NBN Co are simply assuming that our desire for ever-increasing bandwith will continue into the future, and indicating what such upgrades to the NBN may cost, even with a capability in 2021 of 1Gbps for fibre and 25Mbps for wireless/sat.

Turnbull on the other hand, is presenting a policy that simply stops in 2019 with people at 50-100Mbps for FTTN and 25Mbps for wireless and sat. His plan doesn't indicate any provision for additional capex post-2019, because there is no plan post-2019. How can you criticise the NBN for projecting upgrades when your own policy doesn't consider future requirements _at all_?

If he thinks it's bad that a 1Gbps network will need another $6bn of capex for upgrades, what on earth does he foresee as the additional capex required for his network? Or is he assuming that people will be happy with 25-100Mbps in 10 years time, and no further upgrades will be required?

If he's right, then the $6bn forecast by NBN Co won't be required at all. If he's wrong, then the capex required to upgrade his network will be closer to $40bn than 6.  Either way, he's hardly in a position to criticise.

What proportion of capex post 2021 is for upgrades, what specific upgrades are envisaged, and what would they achieve in terms of bandwidth ?


----------



## sydboy007

Calliope said:


> Your loyalty to the Conroy/Quigley rollout is admirable Myths. Nevertheless come September your heroes will be consigned to irrelevancy.




How about you confine your posts to the topic?  This post has added no value to the discussion.


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> How about you confine your posts to the topic?  This post has added no value to the discussion.




Off topic. :topic Criticism of me is not the topic.  My post was relevant...the topic is * NBN Rollout Scrapped*


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Off topic. :topic Criticism of me is not the topic.  My post was relevant...the topic is * NBN Rollout Scrapped*


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> View attachment 51856




Great post Myths.


----------



## moXJO

Calliope said:


> Great post Myths.




Did you get on the turps tonight calli?
Thats the second  out of character post


----------



## Calliope

moXJO said:


> Did you get on the turps tonight calli?
> Thats the second  out of character post




Everybody loves a little praise moXJO, and if it tends to diffuse their unpleasantness so much the better.


----------



## drsmith

Myths,

I didn't look very closely at your math in my previous response,



NBNMyths said:


> It's funny that Malcolm thinks it will be impossible for NBN Co to meet a pass rate of 6800 premises/day after 2 years of trials and 5 years of ramping up, but he thinks the Coalition can manage to actually migrate (not just pass) *24,000 premises to VDSL/FTTN per day for two years, after a couple of months of trials and zero ramp up. That equates to physically connecting and testing and migrating the ISP billing/service of an average 3,000 connections per hour, every working day for 2 years*....About 1 per second.  I've said it before, and I'll say it again: _Not a snowball's chance in hell._



There are approximately 250 working days per year (weekdays minus public holidays).

24,000 x 250 = 6,000,000.

My bolds.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Myths,
> 
> I didn't look very closely at your math in my previous response,
> 
> There are approximately 250 working days per year (weekdays minus public holidays).
> 
> 24,000 x 250 = 6,000,000.
> 
> My bolds.




Yes, 6,000,000 per year for two years. For a total of 12,000,000 connections.

To be fair, it could be a little less than that if Turnbull ignores the HFC footprint until after 2016. But the promise is for everyone to be able to access 25Mbps, and there are many buildings within the HFC footprint (ie MDUs) that cannot access HFC, and would therefore need to have FTTN/FTTB installed by 2016 to meet the promise.


----------



## NBNMyths

Questions/comments in blue,

My answers in red.


Yes, I've read the background notes. 

The notes are more a critique of the Labor NBN than anything to do with the Coalition policy. It's really relegated to the last couple of pages. 

It's funny that Malcolm thinks it will be impossible for NBN Co to meet a pass rate of 6800 premises/day after 2 years of trials and 5 years of ramping up, but he thinks the Coalition can manage to actually migrate (not just pass) 24,000 premises to VDSL/FTTN per day for two years, after a couple of months of trials and zero ramp up. That equates to physically connecting _and_ testing _and_ migrating the ISP billing/service of an average 3,000 connections per hour, every working day for 2 years....About 1 per second.  I've said it before, and I'll say it again: _Not a snowball's chance in hell._

Are you saying that the Coalition's rollout schedule is technically unachievable and if so, what specific technical background do you have to make that judgement ?

I would say it's almost impossible. I don't have any background, but I do have some common sense and ability to assess! 

Compare the target to BT's FTTN rollout, for example: 

They have been rolling it out in the UK for three years already. They began their rollout in January 2009, and hit 10 million premises in June 2012. An average of 16,000 per day over their first 2.5 years.

The coalition expect to pass ~125,000 per week ~(24,000 per day) in the first 2 years of their rollout.

Despite:
• BT being the owner of the copper network, and their existing trained and familiar staff performing the rollout. Compared to NBN Co not owning the network, and not having a workforce trained and familiar with that network.

• BT have a total workforce of 89,000 people (although I don't know how many are involved in FTTN deployment). Compared to NBN Co's contractors having a workforce of a few thousand, who have all been trained in FTTP, not copper.

• The population density of the UK being quite a bit higher than Australia's.



=====

NBN Co have always said that doing Fibre to the basement of apartment blocks was an option, albeit one they don't favour. This is not a new idea, and it is not anything like the coalition's FTTN plan. The copper used in such a situation would be under 100m long, and in far better condition that 500m of copper that's been in a water-filled trench on the street for 50 years.

Their political master, Stephen Conroy would beg to differ.



http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...pposition-on-nbn-in-flats-20130419-2i3y1.html

What's happening here is that NBN Co are realising that in an economic sense, the Copper in not necessarily redundant yet as a whole. This interestingly is Malcolm Turnbull's principal. What NBN Co's acknowledgement above does is make Stephen Conroy and Labor look increasingly isolated in their point of view on the existing copper.

As I wrote, there is a huge difference between general FTTN, and FTTB in MDUs. A distance difference of ~50m of copper to ~500m of copper, and considerable differences in the condition of that copper. I have no problem with FTTB if it's too hard to run the fibre up, and NBN Co have been saying its a possibility since the beginning.

=====

Turnbull's claim that the cost of maintaining copper has not been disclosed by Telstra, and is estimated to be $750m pa is incorrect. I was listening to a parliamentary hearing last year (sorry, can't remember if is was house or senate), where the Telstra rep testified that the cost of maintaining copper was "well into the billions" per year.

It would be interesting to see the transcript to understand the quantum, breakdown (if any) and the context.

Mal's spin on the TUSMA contract is a good indication. Even assuming the rural section is the most expensive to maintain per line (likely), what sort of voodoo maths leads one to conclude that a cost of $6.4bn ($320m pa) NPV to maintain ~7% of the current network, equates to $750m for 100% of it? Especially considering that there's a very good chance that a huge chunk within that 7% will abandon their copper lines during the 20-year period anyway, removing their cost completely.

Is that 7% of the network by premises, or by length of Telstra's copper to serve those connections ?
What condition is that portion of the copper in, relative to the rest ?
Has the abandonment of the copper lines over time that you refer been factored into the underlying TUSMA contract value ?
What is the discount rate on the TUSMA contract value and how would that differ from, say the cost of Labor over time ?

The reality my not be as simple as the picture painted above. 

I'm only going on the figures quoted by Telstra and Malcolm.

=====

Turnbull's claims criticising NBN Co's projected capex in the years post-2021 are atrocious.

NBN Co are simply assuming that our desire for ever-increasing bandwith will continue into the future, and indicating what such upgrades to the NBN may cost, even with a capability in 2021 of 1Gbps for fibre and 25Mbps for wireless/sat.

Turnbull on the other hand, is presenting a policy that simply stops in 2019 with people at 50-100Mbps for FTTN and 25Mbps for wireless and sat. His plan doesn't indicate any provision for additional capex post-2019, because there is no plan post-2019. How can you criticise the NBN for projecting upgrades when your own policy doesn't consider future requirements _at all_?

If he thinks it's bad that a 1Gbps network will need another $6bn of capex for upgrades, what on earth does he foresee as the additional capex required for his network? Or is he assuming that people will be happy with 25-100Mbps in 10 years time, and no further upgrades will be required?

If he's right, then the $6bn forecast by NBN Co won't be required at all. If he's wrong, then the capex required to upgrade his network will be closer to $40bn than 6.  Either way, he's hardly in a position to criticise.

What proportion of capex post 2021 is for upgrades, what specific upgrades are envisaged, and what would they achieve in terms of bandwidth ?

No idea, and it doesn't matter. If NBN Co need to perform capex upgrades to meet demand at that time, then it is essentially inevitable that the coalition would also have to do this, and equally inevitable that the cost of upgrading the coalition's network would be higher given its lower initial capability.

Malcolm cannot berate NBN Co for projecting capex in the years beyond the projections of his own network, when clearly it would also require capex over that period. He simply doesn't want to estimate how much it will be.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Yes, 6,000,000 per year for two years. For a total of 12,000,000 connections.
> 
> To be fair, it could be a little less than that if Turnbull ignores the HFC footprint until after 2016. But the promise is for everyone to be able to access 25Mbps, and there are many buildings within the HFC footprint (ie MDUs) that cannot access HFC, and would therefore need to have FTTN/FTTB installed by 2016 to meet the promise.




I see. You've presented a deliberate falsehood about the Coalition's rollout schedule in order to try and make another point and then gone on to repeat that falsehood in a subsequent post.



NBNMyths said:


> The coalition expect to pass ~125,000 per week ~(24,000 per day) in the first 2 years of their rollout.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> I see. You've presented a deliberate falsehood about the Coalition's rollout schedule in order to try and make another point and then gone on to repeat that falsehood in a subsequent post.




What figures would you present then?

Considering that any household that's currently on ADSL and not due to get FTTN from the current NBN will have to be cut over to a node by 2016 to receive the 25Mbs minimum speed that meas there's a lot of premises that will need to be cut over in a very short period of time.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> What figures would you present then?



Syd,

I'm still waiting for you to show me where I've suggested that Labor's rollout schedule is more realistic than that of the Coalition's.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...21778&page=112&p=767415&viewfull=1#post767415


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> I see. You've presented a deliberate falsehood about the Coalition's rollout schedule in order to try and make another point and then gone on to repeat that falsehood in a subsequent post.




Not at all. Because the Coalition's policy is so light on detail, all we know about it is that everyone must have access to 25Mbps by 2016. If we ignore HFC, then the quoted figure is accurate.

Presently, about 25% of the country is passed by HFC, but (by Optus' statement), only about 15% of premises can actually access it. Additionally according to Optus, 24% of their HFC customers cannot access speeds over 8Mbps on their cable.

The other issue for HFC is that both Telstra and Optus have agreed not to sell broadband connections on cable, so those agreements would have to be varied if the Coalition want to use HFC as part of their target.

And the final issue is that neither Telstra nor Optus' HFC networks are designed to be offered on a wholesale basis, and I can't see them investing the money to allow it when it will be overbuilt as soon as the Coalition can manage it.

Thus, it is by no means certain that the Coalition will be able to use HFC as part of their 'plan', and even if they can use part of it, they will still have to roll out FTTN/FTTB to every premises within the footprint that cannot get access to the cable. Which will include pretty much every MDU. This means they'll have to haul fibre right through areas they don't plan on providing FTTN in yet, just to get to each premises that cannot access HFC.

But, let's be generous and use the Optus figure of 15% coverage, and remove that from the Coalition's target. That leaves them 10.4 million connections, or 104,000 per week / 20,800 per day / 2,600 per hour. 

Or 1 FTTN connection every 1.3 seconds....Every day for two years.....With a network that they essentially know nothing about.....Starting from nothing.....With an untrained workforce of a few thousand..... And then there are the areas where the copper is unusable, and will need FTTP instead. Turnbul admits he has no idea how many premises will fall into this category.

And all that is assuming they can complete three public studies, completely change the focus of NBN Co, renegotiate with Telstra, redesign a network from scratch, vary contracts, let new contracts and get started all within a year of the election.


Incumbent telco BT have been doing FTTN for three years with a trained workforce in the tens-of-thousands, on their own network, in a densely-populated country with high unemployment, and they are only just achieving the numbers now that Turnbull is claiming his startup can do from day 1.

Do you _honestly_ think the Coalition will succeed? 

I have absolutely no doubt that it won't happen. What I am curious about is who will cop the blame for the failure come 2016. I predict it will be a combination of:
1) "The incompetent Labor Govt that left us with a mess".
2) "We had no idea the copper was this bad. Nobody warned us".
3) "The unions are making excessive demands on contractors, reducing their efficiency".

There will be no acknowledgement about all the people that said "we told you so" in 2013....


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Syd,
> 
> I'm still waiting for you to show me where I've suggested that Labor's rollout schedule is more realistic than that of the Coalition's.
> 
> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...21778&page=112&p=767415&viewfull=1#post767415




* It*takes*approximately*4*quarters*for*activity*at* NBN*Co*to*fully*reflect*changed*policy - if Malcolm is able to achieve this I'll take my hat off to him. To be able to redesign the network rollout, run tenders and pick suppliers, renegotiate with Telstra and Optus will be pretty hard to achieve in 1 year. I think there was a 3+ month period between the deal with Telstra getting board approval and the shareholder vote.

We'll have to wait for the detail, but it wouldn't surprise me if these targets are too ambitious.

the beginning of your response in red.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> * It*takes*approximately*4*quarters*for*activity*at* NBN*Co*to*fully*reflect*changed*policy - if Malcolm is able to achieve this I'll take my hat off to him. To be able to redesign the network rollout, run tenders and pick suppliers, renegotiate with Telstra and Optus will be pretty hard to achieve in 1 year. I think there was a 3+ month period between the deal with Telstra getting board approval and the shareholder vote.
> 
> We'll have to wait for the detail, but it wouldn't surprise me if these targets are too ambitious.
> 
> the beginning of your response in red.



In that statement, I didn't make any comparison with Labor's rollout which is what you seem to want to imply.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Not at all. Because the Coalition's policy is so light on detail, all we know about it is that everyone must have access to 25Mbps by 2016. If we ignore HFC, then the quoted figure is accurate.



There's enough detail if you choose to look.



> Approximately 65 per cent of the FTTN portion of the rollout is expected to be completed in the four years to 2016-17. The remaining 35 per cent will be deployed in 2017-18 and 2018-19 and will in most cases be in areas served by HFC networks.




http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Broadband.pdf


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> There's enough detail if you choose to look.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Broadband.pdf




The question is then, how do the 'missing' 20% get 25Mbps by 2016? Delivered by the fairies at the bottom of the garden?

Turnbull says *everyone* will have access to 25Mbps by 2016. But he also says he's only doing 65% of the FTTN by then. HFC is only available to maybe 15%, so that leaves 20% with no upgrade at all. And 15% with no choice but monopoly HFC for 25Mbps, _*if* _the Coalition can re-negotiate the Telstra/Optus deals, _*if*_ people can actually get connected to it and_* if* _it can actually deliver 25Mbps to them.






http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/gov...declare-on-turnbulls-plan-20130409-2hjil.html


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> There's enough detail if you choose to look.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Broadband.pdf




On page 2 of the document it states by Late 2016 EVERY household and business will have speeds of 25-100Mbs

That's a bit tricky to have one goal post as the first thing a reader will see, and to then change it to sometime in 2017 near the end of the document.

Caliope would definitely give that the slippery eel moniker


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> In that statement, I didn't make any comparison with Labor's rollout which is what you seem to want to imply.




Wasn't saying you did, only that you seem to have some doubt as to the LNP being able to porvide 25-100Mbs within the time frame they have stated.

As my previous post has shown, they seem to have 2 time frames, depending on how far within the broadband document you are willing to read.


----------



## sptrawler

So how is the coalitions claims any different to the governments claims, they seem to be both full of it.

You guys say the coalition can't meet their timeframes.

The government isn't meeting theirs.:1zhelp:


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> On page 2 of the document it states by Late 2016 EVERY household and business will have speeds of 25-100Mbs
> 
> That's a bit tricky to have one goal post as the first thing a reader will see, and to then change it to sometime in 2017 near the end of the document.
> 
> Caliope would definitely give that the slippery eel moniker




I really have no interest in either Conroy's or Turnbull's NBNs. I get along nicely on ADSL 2.


----------



## sptrawler

Calliope said:


> I really have no interest in either Conroy's or Turnbull's NBNs. I get along nicely on ADSL 2.




Hooray, a voice in the wilderness, I agree with you.
We need bling speed internet to the home, about as much as we need a bidet in every bathroom.

Spend the $50b on dams, irrigation, flood mitigation, drought proofing, sustainable industry, agriculture, marine aquaculture.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> So how is the coalitions claims any different to the governments claims, they seem to be both full of it.




egads

Are you casting aspersions on the righteous and holy LNP who shalt forever be destined for power as the one and true party of the never ending surplus?

I do find it sad that when the LNP is caught out, it's "they all do it" yet when at first it seems just the ALP or Greens are doing it, then it's attack mode straight for the jugular.

The point I think that we are trying to make is that the LNP policy is based on

- being faster to implement hence cheaper - yet seems to have unrealistic rollout targets so would probably experiencing far great cost blowouts than the current NBN.

- uses the copper network - therefore cheaper (Malcom's words) - yet it does not provide any kind of estimate as to how much copper will need to be replaced.  How can you claim to have a costed policy that doesn't even attempt to estimate what would be a major cost increase.

You have to wonder what they've been up to for 2.5 years.  I mean a policy document of 18 pages and a "back ground paper" that is 36 pages long and only starts to detail the assumptiosn behind the LNP policy on page 30.  Page 32 starts talking about the NBN being on or off budget.

So just 2 pages out of 36 used to provide some insight into how they've come up with their $29 billion Fraudband proposal.  I would laugh, except it's likely what we will end up with for the next decade or more.

Now if Malcolm was willing to say he will resign from office if his target is not met for ALL households and businesses to have a minimum of 25Mbs by the end of 2016, then I might take his proposal a bit more seriously.


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> egads
> 
> Are you casting aspersions on the righteous and holy LNP who shalt forever be destined for power as the one and true party of the never ending surplus?
> 
> I do find it sad that when the LNP is caught out, it's "they all do it" yet when at first it seems just the ALP or Greens are doing it, then it's attack mode straight for the jugular.
> 
> The point I think that we are trying to make is that the LNP policy is based on
> 
> - being faster to implement hence cheaper - yet seems to have unrealistic rollout targets.
> 
> - uses the copper network - therefore cheaper (Malcom's words) - yet it does not provide any kind of estimate as to how much copper will need to be replaced.  How can you claim to have a costed policy that doesn't even attempt to estimate what would be a major cost increase.
> 
> You have to wonder what they've been up to for 2.5 years.  I mean a policy document of 18 pages and a "back ground paper" that is 36 pages long and only starts to detail the assumptiosn behind the LNP policy on page 30.  Page 32 strts talking about the NBN being on or off budget.
> 
> So just 2 pages out of 36 used to provide some insight into how they've come up with their $29 billion Fraudband proposal.  I would laugh, except it's likely what we will end up with for the next decade or more.
> 
> Now if Malcolm was willing to say he will resign from office if his target is not met for ALL households and businesses to have a minimum of 25Mbs by the end of 2016, then I might take his proposal a bit more seriously.




Mate, youve really lost it, they aren't in office and you're paying out.

You're taking the pizz out of their roll out targets, yet supporting roll out targets of the government, that keep falling short.
Tell me what the rollout targets were for the pink batts?
Tell me the roll out targets and budget outcomes, for the school building programme?
No you can't because they were crap.

Someone said, what infrastructure project did the Howard government build.
One has to ask what has this government built other than a huge debt, that you and I will be crunched for.


----------



## NBNMyths

[video=youtube_share;b-6E5yX1E0U]http://youtu.be/b-6E5yX1E0U[/video]


----------



## So_Cynical

NBNMyths said:


> [video=youtube_share;b-6E5yX1E0U]http://youtu.be/b-6E5yX1E0U[/video]




The high speed train analogy is a beaut...you wouldn't build a Melbourne to Brisbane high speed train that stopped at Lithgow to drop of passengers heading to Sydney.

30 Billion to build a half arsed NBN is crazy.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> As my previous post has shown, they seem to have 2 time frames, depending on how far within the broadband document you are willing to read.




The latter half of 2016 is within the 2016/17 FY. You're grasping at straws there.



sydboy007 said:


> Wasn't saying you did, only that you seem to have some doubt as to the LNP being able to porvide 25-100Mbs within the time frame they have stated.




No. You went further than that in attempting to relate my comment about the Coalition's rollout prospects to your own views on Labor's. 



sydboy007 said:


> I would argue up to 8 years seems a lot more realistic than what the LNP is saying at present.  You seem to have hinted you at least partially agree with this.


----------



## Knobby22

Very funny. Good show - Mad as Hell.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> The latter half of 2016 is within the 2016/17 FY. You're grasping at straws there.
> 
> 
> 
> No. You went further than that in attempting to relate my comment about the Coalition's rollout prospects to your own views on Labor's.




The page 2 date does not state it is a fiscal year.  So possibly you are the one grasping at straws?  If you are correct, then I would argue the majority of punters who see late 2016 as a date would think it to mean late calendar year 2016, not up to mid 2017.  Certainly MT needs to make this cleared for the voting public.

Seems I have misinterpreted you comment for the rollout of the LNP NBN and how much faith you have in the schedule, so I'll leave it be.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> The page 2 date does not state it is a fiscal year.  So possibly you are the one grasping at straws?  If you are correct, then I would argue the majority of punters who see late 2016 as a date would think it to mean late calendar year 2016, not up to mid 2017.  Certainly MT needs to make this cleared for the voting public..



That part of the rollout can finish in late 2016 and within the 2016/17 FY. There's a 6-month overlap between the two. 

My reflection in the likelihood of the Libs achieving their rollout schedule was an attempt to introduce some bipartisanship into the discussion. I like a bit of partisan political argy bargy as you do, but if that's all it is, it ultimately becomes pointless.

As for any comparison between my expectations for the Coalition's rollout and Labor's, we've already seen two significant delays in Labor's.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> That part of the rollout can finish in late 2016 and within the 2016/17 FY. There's a 6-month overlap between the two.




Then MT should make that clear

I think it's reasonable to think that the majority of people who see late 2016 would not consider it to mean a fiscal year.

MT needs to clarify this so a large section of the community don't have unrealistic expectations of when they will receive an upgrade to their internet service.


----------



## Smurf1976

If someone tells me "late 2016" then I will expect it by mid-December and will enforce Dec 31 at the latest.

If someone is referring to a financial year then this it is normal practice to say so. Either as "2016-17" or "2016 financial year" or something like that. To do otherwise is dishonest at best.


----------



## drsmith

Smurf1976 said:


> If someone tells me "late 2016" then I will expect it by mid-December and will enforce Dec 31 at the latest.
> 
> If someone is referring to a financial year then this it is normal practice to say so. Either as "2016-17" or "2016 financial year" or something like that. To do otherwise is dishonest at best.



I think the point Syd is making is that to say "late 2016" in one part of the document and "in the 4-years to 2016-17" in another part is inconsistent.

It depends on how you want to look at it.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> I think the point Syd is making is that to say "late 2016" in one part of the document and "in the 4-years to 2016-17" in another part is inconsistent.
> 
> It depends on how you want to look at it.




Then can you explain a way to look at it where they are not inconsistent.

I'm not being partisan in this, am just saying that from my reading of the document it seems inconsistent.

So I'd like to see why you believe it isn't so i can better understand your point of view.

As smurf has said, the usual way to indicate a financial year is 2016-17, otherwise I'd say most people will see the 2016 deadline as Dec 31 2016.

The only way I can see that it isn't inconsistent is that the second reference is talking about not only the upgrade to a minimum 25Mbs by 31/12/2016, but is also including some of the further rollout to HFC areas and providing the further upgrade to 50Mbs by 31/12/2019 as he does state it will be completed in 2019.

Surely he got some people not too au fey with the policy to read it and catch these kinds of ambiguities?


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Then can you explain a way to look at it where they are not inconsistent.



The 2016-17 FY is from July 01 2016 to June 30 2017.

The end of 2016 is within the above FY.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> The 2016-17 FY is from July 01 2016 to June 30 2017.
> 
> The end of 2016 is within the above FY.




So how does one distinguish between 2016 calendar year and 2016 fiscal year, when all you are told is that work will be completed by late 2016?

Do you agree that it it makes much more sense to be specific and say 2016-17 or the 2016 fiscal year?

All MT has to do is update his document on page 2 to say late 2016 fiscal year or 2016-17 and this fog is cleared up, and it will also allow people to see that the promised upgrade may not occur till mid 2017.

This is an important policy and I feel that things need to be as precise as possible as it allows people to make the best informed decision they can, and it also allow us to hold MT accountable should things fall short of what has been promised.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> So how does one distinguish between 2016 calendar year and 2016 fiscal year, when all you are told is that work will be completed by late 2016?
> 
> Do you agree that it makes much more sense to be specific and say 2016-17 or the 2016 fiscal year?



As I've said above, the time frames for 65% of the FTTN rollout and min 25 mbps frames are not mutually exclusive. The end of 2016 is within the 2016/17 FY.

With min 25 mbps, he has been specific in saying the end of 2016.



sydboy007 said:


> This is an important policy and I feel that things need to be as precise as possible as it allows people to make the best informed decision they can, and it also allow us to hold MT accountable should things fall short of what has been promised.



If you want further clarification on the detail, there's no harm in asking.

http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/contact/

As for things falling short, public judgement will ultimately be between the outcomes of the two parties.


----------



## drsmith

I'm surprised no one's picked up on this,



> The number of properties to receive fibre direct to the premises as part of the Coalition’s NBN plan could increase depending on the cost of such an endeavour, says Opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull.




This sort of flexible thinking is what we need in our politicians, unlike the political dogma of Stephen Conroy.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...lition-may-increase-ftth-nbn-rollout-turnbull


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> I'm surprised no one's picked up on this,
> 
> 
> 
> This sort of flexible thinking is what we need in our politicians, unlike the political dogma of Stephen Conroy.
> 
> http://www.businessspectator.com.au...lition-may-increase-ftth-nbn-rollout-turnbull




Let me translate Turnbull:

_"If the rubbish "FTTN is 1/4 the cost of fibre" campaign I've been running for the last 3 years turns out to be wrong, then the current NBN model (which I've also been bagging for 3 years) is actually the way to go. Sorry."_


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Let me translate Turnbull:



The cost and timeframe of Labor's NBN is by no means settled yet, but I knew I could draw you out. 

How do you want to translate Stephen Conroy ?

You know it'll have to include red underpants and the dogma that money is no object.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> The cost and timeframe of Labor's NBN is by no means settled yet, but I knew I could draw you out.
> 
> How do you want to translate Stephen Conroy ?
> 
> You know it'll have to include red underpants and the dogma that money is no object.




Dr Smith, when nation building does money really matter? i mean the *45 to 90 billion* isn't going to break us as a country, wont even come close, a literal drop in the bucket.

Do you think wars are won worrying about the cost? what % of GDP did the *Trans-Australian Railway* cost in 1912/17? wiki says it *cost £4,045,000 *to build it, an extraordinary amount in those days, pushed forward by a Labor Govt going about the business of nation building.

EDIT:

Total Federal Govt revenues in 1909 were £14,350,793

http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/free.nsf/0/F266A9AFC7CD16B7CA257AEE0011E796/$File/13010_1901_1909%20section%2019.pdf

Same in 2012 expected $376.1 billion

http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/overview/html/overview_42.htm

So the spend is somewhat comparable to previous nation building initiatives.


----------



## sydboy007

Decided I have too many unanswered questions from the LNP broadband policy (not sure 18 pages counts as a policy) So I've emailed the following to Malcolm.

I'm expecting to get back the same kind of waffle I've received on previous emails, but I'll post what ever I receive.

Malcolm

I've been reading your broadband policy with quite some interest.  I must admit I'm quite disappointed that after 2.5 years the policy you have presented is all you've got.

After reading you policy and background papers a few times, I'm still quite unclear about a range of issues.  I'm hoping you can clarify these for me.

Telstra

When do you expect a signed agreement with Telstra on use of the copper network?

Why do you believe that this agreement will not add any cost to the current agreement NBN has with them?

Do you expect that ACCC will need to clear any agreement?

Do you expect a new agreement will require a vote by Telstra shareholders?

Copper remediation / replacement

Does your current costings have any amount for copper network repairs?

Have you any forecast figures as to how much copper will need to be repaired?

Who will pay for the copper repair?

If a significant amount of copper - say greater than 20% - needs to be replaced will this have an impact on your rollout schedule?

If an area has most of its copper replaced, will they still be connected to a node?  I'm assuming this would be more costly to run that a GPON network?

Network Rollout

How long will the tender process take to determine the node / equipment supplier?

How will the network rollout proceed before you have a signed agreement with Telstra?

When do you expect the first node to go live?

How many nodes do you expect to be installed by late 2016 and then late 2019?

How many premises do you expect will be cutover to the network by late 2016 so as to have access to a minimum of 25Mbs?

How long will it take to reach the highest daily rate of cutovers?  How many premises per day do you expect this to be?

What is the maximum node to premises cable length that you have forecast that will allow a minimum of 25Mbs?

Are MDUs is current HFC areas due for an upgrade by late 2016, or will they be part of the late 2019 rollout?

I'm looking forward to your response to these questions as it will help me in weighing your proposal against Labor's.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I've emailed the following to Malcolm.



There's some good questions in there.

I perhaps would have asked them in the form of a formal letter and not been so disparaging at the beginning. That's only going to lead the reader to think you have made up your mind regardless of how the questions are answered.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> Dr Smith, when nation building does money really matter? i mean the *45 to 90 billion* isn't going to break us as a country, wont even come close, a literal drop in the bucket.



That statement well illustrates things. Firstly, the lack of respect of the value of money typical of the current government and a lack of confidence in the projected costing of the current NBN rollout.

As for comparisons with federal budgets of 100 years ago, what were the other demands on government in terms of social security, healthcare, pensions etc ?

I think you'll find it's not exactly a rational comparison.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> There's some good questions in there.
> 
> I perhaps would have asked them in the form of a formal letter and not been so disparaging at the beginning. That's only going to lead the reader to think you have made up your mind regardless of how the questions are answered.




My personal feeling is what Malcolm has is more a discussion paper than a true fully costed policy.  Both documents total less than 60 pages, most of which is just criticising the NBN.

It's certainly not the quality document I think a lot of MT supporters were expecting.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> My personal feeling is what Malcolm has is more a discussion paper than a true fully costed policy.



One thing to consider is that oppositions don't have the resources of government when it comes to evaluating and costing projects.

It may also be the case that the Opposition haven't released all the background information. It is a political environment in which they operate after all, and the information is for broader public consumption. It may not necessarily reflect all the research they have conducted.

I hope in their own minds that they do see it at least in part of a discussion paper and that's why I've been encouraged by some of Malcolm's comments regarding the potential scope of the fibre rollout relative to cost. With that in mind, it's obviously beneficial all round if NBN Co are successful in bringing the rollout costs to expectations as, judging by Malcolm's comments, this would enable the expansion of FTTH relative to FTTN under their model.

I don't know if you noticed, but in the Coalition's background documents, Malcolm assumed an FTTP cost of $3600 per premises in his time value of money argument. That leaves a lot of scope to expand FTTP beyond 22% under the Coalition's model if the actual cost is closer to NBN Co's $2400 PP.

If your questions are raised in the context of genuine interest as part of a formal letter, it will be interesting to see what responses you get. I'm sure Myths could make worthwhile additions to the list.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> One thing to consider is that oppositions don't have the resources of government when it comes to evaluating and costing projects.
> 
> It may also be the case that the Opposition haven't released all the background information. It is a political environment in which they operate after all, and the information is for broader public consumption. It may not necessarily reflect all the research they have conducted..




That's true, but the LNP do have considerable resources at their disposal, and polling would suggest this is a particularly important policy area, so I would have thought they would put more effort into it.

I don't feel that the current policy provides enough information to determine if their costings are in the ball park.  

At a minimum Malcolm needed to state how many nodes would be required and the approx max cable length to provide a minimum 25Mbs.  These are the 2 factors that have the most bearing on rollout costs.

Considering there's a website called http://www.adsl2exchanges.com.au/ that provides reasonable cable length estimates I would think he could have gained access to similar data sets.  I hope he has.

Copper remediation would be the next biggest cost.

I do find it rank hypocrisy that Malcolm is having it both ways in saying the NBN will cost $94B but then says if the current FTTP rollout costs are true then he will allow more FTTP under his policy.  He's having a two way bet and the media isn't hammering him enough on this duplicity.

I am hoping to get a reasonable response from him, but my experience from sending him emails in the past about what he's said on talk shows and radio has usually been he responds to just one question in such a limited way as to offer no real understanding as to what his true position is.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I am hoping to get a reasonable response from him, but my experience from sending him emails in the past about what he's said on talk shows and radio has usually been he responds to just one question in such a limited way as to offer no real understanding as to what his true position is.



When you open them the way you've open the one above, it's obvious you've made your mind up and are not a genuine seeker of additional information.

A response (if any) is drafted accordingly.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> When you open them the way you've open the one above, it's obvious you've made your mind up and are not a genuine seeker of additional information.
> 
> A response (if any) is drafted accordingly.




Aug 22 2012 Malcolm stated on ABC Lateline that he had a fully costed broadband policy.  He then release his "fully costed" policy in April 2013 and well it's a pretty thin document that doesn't show any estimates as to the main cost compnents of the network rollout.

So yes, I'm disappointed and feel right to criticize the document to Turnbull directly.

As for making my mind up, yes I'm a support of the current NBN, but if I had great faith in the costings and rollout schedule of the LNP version, while probably not wholeheartedly supporting it, I could see why the electorate my decide to go with it, and accept it.

Does that make me political?  I suppose it does, but no more than you or pretty much anyone else on this forum.  I'm at least attacking the LNP policy based on the technical criteria.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> If your questions are raised in the context of genuine interest as part of a formal letter, it will be interesting to see what responses you get. I'm sure Myths could make worthwhile additions to the list.




I wouldn't place too much hope in getting a decent reply.

I sent a polite, formal letter to MT in late 2010, asking several very specific questions about speed, coverage, technologies and future upgrades under his policy. All I got back was a 2-page form letter on 21/1/11 that said (summarised into brief points):

The NBN is "an irresponsible plan that will..."
- "increase the cost of internet access for consumers due to real price increases".
- "duplicate existing infrastructure and scrap existing copper, HFC and FTTP networks"
- "not deliver value for money"
- "has been exempted from FOI laws"

"Wireless is the type of broadband in greatest demand" yet the NBN is only fixed line.
"12Mbps is more than sufficient for residential customers".


_Interesting that since then:_
#1 has been shown to be false, with current pricing below copper and an SAU submission requiring a fall in real prices for 30 years.

#2 is somewhat false and the rest will ultimately apply to his plan as well in the case of copper and probably HFC.

#4 is incorrect, since NBN Co was explicitly subjected to FOI even though GBE are automatically exempted.

#5 applies equally to his own policy.

He has now decided that #6 is wrong and is offering 25-100Mbps in his own policy.



He didn't answer a single question I asked of him.


----------



## moXJO

sydboy007 said:


> Aug 22 2012 Malcolm stated on ABC Lateline that he had a fully costed broadband policy.  He then release his "fully costed" policy in April 2013 and well it's a pretty thin document that doesn't show any estimates as to the main cost compnents of the network rollout.
> 
> So yes, I'm disappointed and feel right to criticize the document to Turnbull directly.
> 
> As for making my mind up, yes I'm a support of the current NBN, but if I had great faith in the costings and rollout schedule of the LNP version, while probably not wholeheartedly supporting it, I could see why the electorate my decide to go with it, and accept it.
> 
> Does that make me political?  I suppose it does, but no more than you or pretty much anyone else on this forum.  I'm at least attacking the LNP policy based on the technical criteria.




Questions and catching them out won't help out much in changing opinion on the NBN. Continually lobbying them with the affordability and future economic benefits will more than likely turn them. If you can get the numbers of people supporting you to a decent number then the door will be left open to changing their stance. There are a lot of libs that do support the nbn and I think it's a sticking point with a lot of them. This is one area I think the libs look a little stupid in. But I would consider it more an election tactic at this point then anything else.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> _Interesting that since then:_



Since then.........................?

Try again, and phrase it more diplomatiacaly than Syd.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Aug 22 2012 Malcolm stated on ABC Lateline that he had a fully costed broadband policy.  He then release his "fully costed" policy in April 2013 and well it's a pretty thin document that doesn't show any estimates as to the main cost compnents of the network rollout.
> 
> So yes, I'm disappointed and feel right to criticize the document to Turnbull directly.
> 
> As for making my mind up, yes I'm a support of the current NBN, but if I had great faith in the costings and rollout schedule of the LNP version, while probably not wholeheartedly supporting it, I could see why the electorate my decide to go with it, and accept it.
> 
> Does that make me political?  I suppose it does, but no more than you or pretty much anyone else on this forum.  I'm at least attacking the LNP policy based on the technical criteria.



Do you want answers or just to make a political point ?

It's your choice, but don't expect the former when you're looking for the latter.

And don't worry about the forum. It's ultimately not about winning a debate here.


----------



## sydboy007

I can only find some small excerpts from the April 19 Senate Estimates Committee hearing (why do Govs make it so hard to access public domain info), but from the small amount I've read on some blogs it does seem MT does not have the understanding required of a Mr Broadband

Mr Turnbull: To Mr McLaren! You would be aware that about 34 percent of the premises to be covered by the fixed line footprint of the NBN Co’s plan are multidwelling units!

Turns out only a very small amount of that 34% is what most people would call MDUs - the majority in there are town houses and villas.

Next to show his lack of understanding

Turnbull to Quigley
If you were to do a portion of the brownfields rollout with what is called fibre to the node – but we are talking about a vectored VDSL solution!

Mr Quigley: – No we have not. In fact, not only should we not do that, for the reasons that Mr Harris articulated before, but we just do not have enough information to do that, because it takes a fair number of assumptions.

There are some big questions in there about the copper remediation. For example, there is a big question of who is going to pay for the costs of the copper that would need to be remediated to remove bridge taps and fix joints if such an approach were taken. So there are half a dozen very meaty issues that would need to be resolved before we could analyse that in any detail!

MT has definitely not attempted to answer these questions.

To put some perspective on this issue, the company I work for has around 100K of Telstra ULLs (Telstra copper without a dial tone), along with a significant amount of Telstra Wholesale ADSL.

In any month the failure rate of this copper is 0.5% to 1% (admittedly failure can mean totally down to just unstable or errors slowing things down).  The wide variation is usually due to local weather - ie when it rains the level of faults jumps significantly.  I'm lucky I deal in the corporate faults as it's much easier to get a decent Telstra tech assigned.  In the consumer space it seems faults can last for weeks before being resolved.

I'd estimate 15% of the corporate faults require multiple visits by a field tech.

So I do worry about how the copper will be tested and what criteria will be used to determine if you keep it or it gets replaced.


----------



## drsmith

A single disgruntled subcontractor or a further sign of broader rollout problems,



> The failure of those major contractors - or "tier-one" contractors - to pass on the benefits of the scheme has meant many subcontractors are refusing to sign up to the NBN, while the ones that do are often far less experienced.
> 
> The lower-quality work being delivered by some less experienced subcontractors, which often needs to be rectified, and the lack of interest from subcontractors have been blamed for the delays in the rollout of the $37.4 billion network.
> 
> One telecommunications subcontractor, who declined to be named because he had signed confidentiality clauses, said an NBN Co construction partner was charging the federal government about $106 a metre for drilling, but offering subcontractors about $38 a metre.
> 
> "High gross margins are being gouged out by the big companies and are the main contributing reason for the rollout issues for the NBN," the subcontractor said.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...d-for-nbn-delays/story-e6frgaif-1226631161161


----------



## Calliope

It's BER rip-off all over again.



> DRILLING contractors Helen and Ian Murdoch have no desire to sign up for work with the National Broadband Network.
> 
> The rates offered are not even enough to cover costs.
> 
> *While the federal government is paying top dollar to roll out the scheme, the handful of major contractors it has engaged are pocketing vast sums and refusing to pass on the benefits to the mum-and-dad contractors on the ground.*
> 
> The failure of those companies to fully compensate sub-contractors is a key reason why the NBN rollout is behind schedule, with major contractors revising down construction estimates as they struggle to find workers.
> 
> Ms Murdoch said the going market rate for drilling pits - the trenches in which the NBN fibre cable is installed - is 40 per cent higher than that being offered by major NBN contractors. "Some people are pretty desperate for work so they're doing it but there's not enough money in it to even cover your overheads," Ms Murdoch said. "People are going to go broke. People are going to owe employees and suppliers all over the place."
> 
> *She likened problems with subcontracting in the NBN to previous cases of government mismanagement, which included the Building the Education Revolution, which was plagued by over-charging of management fees by the major companies empowered to implement the $16.2 billion scheme,* and the pink batts scheme, which was suddenly cancelled, leaving insulation installers stuck with large quantities of batts they had stockpiled in the expectation of extra work.
> 
> "It's going to be a vicious cycle," Ms Murdoch said.



 (My bolds)

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-cover-our-costs/story-e6frgaif-1226630368996


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> A single disgruntled subcontractor or a further sign of broader rollout problems,
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...d-for-nbn-delays/story-e6frgaif-1226631161161






Calliope said:


> It's BER rip-off all over again.
> 
> (My bolds)
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-cover-our-costs/story-e6frgaif-1226630368996




You blokes are funny. Seems the NBN can't win: They're either paying too much, or not enough! You all cry for the free market, but if the "free market" means subbies aren't making enough money then the free market is broken.

Subbie work is supply and demand. If the NBN contractors aren't paying enough, then they won't get anyone to do it and they'll have to pay more. But while there are companies doing it for the offered rates, that's what the rates will be.

It's not just Govt work. I had a client that used to pay me $x for a photo job. Last year, they cut the rate to 1/2 $x. I knocked them back, and lost work for 3 months. Then they rang me back and offered 3/4 $x. Now I'm working for them again. Such is subcontract work.


Could it be that there are a few contractors out there who are finding that NBN work isn't the normal "take a regular price and double it for a Govt contract" that they were hoping for?


----------



## moXJO

NBNMyths said:


> You blokes are funny. Seems the NBN can't win: They're either paying too much, or not enough! You all cry for the free market, but if the "free market" means subbies aren't making enough money then the free market is broken.
> 
> Subbie work is supply and demand. If the NBN contractors aren't paying enough, then they won't get anyone to do it and they'll have to pay more. But while there are companies doing it for the offered rates, that's what the rates will be.
> 
> It's not just Govt work. I had a client that used to pay me $x for a photo job. Last year, they cut the rate to 1/2 $x. I knocked them back, and lost work for 3 months. Then they rang me back and offered 3/4 $x. Now I'm working for them again. Such is subcontract work.
> 
> 
> Could it be that there are a few contractors out there who are finding that NBN work isn't the normal "take a regular price and double it for a Govt contract" that they were hoping for?




Subbies get screwed by the main contractors. While the big builders that were in with the unions made millions. BER contracts were a joke and they ruined a lot of young subbies.


----------



## Calliope

moXJO said:


> Subbies get screwed by the main contractors. While the big builders that were in with the unions made millions. BER contracts were a joke and they ruined a lot of young subbies.




Yes. The subbies get screwed by the main contractors. The main contractors screw NBN Co. NBN Co screws the taxpayer.

The screwed subbies are doing inferior sub-standard work. 

The trail leads back to Quigley and Kaiser...Quigley who has had no experience with large scale telecommunications roll-outs and Kaiser who is a failure at quality control.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Yes. The subbies get screwed by the main contractors. The main contractors screw NBN Co. NBN Co screws the taxpayer.
> 
> The screwed subbies are doing inferior sub-standard work.
> 
> The trail leads back to Quigley and Kaiser...Quigley who has had no experience with large scale telecommunications roll-outs and Kaiser who is a failure at quality control.




So you expect that things will change under the coalition's NBN then? There are only three possible outcomes:

1. Things stay the same.

2. Main contractors pay subbies more, and charge NBN Co more to maintain their margin.

3. The main contractors pay subbies more, and reduce their margins so charge NBN Co the same rates. 

So, pray tell, which will be the outcome under the Coalition do you think?


I'd be betting on #1 or #2. I'd suggest #3 is about as likely as the Coalition delivering on their promise of min25Mbps to everyone by the end of 2016....


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> So, pray tell,




"So, pray tell". Hey that's cute.



> which will be the outcome under the Coalition do you think?




:dunno: Value for money perhaps?


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> "So, pray tell". Hey that's cute.
> 
> 
> 
> :dunno: Value for money perhaps?




So explain which of the three possibilities you think will happen to achieve that. 

Will they pay the main contractors less? And if so, how do you think the main contractors will be willing/able to pay the subcontractors more money?

Will they pay the main contractors the same amount (and therefore not save any money), but insist that the main contractors reduce their margins and pay the subbies more? If so, by what mechanism?

Or will they pay the main contractors more, and insist they pass that additional income onto the subbies? If so, by what mechanism?


One-liners may serve Tony Abbott well in opposition, but just like him, when you're pressed for details on how to achieve your contradictory panacea, you are unable to do so.


So far, we've had the opposition claim the NBN pricing is too high, and also too low...

They've complained the rollout is too expensive, but that they aren't paying well enough...

They've complained the rollout is too slow, but also that it's being rushed...

We've had Coalition pollies complaining that the NBN isn't needed, but then demanding their electorates get it first...

We've had them say that the entire NBN sat programme isn't needed. But now they're complaining that the NBN interim sat service (that they didn't want) will run out before the new sats (that they also didn't want) are launched, so new connections will have to go to the market (their 2010 policy anyway) for a year or so...


_There seems to be a pattern developing._


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> So explain which of the three possibilities you think will happen to achieve that.




You worry too much. Your problem is that you put your faith in Conroy. I will back Turnbull against Conroy on achieving value for money on broadband roll-out...a business man versus a union hack.


----------



## Aussiejeff

Calliope said:


> You worry too much. Your problem is that you put your faith in Conroy. I will back Turnbull against Conroy on achieving value for money on broadband roll-out...*a business man versus a union hack*.




That last part might have read better if you had said "_gormless_ union hack"?


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> You worry too much. Your problem is that you put your faith in Conroy. I will back Turnbull against Conroy on achieving value for money on broadband roll-out...a business man versus a union hack.




Uhhuh. Details, schmetails.

You remind me of that epitome of conservative politics and integrity.

_"Now...now...now... Don't you worry about that"_


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> Uhhuh. Details, schmetails.
> 
> You remind me of that epitome of conservative politics and integrity.
> 
> _"Now...now...now... Don't you worry about that"_




Here are the "details schmetails" of who is pulling the strings of the union puppets like Shorten and Combet and the man you have faith in... Conroy. However, if you want to worry about Labor's  NBN ballsups...be my guest.

And by the way who is the epitome of Labor politics and  bastardry? Your beloved Julia. of course.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Here are the "details schmetails" of who is pulling the strings of the union puppets like Shorten and Combet and the man you have faith in...
> 
> View attachment 51967




I'm a little confused. Is it a Bad Thing that representative organisations of _working-class Australians_ are donating to a political party?

Why?

And more so, why is it worse than big business pulling the strings of the Coalition?
http://periodicdisclosures.aec.gov.....aspx?SubmissionID=48&ClientID=6&ClientTyCo=P
http://periodicdisclosures.aec.gov.au/Returns/49/PQDN1.pdf
http://www.ashaust.org.au/lv4/Lv4action_politicaldons.htm

In 2010/11 alone, one Queensland-based mining company donated $460,000 to the Liberal party. I wonder what they'll want for their money? 
http://periodicdisclosures.aec.gov.au/Returns/48/OWOT7.pdf


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> I'm a little confused.




More than a little I would say.


> Is it a Bad Thing that representative organisations of _working-class Australians_ are donating to a political party?




Union membership covers only 13% of private sector employees, so they are not representative of "working-class Australians". It is interesting that the money is being donated by the union bosses and not the members. It is a bad thing, and typically Labor, that these huge sums of  workers' money are being shoveled into a lost cause without any consultation.   

The main reason is so that the militant unions can demand favorable treatment from a union dominated government.


----------



## sptrawler

Calliope said:


> More than a little I would say.
> 
> 
> Union membership covers only 13% of private sector employees, so they are not representative of "working-class Australians". It is interesting that the money is being donated by the union bosses and not the members. It is a bad thing, and typically Labor, that these huge sums of  workers' money are being shoveled into a lost cause without any consultation.
> 
> The main reason is so that the militant unions can demand favorable treatment from a union dominated government.




Well said, the unions need to excise themselves from the Labor party and start another political party.

NBNMyths, has been a great source of accurate information and I hope he continues to critique the NBN, on our forum, after the election.

Also I hope we are as critical of the opposition if they don't deliver.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> More than a little I would say.
> 
> 
> Union membership covers only 13% of private sector employees, so they are not representative of "working-class Australians". It is interesting that the money is being donated by the union bosses and not the members. It is a bad thing, and typically Labor, that these huge sums of  workers' money are being shoveled into a lost cause without any consultation.
> 
> The main reason is so that the militant unions can demand favorable treatment from a union dominated government.




No consultation, huh? So union members have no say on how their funds are spent? And they have no option to cancel their membership if they disagree with how it's spent? Do they have more or less say than the shareholders of a public company that donates to a political party?


Here's a couple more questions that spring to mind:

1) If unions donate to get favourable treatment for their workers, why do you think corporations donate? Just from the goodness in their hearts? 

2) In your mind it's OK for a mining company to donate to a political party, but not OK for the representative organisation of the employees of that mining company (ie: the CFMEU) to donate to the "other" political party? Please explain.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> No consultation, huh? So union members have no say on how their funds are spent? And they have no option to cancel their membership if they disagree with how it's spent? Do they have more or less say than the shareholders of a public company that donates to a political party?




Much less I would say. The shareholders own the company. The unions are just parasites on their members. That's why membership is dropping off so rapidly. They are not as rusted on Labor as you are.



> Here's a couple more questions that spring to mind:
> 
> 1) If unions donate to get favourable treatment for their workers, why do you think corporations donate? Just from the goodness in their hearts?




No. It's to get rid of the worst Labor government we have ever had.:



> 2) In your mind it's OK for a mining company to donate to a political party, but not OK for the representative organisation of the employees of that mining company (ie: the CFMEU) to donate to the "other" political party? Please explain.




Because one wants to keep a corrupt union dominated government in power and the other wants to save the country from further ballsups and black holes.

Any more silly questions?


----------



## bellenuit

NBNMyths said:


> And they have no option to cancel their membership if they disagree with how it's spent?




I know many guys in the building industry around Perth and when it comes to union dominated sites, they have no choice but to be in the union. Technically they don't have to be, but unless they have no fear of a hammer falling on their head, then that is how it works. So in many cases, yes they can cancel their membership. But doing so means they are make themselves unemployable on all union dominated sites.

Myths, though I have disagreed with you many times in the past, I have always respected your technical knowledge, from which I have learned quite a bit. I'm not the one for name calling, so I have always taking you at face value - you are here to dispel myths about the NBN, not to play partisan politics.

However, in the last month or so I think you are adopting a very partisan stance. Very unlike you and making me question the independence of some of the data you produce, which I personally can't verify.


----------



## medicowallet

bellenuit said:


> However, in the last month or so I think you are adopting a very partisan stance. Very unlike you and making me question the independence of some of the data you produce, which I personally can't verify.




I guess it has got to be hard knowing that your puppy is being replaced by a kitten.
I remember having a tanty as a little tot when this happened to me.
I don't think it would happen to me nowadays.

MW


----------



## NBNMyths

bellenuit said:


> I know many guys in the building industry around Perth and when it comes to union dominated sites, they have no choice but to be in the union. Technically they don't have to be, but unless they have no fear of a hammer falling on their head, then that is how it works. So in many cases, yes they can cancel their membership. But doing so means they are make themselves unemployable on all union dominated sites.
> 
> Myths, though I have disagreed with you many times in the past, I have always respected your technical knowledge, from which I have learned quite a bit. I'm not the one for name calling, so I have always taking you at face value - you are here to dispel myths about the NBN, not to play partisan politics.
> 
> However, in the last month or so I think you are adopting a very partisan stance. Very unlike you and making me question the independence of some of the data you produce, which I personally can't verify.





To some extent it has to be partisan, because the NBN is the policy of a political party, and the other party opposes it (although far less than they used to). Therefore a debate on the two policies must be somewhat partisan. The NBN is a typical Labor policy (ie Govt build it for everyone). The coalition's policy used to be typical Coalition (ie leave it to the market), although now it's basically a cheaper version of a Labor policy (ie the Govt is still building it for everyone).

That said, the discussion has moved off on a tangent, mainly because I'm amusedly perplexed by Caliope's notion that union political donations are examples of self-serving corruption, but business political donations are entirely selfless.  However, point taken and I'll refrain from future posts on that topic unless they directly relate to the NBN.




medicowallet said:


> I guess it has got to be hard knowing that your puppy is being replaced by a kitten.
> I remember having a tanty as a little tot when this happened to me.
> I don't think it would happen to me nowadays.
> 
> MW




Nobody would be happy about losing a puppy for a kitten. Everyone knows dogs are better than cats.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> That said, the discussion has moved off on a tangent, mainly because I'm amusedly perplexed by Caliope's notion that union political donations are examples of self-serving corruption, but business political donations are entirely selfless.  However, point taken and I'll refrain from future posts on that topic unless they directly relate to the NBN.




"Bemusedly perplexed":screwy:  I, however am not bemused or perplexed at your political stance, e,g, unions are good - big business is bad. It is not surprising that the CFMEU, which you support as a Labor donor  is the most militant in Australia and well noted for its thuggery. And Craig Thomson is  well known as a donor of members' fees to brothels.

Actually the Gillard government and NBN Co are part and parcel of the same thing. They both stand for bad management, waste and failure to meet commitments.

And now you are claiming that I have diverted you from your role of NBN Co cheerleader. What nonsense. The reason is that the Conroy/Quigley NBN is, along with your Labor party, in it's death throes and they are determined to trash the joint with economic vandalism before they go.

One thing you have made clear is that your participation on this thread has been entirely partisan. I have no interest in who provides the service to my computer as I am doing OK on ADSL2.

As you have now, at last, declared you true colours you may resume your propaganda without being diverted from your mission by me. It is however, a lost cause.:bad:


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> "Bemusedly perplexed":screwy:  I, however am not bemused or perplexed at your political stance, e,g, unions are good - big business is bad. It is not surprising that the CFMEU, which you support as a Labor donor  is the most militant in Australia and well noted for its thuggery. And Craig Thomson is  well known as a donor of members' fees to brothels.
> 
> Actually the Gillard government and NBN Co are part and parcel of the same thing. They both stand for bad management, waste and failure to meet commitments.
> 
> And now you are claiming that I have diverted you from your role of NBN Co cheerleader. What nonsense. The reason is that the Conroy/Quigley NBN is, along with your Labor party, in it's death throes and they are determined to trash the joint with economic vandalism before they go.
> 
> One thing you have made clear is that your participation on this thread has been entirely partisan. I have no interest in who provides the service to my computer as I am doing OK on ADSL2.
> 
> As you have now, at last, declared you true colours you may resume your propaganda without being diverted from your mission by me. It is however, a lost cause.:bad:




Ok, I'll have to post one more time....

Nice to see the master strawman return! I never claimed that unions are always good, and never said that big business is bad. I never said I supported the CFMEU as a labor donor. I merely questioned why in your mind its ok for business to donate, but not unions.  I would suggest that if one is OK, then so is the other. I'd be quite happy for all corporate and union political donations to be banned, actually.

I'm also very pleased to hear that apparently no employee of a public business has ever been accused of misusing the funds of that company. Obviously this only happens in unions. :

As for failure to meet targets, lets see how that "25Mbps to everyone by the end of 2016" goes, shall we? I expect if/when this fails to occur, you'll be holding the coalition to account for their failure to meet targets, and mismanagement? And demanding they be dismissed at the subsequent election?


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> I'm also very pleased to hear that apparently no employee of a public business has ever been accused of misusing the funds of that company. Obviously this only happens in unions. :




The difference is that when an employee misappropriates his employer's funds he is charged with a criminal offence. However when a Union official sets up a slush fund to defraud his Union members, a benefactor of that fund can even be elected PM and the justice system is very reluctant to do anything about it. 

Instead of sticking out your tongue, you would be better served to show a little maturity and hold your tongue.


----------



## sydboy007

Calliope said:


> The difference is that when an employee misappropriates his employer's funds he is charged with a criminal offence. However when a Union official sets up a slush fund to defraud his Union members, a benefactor of that fund can even be elected PM and the justice system is very reluctant to do anything about it.
> 
> Instead of sticking out your tongue, you would be better served to show a little maturity and hold your tongue.




What about Tony Abbots political slush fund??

should you need to refresh your understanding of this - http://www.kingstribune.com/index.p...sting-the-first-stone-tony-abbott-and-the-awu

Now one has to wonder why the AEC under a Liberal Govt didn't fully investigate a Liberal minister over this mater.


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> What about Tony Abbots political slush fund??
> 
> should you need to refresh your understanding of this - http://www.kingstribune.com/index.p...sting-the-first-stone-tony-abbott-and-the-awu
> 
> Now one has to wonder why the AEC under a Liberal Govt didn't fully investigate a Liberal minister over this mater.




:topic: Wrong thread :bad:


----------



## drsmith

Today's offering from the AFR on the NBN,

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/marketing_chief_latest_to_quit_nbn_U9rMcLrTFVmZk9uIyPaOQM


----------



## Smurf1976

Well it's actually being built, at least it is here in Tasmania.

I've spotted 3 separate construction crews in the Hobart CBD this week working late at night. That plus they're now just in the next street from my mother's house in the suburbs and there's an assortment of cabinets appearing in various places.

So it's being built. Whether or not it will be "on time" is a good question, but it is being built at least down here.


----------



## sptrawler

Smurf1976 said:


> Well it's actually being built, at least it is here in Tasmania.
> 
> I've spotted 3 separate construction crews in the Hobart CBD this week working late at night. That plus they're now just in the next street from my mother's house in the suburbs and there's an assortment of cabinets appearing in various places.
> 
> So it's being built. Whether or not it will be "on time" is a good question, but it is being built at least down here.




Actually it is probably a good idea to push ahead with the Tasmanian rollout. 
With all the industry shut down and high unemployment, it will give people something to do while they sit at home.
Maybe some of the new clean energy technology jobs, will kick in soon.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> Actually it is probably a good idea to push ahead with the Tasmanian rollout.
> With all the industry shut down and high unemployment, it will give people something to do while they sit at home.
> Maybe some of the new clean energy technology jobs, will kick in soon.




Yup.  Keep the H&H economy going

* H&H = House and Holes because that's all people seem to think about these days.


----------



## noco

Smurf1976 said:


> Well it's actually being built, at least it is here in Tasmania.
> 
> I've spotted 3 separate construction crews in the Hobart CBD this week working late at night. That plus they're now just in the next street from my mother's house in the suburbs and there's an assortment of cabinets appearing in various places.
> 
> So it's being built. Whether or not it will be "on time" is a good question, but it is being built at least down here.




These poor buggers are having to work late at night with long hours because of the poor rates they are trying to work with.

No wonder so many subcontractors are going broke. At this rate the NBN won't be finished in the next 20 yeras and by that time new techknowology will be with us. 



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...ver-nbn-disaster/story-e6frgaif-1226634272172


----------



## drsmith

Debate today between Malcolm Turnbull and Stephen Conroy.

It gets a little feisty towards the end.


----------



## sptrawler

Yes I think Turnbull calling Conroy a grub was a waste of breath, everyone had made their own minds up on that allready.IMO

More perinent today was probably Michael Pascoes comment on the banks, when he starts calling it as it is, I listen.lol


----------



## DB008

Someone on reddit did a website comparing "ALP v LNP" NBN speeds when completed with some interactive simulations

http://howfastisthenbn.com.au/


----------



## sptrawler

Smurf1976 said:


> Well it's actually being built, at least it is here in Tasmania.
> 
> I've spotted 3 separate construction crews in the Hobart CBD this week working late at night. That plus they're now just in the next street from my mother's house in the suburbs and there's an assortment of cabinets appearing in various places.
> 
> So it's being built. Whether or not it will be "on time" is a good question, but it is being built at least down here.




Since you posted this Smurph, I've seen crews all over the place.
Obviously someone has put a cracker up their @rse, I bet Conroy has blown a fuse.


----------



## Calliope

DB008 said:


> Someone on reddit did a website comparing "ALP v LNP" NBN speeds when completed with some interactive simulations
> 
> http://howfastisthenbn.com.au/




It shows the ignorance of the spinmeister. The LNP is the Queensland governing party. As far as I know they are not involved in the NBN rollout. Obviously the spin has been poorly researched and should be taken with a grain of salt.


----------



## DB008

DB008 said:


> Someone on reddit did a website comparing "ALP v LNP" NBN speeds when completed with some interactive simulations
> 
> http://howfastisthenbn.com.au/




Made it to news.com.au (I really shouldn't be surprised as half of their stories come from reddit.com)

*How fast is the NBN compared to the Coalition's internet plan?*

http://www.news.com.au/technology/how-fast-is-the-nbn-compared-to-the-coalitions-internet-plan/story-e6frfro0-1226637554402


----------



## drsmith

DB008 said:


> Made it to news.com.au (I really shouldn't be surprised as half of their stories come from reddit.com)
> 
> *How fast is the NBN compared to the Coalition's internet plan?*
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/technology/how-fast-is-the-nbn-compared-to-the-coalitions-internet-plan/story-e6frfro0-1226637554402



He's being a bit naughty comparing FTTP's max speed to FTTN's min speed.

http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...-website-draws-quick-fire-20130508-2j7cw.html

Where I stand based on the NBN's latest rollout schedule in comparison to the Coalition's is that in 2016, I'll have what I have now with Labor (~12mb/sec download) compared to min 25mb/sec download with the Coalition's NBN. That's on the basis of the schedules provided.


----------



## waza1960

I've seen on this thread many times stated that wireless will never match Labors NBN.
 What about Samsung's announcement (downloading a movie in a second) download speeds several hundred times faster than 4g ...
http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/mobiles/samsung-announces-5g-data-breakthrough-20130514-2jizs.html


----------



## Calliope

waza1960 said:


> I've seen on this thread many times stated that wireless will never match Labors NBN.
> What about Samsung's announcement (downloading a movie in a second) download speeds several hundred times faster than 4g ...
> http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/mobiles/samsung-announces-5g-data-breakthrough-20130514-2jizs.html




The is little doubt that by the time the NBN is finally rolled out it will be redundant.:bad:


----------



## Paccioli

Calliope said:


> The is little doubt that by the time the NBN is finally rolled out it will be redundant.:bad:



Sure. Tell us everything you know about spectrum, shared bandwidth, absorption and interference. Won't take long, I expect.


----------



## So_Cynical

waza1960 said:


> I've seen on this thread many times stated that wireless will never match Labors NBN.
> What about Samsung's announcement (downloading a movie in a second) download speeds several hundred times faster than 4g ...
> http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/mobiles/samsung-announces-5g-data-breakthrough-20130514-2jizs.html




Somehow you missed this bit 



> Independent telecommunications analyst Chris Coughlan said at such an early stage the 5G wireless technology could not be compared with the NBN. He said there would be questions on how costly the 5G technology would be and *how much spectrum it would need to use.*
> ''There's a lot of things that have to be done for it to become viable,"he said.
> 
> 
> Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/...reakthrough-20130514-2jizs.html#ixzz2TGQSsxW9




Wireless spectrum is limited, fibre optic basically isn't.


----------



## bellenuit

So_Cynical said:


> Wireless spectrum is limited, fibre optic basically isn't.




Could it fill the role of the last mile to the home though?  I have read that this "5G" requires special antennas and is still only at the lab stage. There is also a question mark over Samsung calling it 5G, as the xGs (1G, 2G etc) are international standards and this has not been ratified by anybody at this stage.

But Samsung have tested to 1KM and if one were to put an antenna at the NBN nodes, it would be interesting to know if it could eliminate the need to run fibre to each individual home. Presumably the spectrum requirements over a small geographic area are significantly less than more widespread wireless networks. It doesn't need to service every home serviced by each node with 100Mbps+ speeds, only those who are not satisfied with the coalition's 25Mbps using existing copper. 

This is why I believe that Turnbull is right not to put everything in the FTTP basket. Of course FTTP is faster than FTTN, but if it means a $40B+ saving and those who need the faster speeds can still be serviced by these ancillary technologies that may come our way, then his approach may be the best overall.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

I am told today by a contact in the Ross Island Hotel that Nicole Kidman can be downloaded on to one's lap, in one second via Samsung wireless.

Why would you bother with the NBN?

gg


----------



## sydboy007

bellenuit said:


> Could it fill the role of the last mile to the home though?  I have read that this "5G" requires special antennas and is still only at the lab stage. There is also a question mark over Samsung calling it 5G, as the xGs (1G, 2G etc) are international standards and this has not been ratified by anybody at this stage.
> 
> But Samsung have tested to 1KM and if one were to put an antenna at the NBN nodes, it would be interesting to know if it could eliminate the need to run fibre to each individual home. Presumably the spectrum requirements over a small geographic area are significantly less than more widespread wireless networks. It doesn't need to service every home serviced by each node with 100Mbps+ speeds, only those who are not satisfied with the coalition's 25Mbps using existing copper.
> 
> This is why I believe that Turnbull is right not to put everything in the FTTP basket. Of course FTTP is faster than FTTN, but if it means a $40B+ saving and those who need the faster speeds can still be serviced by these ancillary technologies that may come our way, then his approach may be the best overall.




So let me ask.  At 1KM from the node, how many properties would be connecting to the "antenna" at the node sending the signal to all the houses within it's area?  What would the available bandwidth in aggregate be, and what could each house expect to receive?

The entire usable wireless spectrum is pathetically small.  A single fibre strand can currently do around 10Gbs with fairly standard tech.  100 Gbs is slowly rolling out into the core backbone of networks.  Compare this to around 3GHz for the entire wireless spectrum.  Most of this is already in use, so the reality is wireless *can not, will not, and NEVER NOT* (oh I know incorrect grammar but it helps to make my point)  be able to provide the broadband needs of cities and will only every be useful in low density areas.

As for your $40B saving, can you clarify how MT is going to do this when it seems he has not budgeted fro any copper replacement within his current $29B FTTN network.  If we end up replacing just 30% of the copper, I will be amazed and feel sorry for those who've been left on sub standard lines just so the Libs and Nats can try to fudge a cheaper build.  I'm willing to take bets on MT failing to get get everyone not on fibre / wireless / satellite NBN to minimum of 25Mbs by late 2016 - I'll even give that till Dec 31 2016.  I'm sure he will be providing the monthly updates he seems to think appropriate.  Hopefully he's willing to resign for his incompetence should this goal not be met.


----------



## So_Cynical

bellenuit said:


> Could it fill the role of the last mile to the home though?
> 
> But Samsung have tested to 1KM and if one were to put an antenna at the NBN nodes, it would be interesting to know if it could eliminate the need to run fibre to each individual home. Presumably the spectrum requirements over a small geographic area are significantly less than more widespread wireless networks.




Sure why not, The Noalition plans to build at least 40000 cabinets to house the 40000 nodes required so why not add 40000 antennas to that....it will still be a bottle neck compared to fibre.


----------



## bellenuit

So_Cynical said:


> Sure why not, The Noalition plans to build at least 40000 cabinets to house the 40000 nodes required so why not add 40000 antennas to that....it will still be a bottle neck compared to fibre.




Well it all sound expensive when you talk about 40,000 cabinets. But if each cabinet services 100 homes (I don't know the exact figure), that is 4,000,000 trenches that don't have to be dug. That sound much worse.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

If I am given a choice between Nicole Kidman dropping in my lap, via Samsung 5g, as opposed to a slow poorly extended out to no Labor electorates NBN, I'll take Nicole any ole day.

gg


----------



## tinhat

bellenuit said:


> Well it all sound expensive when you talk about 40,000 cabinets. But if each cabinet services 100 homes (I don't know the exact figure), that is 4,000,000 trenches that don't have to be dug. That sound much worse.




A lot of it is going to be strung up on the poles just like with the existing copper and coaxial cables now. There are no underground services running down my street other than the water main (we don't have coaxial either).


----------



## boofhead

From http://www.arnnet.com.au/article/461691/new_samsung_tech_could_pave_way_5g_2020/ the Samsung tech uses 28 GHz - the higher the frequency the more power it needs. Also the more obstacles interfere. A common example is AM vs FM radio. The 5Gb/s is a nice headline but the devil is in the detail like all the wireless technologies. http://www.itwire.com/business-it-n...stra-demo-1tbps-transmission-on-telstra-fibre is Telstra's 1 Tb/s experiments using fibre. that is one wavelength over one fibre strand. Fibre supports multiple wavelengths per strand. Seems wireless in the lab is so far behind fibre and people talk about fibre being superseded. So for the technological aspect wireless is so far behind it is unbelievable and look how readily fibre has been proved to be upgradable. Once the expensive fibre is layed the upgrade cost is relatively low.


----------



## Calliope

A company like NBN Co which has no experience with cable roll-out, should never have been let loose on Telstra's FAC pits and pipes.



> "None of the workers was using any sort of protective gear," Mr O'Farrell said. "There was nothing showing us, the local residents, they were working with asbestos."
> 
> The 38-year-old immediately called WorkCover, which arrived two days later and confirmed his worst fears: the pit was covered with the deadly fibre and now so was his home.
> 
> "It was everywhere: on the driveway, on the fence, on the top of my bins; when you hit a piece of fibro with a pick and a crowbar it explodes everywhere," he said.





> Mr Davies and NSW Liberal senator Marise Payne, who lives in the area, said the execution of the NBN upgrades appeared to be akin to the insulation debacle, in which unqualified contractors installed insulation in homes during the government's stimulus program in 2008.
> 
> "To the ends of pushing things out hard and fast as (Labor) did with pink batts and aspects of the BER and stimulus program, if you do that and don't take care . . . you should expect problems," Senator Payne said yesterday. In a statement last night, Telstra chief operations officer Brendon Riley said the telco had commenced the audit "after a number of incidents of non-compliant asbestos management and removal".
> 
> NBN Co did not respond to phone calls from The Australian last night. But a Senate estimates committee is expected to question NBN chief executive Mike Quigley and other company executives tomorrow about compliance issues around the treatment and handling of asbestos.
> 
> Barry Robson, president of the Asbestos Diseases Foundation of Australia, claimed yesterday that one of the contractors attempted to calm a Penrith resident this month by telling them of the asbestos: "You can eat this ****."




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...to-asbestos-risk/story-e6frgaif-1226652607700


----------



## drsmith

Are the asbestos issues above a product of subcontractors under NBN Co or Telstra ?

My reading of the media articles on this thus far is that the dust is settling on the hands of the latter.


----------



## Calliope

drsmith said:


> Are the asbestos issues above a product of subcontractors under NBN Co or Telstra ?
> 
> My reading of the media articles on this thus far is that the dust is settling on the hands of the latter.




Apparently Telstra has to give the all-clear before NBN's less competent sub-contractors move on to the FAC pits and pipes.



> The Opposition communication's spokesman Malcolm Turnbull said asbestos affected pits should be identified before contractors are sent on site to work.
> 
> He said it was important Telstra was dealing with the issue.
> 
> Mr Turnbull said the Coalition's less ambitious broadband network would mean there was "less disturbance to legacy infrastructure" which may contain asbestos, especially outside people's homes.


----------



## drsmith

Calliope said:


> Apparently Telstra has to give the all-clear before NBN's less competent sub-contractors move on to the FAC pits and pipes.




If the subcontracts for asbestos removal are under NBN co, why would Telstra be auditing them ?



> The concerns have forced Telstra to announce an audit of the work practices of staff and contractors involved in removing asbestos from Telstra’s infrastructure. Under its $11 billion deal with NBN Co, Telstra is responsible for OH&S issues involved in preparing its pipes for NBN fibre cable.




http://www.itwire.com/business-it-news/networking/60052-nbn-asbestos-fears-prompt-telstra-audit

The devil will be in the detail of the contractual arrangements between Telstra and NBN Co. It will depend on whether or not _preparing its pipes for NBN fibre cable _involves removing the asbestos. I suspect we might see some commentary on that soon enough. 

That being said, it's not what the project overall needed.


----------



## Calliope

drsmith said:


> If the subcontracts for asbestos removal are under NBN co, why would Telstra be auditing them ?
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.itwire.com/business-it-news/networking/60052-nbn-asbestos-fears-prompt-telstra-audit
> 
> The devil will be in the detail of the contractual arrangements between Telstra and NBN Co. It will depend on whether or not _preparing its pipes for NBN fibre cable _involves removing the asbestos. I suspect we might see some commentary on that soon enough.
> 
> That being said, it's not what the project overall needed.




It is not about asbestos *removal.* The NBN deal with Telstra was to lease Telstra's infrastructure including the FAC pits and pipes. It would be assumed that this was safe to be used. The problem is that NBN sub-contractors not trained in asbestos handling are now running fibre in this infrastructure in suburban streets.


----------



## Julia

Pink Batts all over again?


----------



## drsmith

Calliope said:


> It is not about asbestos *removal.* The NBN deal with Telstra was to lease Telstra's infrastructure including the FAC pits and pipes. It would be assumed that this was safe to be used. The problem is that NBN sub-contractors not trained in asbestos handling are now running fibre in this infrastructure in suburban streets.



The following interviews with Stephen Conroy and Malcolm Turnbull makes for interesting listening. The thrust of the discussion tends to aim responsibility towards Telstra.

http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/9365

The following specific example from a few weeks ago is aimed directly at the NBN.

http://www.theadvocate.com.au/story/1489079/asbestos-concerns-in-telstra-pits/?cs=87

One interesting question in terms of the public discussion is how long it will be before Telstra and NBN Co turn on each other.


----------



## Smurf1976

Anyone with knowledge of this work would be very well aware of the issues and what needs to be done. 

They also would know that contractors tend to take shortcuts with cable hauling work generally and must therefore be under direct supervision at every site. With the new OH&S laws, gone are the days when you could just leave such things to contractors.

I can confirm from personal observation that work practices are not up to scratch with asbestos. I can also confirm that the cable being installed has been subject to damage in some cases. I can also confirm that third party infrastructure, for example water pipes and conduits carrying other cables, have been damaged and that this has been simply covered up (fill the hole in and ignore the damage). I have noted all of this through personal observation simply walking past work sites - no doubt there's far more problems than those I've spotted.

My real concern here is about the workers, many of whom probably didn't even know it was asbestos (whilst everyone knows asbestos exists, according to the union 85% of workers on this job haven't been trained to identify it and that sounds believable to me). Likewise their families will have been exposed if the workers are going home with contaminated work clothing and the like. 

The only acceptable outcome, so far as I am concerned, is that the full force of the law applies to whoever is responsible at NBNCo and/or Telstra. As I said, anyone with experience in this type of work would know that it requires direct supervision and is at fault for not having their own staff supervising it.

There is no excuse for this having occurred, none whatsoever, and there is a need to both fix it in a safety sense and hand out sufficient punishment to those responsible (Telstra or NBNCo) such that this never occurs again.

For the record, I first posted about this issue in the Telstra thread in August *2005*. There is no way that anyone in a position of authority ought to be able to claim ignorance in regard to this one. They are criminally negligent for endangering the safety of the workers and public so far as I'm concerned and need to be dealt with accordingly.


----------



## sptrawler

Smurf1976 said:


> Anyone with knowledge of this work would be very well aware of the issues and what needs to be done.
> 
> They also would know that contractors tend to take shortcuts with cable hauling work generally and must therefore be under direct supervision at every site. With the new OH&S laws, gone are the days when you could just leave such things to contractors.
> 
> I can confirm from personal observation that work practices are not up to scratch with asbestos. I can also confirm that the cable being installed has been subject to damage in some cases. I can also confirm that third party infrastructure, for example water pipes and conduits carrying other cables, have been damaged and that this has been simply covered up (fill the hole in and ignore the damage). I have noted all of this through personal observation simply walking past work sites - no doubt there's far more problems than those I've spotted.
> 
> My real concern here is about the workers, many of whom probably didn't even know it was asbestos (whilst everyone knows asbestos exists, according to the union 85% of workers on this job haven't been trained to identify it and that sounds believable to me). Likewise their families will have been exposed if the workers are going home with contaminated work clothing and the like.
> 
> The only acceptable outcome, so far as I am concerned, is that the full force of the law applies to whoever is responsible at NBNCo and/or Telstra. As I said, anyone with experience in this type of work would know that it requires direct supervision if done by a contractor and is at fault for not having their own staff supervising it.
> 
> There is no excuse for this having occurred, none whatsoever, and there is a need to both fix it in a safety sense and hand out sufficient punishment to those responsible (which sits substantially with either Telstra or NBNCo senior management at the personal level) such that this never occurs again.
> 
> For the record, I first posted about this issue in the Telstra thread in August *2005*. There is no way that anyone in a position of authority ought to be able to claim ignorance in regard to this one. They are criminally negligent for endangering the safety of the workers and public so far as I'm concerned and need to be dealt with accordingly.




As if that's going to happen, it will all grind to a halt.IMO


----------



## Smurf1976

sptrawler said:


> As if that's going to happen, it will all grind to a halt.IMO



I have personally organised removal of asbestos pits for a different organisation in the past. Done roughly 100 of them.

I've had samples taken and I've had inspectors turn up on the job. No problems.

It can be done safely if done properly. As a general rule, easiest way I found was 2 staff in-house to do the traffic management and install the new pit, plus an "A class" licensed Asbestos Removalist contractor to remove the actual asbestos. The in-house staff also need to be fully trained in asbestos, and must hold authority to order independent inspections etc, but don't need a license as such.

That level of efficiency could be improved upon if there wasn't demarcation as to who does what. But I couldn't find a contractor able to also do traffic management etc, and we had no intention of doing asbestos removal in-house. So 3 people it was.

As for the contractors, it was difficult getting a good one that's for sure but some are definitely better than others. They all take short cuts if you aren't on site however and that happens with pretty much all underground work. Been there, had this problem and won't do it again. Same goes for conduit installation and cable hauling - it's out of sight so all sorts of bad things happen if nobody's watching.


----------



## drsmith

The first head rolls,



> Service Stream executive general manager Stephen Ellich is believed to have parted company with the Telstra subcontractor after homes in Sydney's west were exposed to asbestos.
> 
> Telstra last night confirmed its contract with Service Stream had been suspended, saying: "Leaving any asbestos at a site is completely unacceptable and that is why, when we were alerted to the situation in Penrith, we immediately shut down all works in the area, suspended the contractor and safely secured the sites.
> 
> "The safe and proper handling and disposal of asbestos is an absolute and not-negotiable priority."




http://www.google.com.au/#q=Service...14,d.aGc&fp=33bf1b954cd2da95&biw=1334&bih=907

This is the same outfit that lost a construction contract for the NBN itself.



> But that fall represented only a fraction of the damage wrought on Service Stream since Syntheo, its 50:50 joint venture with Lend Lease, lost a lucrative contract to build Labor's $37.4 billion NBN in the Northern Territory.
> 
> In March Syntheo was forced to hand back the design and construction responsibilities for building the NBN in the Northern Territory, a four-year contract that in conjunction with connecting buildings in South Australia was worth up to $341m.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...s-service-stream/story-e6frgaif-1226649531855

I can see this whole mess becoming a lawyers picnic.



> TELSTRA has admitted its comprehensive training program for employees dealing with asbestos does not extend to subcontractors, raising serious questions about its ability to ensure the National Broadband Network roll out is conducted safely.
> 
> Telstra spokesman Scott Whiffin said the telco took full responsibility for this segment of the project.
> 
> "Telstra has the ultimate accountability and places the highest priority on the safety of its workers and the public," he said.
> 
> Mr Whiffin provided copies of Telstra's extensive and detailed policy and operations manuals dealing with asbestos, and said "all of Telstra's contractors are required to comply with them as a minimum".
> 
> "The asbestos removal process for pits remediated under the NBN rollout are the same as Telstra's internal guidelines," he said. "We work with our prime contractors -- and these are major companies -- to ensure they comply with our policies and processes. These companies then develop their own processes and training materials and we review their documentation to ensure that they meet our stringent requirements."
> 
> But beyond this policy and an unspecified number of site inspectors, Telstra would appear to have no direct control to ensure prime contractors pass on the policy, procedures and training to sub and sub-sub contractors
> 
> The Communications, Electrical and Plumbing Union's national NBN construction and project officer, David Mier, said that like the federal government's failed pink batts insulation scheme, many of the people working on Telstra sites in preparation for the rollout of the NBN have "just been sublet and sublet". "It's pyramid subcontracting," Mr Mier said. "It's the biggest subcontracting scam you've ever seen and it can never work."




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...other-batts-scam/story-e6frgaif-1226653332346


----------



## drsmith

Smurf1976 said:


> I can confirm from personal observation that work practices are not up to scratch with asbestos. I can also confirm that the cable being installed has been subject to damage in some cases. I can also confirm that third party infrastructure, for example water pipes and conduits carrying other cables, have been damaged and that this has been simply covered up (fill the hole in and ignore the damage). I have noted all of this through personal observation simply walking past work sites - no doubt there's far more problems than those I've spotted.



It's observation such as this that makes one wonder how deeply beyond the specific issue of asbestos the NBN rollout problems run.

As for Telstra, they would do better if their senior management met in rooms that had windows out to what was happening under their watch.


----------



## NBNMyths

waza1960 said:


> I've seen on this thread many times stated that wireless will never match Labors NBN.
> What about Samsung's announcement (downloading a movie in a second) download speeds several hundred times faster than 4g ...
> http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/mobiles/samsung-announces-5g-data-breakthrough-20130514-2jizs.html






Calliope said:


> The is little doubt that by the time the NBN is finally rolled out it will be redundant.:bad:




There's nothing there that will make fixed broadband redundant. Even Calliope's hero party aren't stupid enough to think that.

All they have done is experimented with a different part of the spectrum, a part which is extremely susceptible to interference from moisture (humidity, fog, rain) and has extremely poor transmission through solid objects (walls, foliage, earth, metal).

On top of that, it does nothing to address contention, so users are still sharing bandwidth that's a tiny fraction of that available over copper, let alone fibre.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> A company like NBN Co which has no experience with cable roll-out, should never have been let loose on Telstra's FAC pits and pipes.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...to-asbestos-risk/story-e6frgaif-1226652607700




Seems that in your haste to blame the current Govt and NBN Co for everything from a change in the orbit of the earth through to a school of fish dying of the Antarctic coast, you have attacked your keyboard before you knew the facts. What a surprise. 

The contractors were working for Telstra, not NBN Co. Telstra contracted them to clean out the ducts ready for the NBN. Seems that having a company with "cable rollout experience", cleaning out their own duct network, is no guarantee of success. The only guarantee is that you can blame the federal govt for it, no matter how far removed. 



> *Telstra spokesman Scott Whiffin said the telco took full responsibility for this segment of the project.*
> 
> "Telstra has the ultimate accountability and places the highest priority on the safety of its workers and the public," he said.


----------



## Calliope

Instead of looking up old threads Myths, you might address your spin to current NBN problems, or will you just follow the Conroy line and say it is all Telstra's fault.

EDITORIAL
Unforeseen asbestos risk a sign of undue NBN haste
From: The Australian May 30, 2013 12:00AM

IT seems incomprehensible that the Gillard government could have done it again. But the latest worrying revelations about deadly asbestos fibres being disturbed by subcontractors preparing Telstra ducts for the National Broadband Network have an air of deja vu about them.

Once again a massive federal initiative that was conceived in haste, without proper processes, is running into unnecessary and potentially dangerous and costly problems during the delivery phase. We saw a similar scenario unfold with tragic consequences though the home-insulation scheme; and the Building the Education Revolution's school halls program generated enormous waste and duplication. The NBN, as we know, was implemented without a prudent cost-benefit analysis and already has been hit by delays and frustrations as it has failed to meet its own rollout targets. Now the unforeseen difficulties with asbestos seem certain to add to those woes, and the most pertinent question is why this issue was not, in fact, foreseen.

Suburban families, understandably, are now worried about their health because even minute quantities of asbestos fibre can trigger life-threatening disease. Some people have been relocated to hotels while problems are resolved. There are also concerns about workers who almost certainly have encountered asbestos without appropriate protective equipment. In a planned, government-funded infrastructure project, none of this should have occurred. The asbestos, in existing Telstra ducts, should have been readily identified at specific sites before work began. Given the commercial relationship between NBN Co and Telstra, all relevant information should have been systematically shared, including with subcontractors.* To think that workers and families could have been exposed needlessly to risk because of lax procedures is an indictment on NBN planning and oversight.
*
Procedures and training should have been in place to ensure no workers or residents were exposed to risk, yet we learn lengthy NBN implementation studies didn't cover asbestos. Clearly the current controversy will ensure such measures are devised now, but retrofitting processes never should have been necessary. Again, we have seen a large-scale federal government program rolled out on a national scale, demonstrating a lack of political and bureaucratic expertise at this kind of practical service delivery. This is precisely the scenario that led to difficulties and cost blowouts in the earlier school hall and insulation stimulus programs; so given the personal, budgetary and political pain they caused, we might have expected the Gillard government would have learned a lesson. For Communications Minister Stephen Conroy it is just another embarrassment. After a long line of ministerial accidents, he seems to be immune from any internal consequences.

But for voters it could be a final blow, turning the once electorally popular NBN into another example of wasteful and inefficient overreach by a federal government that wants a direct hand in almost every area of national service delivery - from schools and hospitals to broadband and digital set-top boxes. As Labor spruiks its fibre-to-the-home model, the last thing it wants families thinking of is this asbestos shambles.
(my bolds}


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Instead of looking up old threads Myths, you might address your spin to current NBN problems, or will you just follow the Conroy line and say it is all Telstra's fault.




So ducts owned by *Telstra*, operated by *Telstra*, being worked on by *Telstra* contractors is the Federal Govt's responsibility? Even when *Telstra* accept the blame?

Hmmm. Does this extension apply to all work carried out >2 degrees of separation from the federal Govt, or only when that Govt is Labor?

For example, would you say that Howard Govt incompetence was responsible for the faulty work on fuel lines carried out by Enzed (working as a subcontractor to ADI, a subcontractor to the Navy) in 1998 on the HMAS Westralia, which lead to the death of 4 sailors in the subsequent fire? Or does your wide scope of blame only apply when Labor is in power?


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> So ducts owned by *Telstra*, operated by *Telstra*, being worked on by *Telstra* contractors is the Federal Govt's responsibility? Even when *Telstra* accept the blame?
> 
> Hmmm. Does this extension apply to all work carried out >2 degrees of separation from the federal Govt, or only when that Govt is Labor?
> 
> For example, would you say that Howard Govt incompetence was responsible for the faulty work on fuel lines carried out by Enzed (working as a subcontractor to ADI, a subcontractor to the Navy) in 1998 on the HMAS Westralia, which lead to the death of 4 sailors in the subsequent fire? Or does your wide scope of blame only apply when Labor is in power?




More red herrings.  I thought you would follow the Conroy line, and even you know that he is a grub

I repeat;  


> To think that workers and families could have been exposed needlessly to risk because of lax procedures is an indictment on NBN planning and oversight.


----------



## boofhead

Calliope: You're using an editorial/opinion piece as fact in where the blame is. The same issue would happen if Telstra needed to do work themselves without any NBN rollout. You're letting your politics get in the way of things.


----------



## Calliope

boofhead said:


> Calliope: You're using an editorial/opinion piece as fact in where the blame is. The same issue would happen *if* Telstra needed to do work themselves without any NBN rollout. You're letting your politics get in the way of things.




Sorry Boof, I know you would never let political bias affect your judgment. But I am glad you qualify it with an "if". Actually they are carrying out the work getting the pits and pipes ready *for the NBN fibre roll-out* in suburban streets. The asbestos issue is now an NBN problem and responsibility.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> More red herrings.  I thought you would follow the Conroy line, and even you know that he is a grub
> 
> I repeat;




I didn't think you'd be able to find a way to answer that one while simultaneously maintaining your position _and_ your inability to criticise a Coalition Govt.


Last time I looked, an editorial from _The Australian _(Pinnacle of objectivity that it is), does not count as a factual argument.

Again, given that this is Telstra infrastructure, being worked on by Telstra contractors, and with Telstra having admitted all liability, could you please explain how the Govt are at any fault? And while you're pondering that, suggest what more they have done to eliminate the problem, given that there are already procedures and laws in place to cover handling of asbestos, but that those laws were allegedly broken.

And, if I may have a crack one more time, explain the difference between this and the Westralia incident. Why is the Govt at fault this time, but not last time. I would truly love a rationalisation. 

EDIT: Oh, look what Google just found:
http://www.frasercoastchronicle.com.au/news/Tesltra-asbestos-box-unrangan-driveway/786217/

Is this one the Fed Govt's fault too, or just Telstra since it was just a replacement they were doing off their own bat?

EDIT2:
Telstra have once again confirmed that it's entirely their responsibility. You better re-write that editorial...

_Telstra operations boss Brendan Riley later announced the company had launched “strong actions” to give priority to the safety of workers, contractors and the community.

“*This is our responsibility so we will take direct control of all asbestos-related activity performed by our contractors*,” Mr Riley said._
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...ncy-investigates/story-e6frgaif-1226653569762


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> I didn't think you'd be able to find a way to answer that one while simultaneously maintaining your position _and_ your inability to criticise a Coalition Govt.
> 
> Last time I looked, an editorial from _The Australian _(Pinnacle of objectivity that it is), does not count as a factual argument.
> 
> Again, given that this is Telstra infrastructure, being worked on by Telstra contractors, and with Telstra having admitted all liability, could you please explain how the Govt are at any fault? And while you're pondering that, suggest what more they have done to eliminate the problem, given that there are already procedures and laws in place to cover handling of asbestos, but that those laws were allegedly broken.
> 
> And, if I may have a crack one more time, explain the difference between this and the Westralia incident. Why is the Govt at fault this time, but not last time.




You'll just have to get over it Myths. I can't help you any more. You are too one-eyed. It will all get sorted come September.  

Incidentally, your hero and mentor Quigley mightn't last that long:



> Quigley faces internal NBN revolt
> Fresh leadership doubts at NBN Co have resurfaced amid reports that the firm's chairman Siobhan McKenna surveyed fellow board directors and senior staff to test support for chief executive Mike Quigley, according to The Australian Financial Review.
> 
> Ms McKenna has been on NBN Co's board for more than three years, but only became chair in March and began asking about support for Mr Quigley within weeks of becoming chair.
> 
> Her actions may be seen as in line with her pledge to take a more activist approach to running NBN Co.
> 
> The move to test support for Mr Quigley was done because Ms McKenna has considered ousting Mr Quigley to allow her to run the company as executive chairman until the federal election in September, according to the AFR.
> 
> The NBN Co's constitution would require the federal government to be consulted about any board-approved moves to oust the chief executive.
> 
> Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has been a strong supporter of Mr Quigley and would likely oppose any moves to unseat him.



http://www.businessspectator.com.au/news/2013/5/30/technology/quigley-faces-internal-nbn-revolt


----------



## bellenuit

NBNMyths said:


> Again, given that this is Telstra infrastructure, being worked on by Telstra contractors, and with Telstra having admitted all liability, could you please explain how the Govt are at any fault?




Just as it's Telstra's responsibility to monitor the performance of its sub-contractors, so it is also the Government's responsibility to monitor the performance of its subcontractors, Telstar being one. 

Speaking about the NBN several months ago, I remember Turnbull explaining that running fibre to the home was a completely different ball game to running fibre to the node, for the very reasons we are seeing now. I think he was specifically referring to the roll out rate NBNCo were assuming and he was suggesting it was unrealistic.

If at the end of the day, it turns out that Telstra having to properly train its subbies in the proper handling of asbestos and perhaps issues of a similar nature add months if not years to the roll out schedule, then ultimately the delay is the responsibility of the Government for choosing a deployment method that had this additional complexity. When they decided on what type of NBN to provide, it was up to the Government to determine the resources needed to deploy it and the timeline it could be delivered in based on the availability of those resources. If they underestimated the resources needed or overestimated the capabilities of the resources available, that is bad planning for which they must take the blame. Individual subcontractors are responsible for completing the tasks assigned to them, but those who assigned the tasks to the subcontractors are too responsible for making the assignment decision in the first place. When the CEO of a public company doesn't deliver, they take the blame. It is no use blaming people lower down in the organisation or outside the organisation for the problem.


----------



## drsmith

The problems may not be limited to Telstra,



> NBN Co has confirmed VisionStream, the company contracted for the NBN roll out in Tasmania, has been given two improvement notices.




http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/breaking/17386831/nbn-site-asbestos-shutdown-a-wake-up-call/


----------



## Smurf1976

The inherent nature of underground pit & conduit work is that it is "out of sight and out of mind" so far as the owners are concerned. It's not sexy, it just needs to be there, and very often companies consider it an easy task.

A complication is that very rarely is it practical to build something "as drawn" so simply issuing specifications isn't a lot of use really. There's always some problem in an urban area, usually because another service (or another previously unrecorded asset of the same service) already has a cable or pipe where you want to put the new conduit or pit. That's just how it is, meaning that a very high degree of improvisation is required by those doing the work.

Now throw asbestos into the mix, plus the need to properly compact and reinstate road surfaces (which I very much doubt is being done properly meaning that the trenches will sink and reduce pavement life - you end up paying via rates and taxes). Now add in other services and the risk of damage to their assets. Then there's the public to consider as pedestrians, and of course businesses as well.

Now suppose that you engage a contractor and let them loose on this. You have effectively just written a blank cheque, since there is no means by which you could have fully specified the work and there is no practical means by which you can inspect it once its' complete. And you quite likely won't find that the conduits weren't glued properly until 20 years later when you end up digging things up as a result.

Does anyone honestly think that simply engaging a contractor, even a big one, and just letting them go for it is really going to work? A scope of works subject to constant variation which the contractor itself will determine whilst they also supervise their own work. That's about as close as you'll get to an actual license to print money and it's not a rational way to deliver major infrastructure.

If it were me, I'd have an in-house workforce diluted by staff from major contractors so as to retain control of the works internally. That way you don't have all these problems.


----------



## Calliope

Smurf1976 said:


> Does anyone honestly think that simply engaging a contractor, even a big one, and just letting them go for it is really going to work? A scope of works subject to constant variation which the contractor itself will determine whilst they also supervise their own work. That's about as close as you'll get to an actual license to print money and it's not a rational way to deliver major infrastructure.




You are right. I can only repeat what The Australian editorial said today, because it is true:



> To think that workers and families could have been exposed needlessly to risk because of lax procedures is an indictment on NBN planning and oversight.


----------



## NBNMyths

bellenuit said:


> Just as it's Telstra's responsibility to monitor the performance of its sub-contractors, so it is also the Government's responsibility to monitor the performance of its subcontractors, Telstar being one.






Smurf1976 said:


> Does anyone honestly think that simply engaging a contractor, even a big one, and just letting them go for it is really going to work? A scope of works subject to constant variation which the contractor itself will determine whilst they also supervise their own work. That's about as close as you'll get to an actual license to print money and it's not a rational way to deliver major infrastructure.
> 
> If it were me, I'd have an in-house workforce diluted by staff from major contractors so as to retain control of the works internally. That way you don't have all these problems.






Calliope said:


> You are right. I can only repeat what The Australian editorial said today, because it is true:




Except Telstra are not a subcontractor to the Government for this task. Neither Govt nor NBN Co have contracted (or are paying) Telstra to undertake any work on their infrastructure.

NBN Co are a customer of Telstra. They will pay to lease access to Telstra's suitable pit&pipe infrastructure. Nothing more.

Whatever work Telstra deems is required to make their pit&pipe network ready for use by NBN Co, Telstra will undertake, at Telstra's cost. Once Telstra have made it ready, then NBN Co will begin leasing it.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> You'll just have to get over it Myths. I can't help you any more. You are too one-eyed.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Except Telstra are not a subcontractor to the Government for this task. Neither Govt nor NBN Co have contracted (or are paying) Telstra to undertake any work on their infrastructure.
> 
> NBN Co are a customer of Telstra. They will pay to lease access to Telstra's suitable pit&pipe infrastructure. Nothing more.
> 
> Whatever work Telstra deems is required to make their pit&pipe network ready for use by NBN Co, Telstra will undertake, at Telstra's cost. Once Telstra have made it ready, then NBN Co will begin leasing it.




From memory, I thought that was the deal, Telstra were responsible for ensuring the pits and ducts were serviceable.


----------



## bellenuit

NBNMyths said:


> Except Telstra are not a subcontractor to the Government for this task. Neither Govt nor NBN Co have contracted (or are paying) Telstra to undertake any work on their infrastructure.




OK, they are buying a product from Telstra, so it is still their responsibility to ensure that the product meets their needs and is available when needed. If Telstra can't deliver then they should have contingencies in place to deal with the situation. The Government has made certain delivery commitments to the Australian people and if they fall behind for whatever reason, then it is their fault. If there are so many unknowns that they cannot predict with any precision, then let them say that and give a best and worst case scenario. But when people outline potential negatives or delivery pitfalls to the FTTP approach, they are rejected and sneered at. This has been the case with everything this Government does. A budget surplus being a good example. Anyone who accurately described the storm clouds on the horizon, were accused of talking down the economy.


----------



## Calliope

bellenuit said:


> The Government has made certain delivery commitments to the Australian people and if they fall behind for whatever reason, then it is their fault. If there are so many unknowns that they cannot predict with any precision, then let them say that and give a best and worst case scenario. But when people outline potential negatives or delivery pitfalls to the FTTP approach, they are rejected and sneered at.




You are right. Any posts on mine on this thread have been targeted by self appointed expert, NBNMyths, and sneered at, because I have the temerity to suggest  that anything that goes wrong with this NBN roll-out is the ultimate responsibility of the Labor government, Senator Conroy and NBN Co.

To try and put the blame on Telstra is just a cop out.

AS Myths admits;


> Whatever work Telstra deems is required to make their pit&pipe network ready for use by NBN Co, Telstra will undertake, at Telstra's cost. Once Telstra have made it ready, then NBN Co will begin leasing it.




Telstra sub-contractors are digging up fibro-asbestos-cement pits and pipes infrastructure *to make it ready for NBN Co.* Under the Turnbull model it they would be left mainly undisturbed in suburban streets.


----------



## Calliope

Perhaps Myths should sneer at Senator Xenophon.



> Senator Xenophon said the responsibility now went beyond Telstra. "This is a legal minefield in terms of NBN Co and ultimately the commonwealth bearing responsibility for shoddy practices that have exposed the public to deadly asbestos," he said.
> 
> He said the NBN rollout should be stopped until an audit was carried out to identify the potential exposures and to ensure the health of residents was monitored.
> 
> "This is just a massive ticking time-bomb in the suburbs that could have been avoided," he said.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-clean-up-begins/story-e6frgaif-1226654128177


----------



## Julia

Allegations from 2GB that sub contractors are dumping removed asbestos in national parks in the Sydney area instead of taking it to the appropriate places where it would be properly dealt with.  Further, that they are using rental cars, thus leaving fibres in these hire vehicles.

Apparently there is a substantial fee for the proper disposal of asbestos, which the sub contractors will be receiving.  Some of them obviously see this as more in their pockets by taking the money and not paying the disposal fee.

This has the potential to be a massive problem imo, much worse than the house fires with the pink batts.


----------



## boofhead

Someone needs a reality check.

NBN is the catalyst for Telstra's issues. Do note Telstra is the one responsible. Telstra has removed so much of the workforce they contract out the work. Coalition's plans would require some of the same work to be done. Do you think the pits etc. were going to be laying in ground for centuries to never need be touched? If Telstra's infrastructure was up to scratch it wouldn't be an issue. Even before the fibre project was announced there have been stories surfacing that a lot of the maintenance was done in a rush to meet timelines at the same time the workforce was being downsized.


----------



## Calliope

From NBN you can get two fibres for the price of one...and a lot faster too.


----------



## bellenuit

I loved the letter in today's The Australian. It went something like: "When Labor promised to deliver fibre to the home, I didn't think they meant this type of fibre".


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> AS Myths admits;
> 
> Telstra sub-contractors are digging up fibro-asbestos-cement pits and pipes infrastructure *to make it ready for NBN Co.* Under the Turnbull model it they would be left mainly undisturbed in suburban streets.




Really? And how do you think the optical fibre will be run from the 121 nationwide POI to the ~60,000-odd street cabinets (to be located every 500 metres or so along footpaths)? Not to mention the eventual (or customer-ordered) FTTP upgrade.


----------



## Calliope

I repeat "mainly undisturbed in suburban streets".



> Opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull said the matter was one of ''greatest seriousness''.
> 
> He told Fairfax Media's Breaking Politics program on Friday that while the ''responsibility for remediating this old Telstra infrastructure has of course been Telstra's that is absolutely right, but they are doing that on behalf of and for the government-owned NBN company''.
> 
> ''And so the government ultimately is responsible for overseeing the whole project so there is . . . I am not suggesting that Stephen Conroy has been personally responsible for this in a hands on manner but the truth is that there have been reports raised about inappropriate management of asbestos for some time and there clearly has not been an adequate response.
> 
> ''The buck stops with the government.''
> 
> *He said under the Coalition's plan there would not be the same disturbance of the existing infrastructure in place because ''in most cases'' the fibre would not be taken into every house.*




http://www.dailylife.com.au/opinion...efends-asbestos-practices-20130531-2nfem.html


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> I repeat "mainly undisturbed in suburban streets".




And I repeat the question:

How will they run the fibre down the streets to the cabinets without using the same ducts that NBN Co are using? Just because they aren't replacing the copper doesn't mean they don't use the ducts.

With cabinets every ~500m down every street, there will be minimal difference in duct access requirements at a street level. They will still need to run fibre down the ducts of almost every street (sans really short streets) to get to the FTTN cabinets. The major difference is the small conduits running into the houses, which don't contain asbestos anyway.


----------



## Smurf1976

Julia said:


> Allegations from 2GB that sub contractors are dumping removed asbestos in national parks in the Sydney area instead of taking it to the appropriate places where it would be properly dealt with.  Further, that they are using rental cars, thus leaving fibres in these hire vehicles.
> 
> Apparently there is a substantial fee for the proper disposal of asbestos, which the sub contractors will be receiving.  Some of them obviously see this as more in their pockets by taking the money and not paying the disposal fee.



Asbestos disposal - it needs to go to an approved landfill. It is stable once buried, but there will normally be a specific area at the landfill where it is dumped and this will be covered over each night. Not all landfills accept it and there are generally specific times for taking it there so that it is segregated from everything else and properly covered over.

As an example, one landfill that takes it in Tasmania will accept it between 11am and 1pm on Tuesday and Thursday only. There is another one nearby which accepts it on Fridays prior to 3pm. These are both the default times for asbestos burial. They will accept it at other times only if arranged in advance - you can't just turn up with it unannounced.

As for the cost, one council I know of charges $100 per cubic metre or part thereof for disposing of asbestos in their landfill. I suspect this maybe relatively cheap compared to what some others charge.

As for the issue of contaminated vehicles, to be honest there's no really certain way to clean it since there are too many small places, air vents, porous materials and so on. Imagine getting a bag of white flour and throwing that everywhere around the car. Now try and get it out again, with a guarantee that you'll remove every single bit of it without exception. It's just not going to happen.


----------



## drsmith

Some very sad news in relation to the NBN rollout today,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-31/man-dies-at-nbn-work-site/4726310


----------



## Smurf1976

boofhead said:


> Someone needs a reality check.
> 
> NBN is the catalyst for Telstra's issues.



Strongly agreed and it comes down to what happens when you lose control of your own assets as Telstra has effectively done.

There's nothing wrong with appropriate use of contractors, but you need to have your own workforce as well. Otherwise the contractor ends up "owning" the asset and you end up pretty much over a barrel. 

Either you have a very long term contract, in which case you end up with the contractor putting their locks on things, putting their name on everything, holding all the really useful information, and charging for work that never needed doing in the first place. You end up pretty much stuck with the same contractor, since anyone else would have to spend a fortune just working out what's going on and will thus tender accordingly. 

Or you have multiple contractors as Telstra has for this work, and then you get an outright debacle in terms of quality since nobody gives a damn about an asset that isn't theirs and for which they have no certainty of future work. So you get the quickest, cheapest and nastiest job they can manage to do.

What should have happened, is for Telstra to have their own maintenance workers and outsource the actual asbestos removal only. That way, you'd have actual Telstra employees on every site during every job since they'll be the ones putting the new pits in once the licensed Asbestos Removalist has removed the asbestos. You don't have quality problems that way, since if your own employees mess it up then they'll be the ones fixing it anyway - hence they generally won't mess it up in the first place. And if they do cause mayhem then you have a very direct way of dealing with it.

I've seen quite a few companies go down the "fully outsourced" model for field works and every one of them has ended up with a mess in one way or another. You either hand one contractor a monopoly and pay through the nose, or have the work done by people who don't give a damn. Lose or lose.

The other thing, is that they should have been investing in the network in the first place going back at least to the middle of last decade. It should never have been in doubt that a future fibre network would use Telstra's existing undergound infrastructure (why wouldn't it) and work should have been done accordingly over the past decade in a rational, sensible manner to remove the asbestos.

As a case in point, an inner CBD location in Hobart. Not too long ago the council did works on the footpath and other services removed asbestos at this time. Telstra left theirs in place, losing the opportunity to do it incredibly cheaply whilst the council already had everything dug up. That's just crazy.

Another example, a major arterial road in the suburbs. A few years ago work was being done there, and at that location Telstra's conduits (not just the pits) are made of asbestos. So what did their contractor do? Smash a hole in the side and bring a cable out of it that way. Apart from the obvious safety hazard, it also defeats the purpose of having a conduit in the first place since that cable will now be firmly stuck in place and the conduit will end up filled with FCR (road gravel) where the hole is.

That's just two random examples that I've seen with my own eyes (and I've never been employed to work on Telstra's infrastructure). There's heaps more like that all over the place, and it's the inevitable consequence of the way Telstra runs things. There's a proper role for contractors, but having them effectively running the show is dangerous when it's a specialised asset. It's not as though we're talking about resurfacing a road or pruning some trees or something like that which can be easily inspected and which is generic in nature. With the sort of work Telstra needs doing, it could well be 20 years before defects are found - and good luck getting the contractor back to fix them after that time.

Does the Telstra CEO, board members and other senior management even know what's in a pit (apart from asbestos)? And have any of them got real world experience with underground assets? Somehow I seriously doubt it, and yet it's critical to the company's business.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> And I repeat the question:
> 
> How will they run the fibre down the streets to the cabinets without using the same ducts that NBN Co are using? Just because they aren't replacing the copper doesn't mean they don't use the ducts.




It won't be your problem, nor Conroy's nor Quigley's.

Smurf asks;



> Does the Telstra CEO, board members and other senior management even know what's in a pit (apart from asbestos)? And have any of them got real world experience with underground assets? Somehow I seriously doubt it, and yet it's critical to the company's business.




Probably not and the same would apply to NBN Co's CEO, Board members and senior management. All these people know is retail. They know nothing about construction. They are at the mercy of the contractors with their cost-cutting disregard of safety.


----------



## Calliope

Quigley's days are numbered.



> THE Coalition has put NBN Co chief executive Mike Quigley on notice that his position may not continue under an Abbott government after a horror week for the $37.4 billion project in which it was revealed that workers and residents were exposed to asbestos risks during the rollout.
> 
> As evidence emerged of an exodus of senior construction and safety staff from NBN Co in recent months, the opposition's communications spokesman, Malcolm Turnbull, reiterated concerns about the selection of Mr Quigley.
> 
> Although he stopped short of saying he would appoint a new NBN Co chief executive, *Mr Turnbull said: "I don't think (Mr Quigley) was the best choice for that role given the fact that he had never run a telecom company or built a telecommunications network, been responsible for building one; he had worked for a vendor. Certainly the performance of the NBN Co in its continuation of its construction project has not been very impressive, has it?"*






http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...uigley-on-notice/story-fn59niix-1226654872623


----------



## Julia

Letter to the "Weekend Australian":


> We can't say we weren't warned.
> Labor's sumptuous school shelters and flaming home insulation programs were simply a warm-up for their asbestos to the home rollout.


----------



## awg

The asbestos pit situation is beyond farcical. 

I've been involved in pit removal, nothing has changed in 20 years..(from what I hear)

They are made of asbestos cement, and they get broken when removed, because conduits intrude, and they are stuck by suction into the soil. 

This work is mainly done by contractors, who have had the price screwed down. 

Many are small operators with a ute.

Machinery is not supposed to be used, hand digging.

Doing it in such a way as no fibres were released would take forever.

Ive seen them smashed up and buried in the trench.

Never seen anyone use more than a dust mask.


Was chatting to my mate who is a senior supervisor far a contractor.

His job is to fix stuff-ups, he works 16hr days!

Was telling me he used to maintain the phones in Wittenoom, until one day his boss, 
said to him that he thought digging trenches there was not so good, rang their bosses in Perth, who told them to immediately abandon all work there! (Telstra)

He also told me that many years ago in Canberra, they used to crawl about in pure asbestos fibre insulation in roofspaces, as it was ubiquitous in that location.

I am 100% sure, that once Libs are elected, the NBN will die in the ass due to cost.
They will just stop, we all know politicians word is worth next-to-nothing







Smurf1976 said:


> The other thing, is that they should have been investing in the network in the first place going back at least to the middle of last decade. It should never have been in doubt that a future fibre network would use Telstra's existing undergound infrastructure (why wouldn't it) and work should have been done accordingly over the past decade in a rational, sensible manner to remove the asbestos.
> 
> As a case in point, an inner CBD location in Hobart. Not too long ago the council did works on the footpath and other services removed asbestos at this time. Telstra left theirs in place, losing the opportunity to do it incredibly cheaply whilst the council already had everything dug up. That's just crazy.
> 
> Another example, a major arterial road in the suburbs. A few years ago work was being done there, and at that location Telstra's conduits (not just the pits) are made of asbestos. So what did their contractor do? Smash a hole in the side and bring a cable out of it that way. Apart from the obvious safety hazard, it also defeats the purpose of having a conduit in the first place since that cable will now be firmly stuck in place and the conduit will end up filled with FCR (road gravel) where the hole is.
> 
> That's just two random examples that I've seen with my own eyes (and I've never been employed to work on Telstra's infrastructure). There's heaps more like that all over the place, and it's the inevitable consequence of the way Telstra runs things. There's a proper role for contractors, but having them effectively running the show is dangerous when it's a specialised asset. It's not as though we're talking about resurfacing a road or pruning some trees or something like that which can be easily inspected and which is generic in nature. With the sort of work Telstra needs doing, it could well be 20 years before defects are found - and good luck getting the contractor back to fix them after that time.
> 
> Does the Telstra CEO, board members and other senior management even know what's in a pit (apart from asbestos)? And have any of them got real world experience with underground assets? Somehow I seriously doubt it, and yet it's critical to the company's business.


----------



## Calliope

awg said:


> I am 100% sure, that once Libs are elected, the NBN will die in the ass due to cost.
> They will just stop, we all know politicians word is worth next-to-nothing




I think the NBN rollout is dead in the water now. Contractors in suburban streets will have to go to extraordinary lengths to prevent the escape of asbestos fibres irrespective of whether the pits and pipes are FAC or not. This of course is not practicable operationally or cost-wise.

It matters not that thousands of homes prevent a greater asbestos hazard than the Telstra stuff. This one has captured the headlines.



> Australians who believe they have been exposed to asbestos will be able to be placed on a national register under a government bill.




This is the biggest farce. Nearly all Australians have been exposed to asbestos contamination. Mesothelioma may not strike until decades after exposure. It's a ticking time bomb and it is one issue where the unions' demands have to be listened to.


----------



## drsmith

Calliope said:


> I think the NBN rollout is dead in the water now.



It's in a lot of bother if the following blog comment is true,



> I watched the team across the street from me last week when they removed the old pit and put a new plastic one in it’s place, they were in full hazmat gear so obvious precautions were being made.
> 
> But it’s not the pits that are the problem, it’s the conduits, and they are going to be near impossible to replace Australia wide.
> 
> When they are laying the NBN fibres they aren’t using a snake to pull it through, that’s too time consuming and ultimately too costly. Instead they are firing the fibre through via air pressure (this is pretty standard practice by the way). The problem though is the asbestos conduit has started naturally crumbling over the years, and firing the fibre through gives a big cloud of asbestos dust at the other end, not healthy, not healthy at all.




http://delimiter.com.au/2013/06/03/telstra-pledges-strong-nbn-asbestos-controls/


----------



## Calliope

drsmith said:


> It's in a lot of bother if the following blog comment is true,
> 
> http://delimiter.com.au/2013/06/03/telstra-pledges-strong-nbn-asbestos-controls/




As the above link suggests "remediation" of the infrastructure should be the first priority.



> However, what I do think is that this is precisely the kind of issue which only raises its head when we really get into the details of deploying fibre ”” to the node or to the premise ”” in Telstra’s existing infrastructure. What we are seeing here is the realisation of the fact that the FTTP/FTTN debate about the NBN may have been something of a furphy all along. The real issue, and it’s going to be an issue lasting several decades, it is increasingly looking like, is the ongoing remediation of Telstra’s network infrastructure in general ”” not just cables, but the physical pipes, pits and ducts where those cables are laid.
> 
> You can see this in the asbestos issue because it’s a very old type of material that hasn’t really been used in Australia for a long time. According to Wikipedia, which has a great and very detailed article on the subject, Australia phased out asbestos starting from 1989, and ceased mining asbestos in 1983. Concern had also been around since the 1970′s about the use of the material in building construction, and the actual diagnoses of asbestos-related illnesses dates way back to the 1920′s and 1930′s.
> 
> What this shows us is that much of Telstra’s physical network infrastructure hasn’t gone through significant remediation and modernisation works for decades. This is, perhaps, the real task facing Australia’s telecommunications industry, especially Telstra and NBN Co, right now ”” not deploying the NBN per se, but getting our national physical telecommunications infrastructure as a whole up to spec so that the network can be deployed. And I suspect that it will take a lot longer than anyone ”” even now ”” really expects, whether you use a FTTN or FTTP model. This is deep and complex stuff which will require a sustained effort to deal with.


----------



## bellenuit

Although the cost of getting the telstra pits up to the required standard may be horrendously expensive, isn't NBNCo in a no lose situation because the have already contracted that to Telstra as part of their $12B deal with them? It will be Telstra shareholders that will bear the brunt.

What I don't quite understand is the parts that NBNCo have directly subcontracted to other (non Telstra) parties and for which they (NBNCo) are responsible. Presumably these are not Telstra pits. What are they? For greenfields sites presumably the asbestos risk in no different to any other development in such areas that requires digging.


----------



## drsmith

I think Malcolm Turnbull got under Bill Shorten's skin.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...icising-asbestos-concerns-20130603-2nlc5.html


----------



## Smurf1976

I think some terminology may be helpful here for the majority of people who won't have installed cables, only found out what a pit is last week and are still alarmed at the prospect of pulling on a snake.

Cables can be installed underground in one of two ways. Either direct buried or in conduit. 

Direct buried means exactly that, the cable is placed in the ground and covered over. It's cheaper to install, but has the disadvantages that installing another cable (or replacing a damaged one) means digging everything up again. And the cable itself is at the mercy of anyone who goes digging nearby.

Using conduit means that you first install conduits (pipes) in the ground and the cables are then "pulled through" the pipes. To facilitate access you have pits at regular intervals along a straight run, plus wherever there's a change of direction or a need to join the cables. These conduits are just pipes, and are made of all sorts of different materials over the years - terracotta, asbestos, galvanised wrought iron, plastic etc.

A pit is simply an empty box in the ground with the ends of the conduits poked through holes in the side of the pit. Pits are made of various materials (concrete poured on site, asbestos, fibreglass, plastic, steel) and come in lots of different sizes (and just about every different utility has their own designs too). On top of the pit is a lid, usually made of concrete or steel / cast iron but in more recent times fibreglass and plastics are also being used.

Pulling through cables means that you insert something relatively easy into the conduits, such as a draw rope (which is often blown through using compressed air) or a "snake". This is so common that there's actually special rope made for this purpose.

A snake is just a long fibreglass rod that's stiff enough to push from one end and stay rigid inside the conduit such that it gets to the next pit (where a human grabs hold of it) whilst being flexible enough to be stored on a big reel when not in use. You can't "push on a string" because it's not stiff enough - a snake is basically a rod that's stiff enough to use this way. You push it in, attach the cable to the other end, then pull it back out again bringing the cable with it. It can also be used in the reverse of this. The snake is a tool used to do the job, not part of the infrastructure as such. Using a snake is in most cases more labour intensive than blowing a string through and pulling in a rope. It just takes longer, that's all.

So in summary there's a lot of conduits (pipes) in the ground with pits at regular intervals to facilitate access. Cables can be installed into these existing conduits using a couple of different methods.

The issues here are:

1. The pits were very commonly made from asbestos cement. Removing these creates a big safety hazard.

2. Some of the conduits are also made from asbestos cement. Any attempt to blow ropes through these will release massive amounts of fibres, whilst even using a snake will release some due to abrasion.

3. Much of the underground network is in poor condition due to years of cost cutting and an "out of sight, out of mind" mentality. In short, it's unlikely to be the same contractor who comes back 15 years later to pull another cable in, so there's no incentive to fix problems properly in the first place. And so they didn't fix them properly, and now it's one almighty mess.

From a political perspective, I'll point the finger in both directions. Labor is undeniably responsible for the NBN as such. But the Liberals can't really claim to have supported an in-house workforce under proper control over contractors with no control or a long term focus toward assets generally. 

Both major parties have contributed to messing it up, that's what happens when you have an obsession with marketing and short term profit rather than actually investing in infrastructure. Labor should have known this was the situation, but then the Liberals also deserve some of the blame for creating it in the first place so it's hard to choose between the two.

Privatisation and in particular competition are part of the cause here. Since there was no guarantee that a future NBN would take over Telstra's underground network in a manner that was profitable for Telstra, they had no incentive to invest in it. And so they didn't.

It's essentially the same as what happened with rail in Tasmania where the trains literally fell off the tracks following over a decade of neglect. Government ended up buying the whole lot back in order to end up with a rail system that actually works. Now we've got the Australian Government building the NBN, effectively re-nationalising telecommunications infrastructure.

Or like what's happening with electricity - the lights _very_ nearly went out in South Australia today, avoided only by the use of diesel generators feeding the grid. Meanwhile there are perfectly good power stations sitting there doing nothing. Sad but true. Needless to say, the costs of all this will eventually feed through to household bills.

So it's Telstra's asbestos pits today but there are plenty of other such disasters looming. Just wait until something goes bang in a big way at ******** or *********.

I'm not against private ownership of infrastructure per se, but the model which creates an obsession with short term profit at the expense of the future is doing Australia far more harm than good. We're losing competitiveness as a direct result - it's utter nonsense to say that it's in some way more efficient doing things this way.


----------



## Calliope

drsmith said:


> I think Malcolm Turnbull got under Bill Shorten's skin.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...icising-asbestos-concerns-20130603-2nlc5.html




Shorten is a nasty little creep.


----------



## drsmith

Smurf1976 said:


> So it's Telstra's asbestos pits today but there are plenty of other such disasters looming. Just wait until something goes bang in a big way at ******** or *********.



I need a bit more of a hint to figure this one out.

As always, an insightful and interesting post.


----------



## Calliope

_The Australian_ editorial;


> The asbestos issue will undoubtedly play into the policy debate about the NBN's failure to meet its fibre-to-the-premises rollout targets, potential for cost overruns and the political contest over the opposition's cheaper fibre-to-the-node alternative. While engineers re-examine plans it is possible the rollout could be modified in areas where infrastructure is contaminated. This has given Malcolm Turnbull an opportunity to spruik the advantages of his plan to leave much of the copper network in place. "The approach that we're taking would not give rise to these problems, or at least not to anything like the same extent," he says, "because you are not disturbing all of those pits."*There is an inherent logic in his argument and we hope that Senator Conroy, having missed earlier opportunities for proper process, will not hesitate to consider the safety and cost benefits of fibre-to-the-node in appropriate areas.*




This would be a forlorn hope for an idiot who kicked off a multi-billion dollar project without a cost-benefit analysis,


----------



## drsmith

Comcare has weighed in and spreads the blame,



> Comcare said it was actively investigating claims of the improper dumping of asbestos in Ballarat in regional Victoria and had put a Tasmanian contractor on notice for poor standards in training requirements and safety gear.
> 
> The federal regulator's chief executive, Paul O'Connor, told a Senate hearing yesterday that 20 incidents of asbestos mishandling at communications pits had been identified since January 1, after only 10 others in the years since 1996.
> 
> *Mr O'Connor warned of "systemic issues with Telstra and NBN Co" and noted they had shared responsibility for health and safety.*
> 
> "There can be the case where there is a project like this, the rollout of the National Broadband Network, that the head contractor NBN Co has accountabilities, as does Telstra as the owner of the telecommunications infrastructure, which as we know is legacy infrastructure and does include an amount of asbestos-containing material in communications throughout the country," he said.
> 
> Highlighting the health risks, an "operational directive" from NBN contractor Visionstream from September warned subcontractors to assume asbestos was present and not to use high-pressure water spray and compressed air on the materials.
> 
> The directive, obtained by The Australian, urges the construction teams to use rods and ropes to install optical fibre cable in the pits and ducts when replacing Telstra's old copper lines.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...r-blames-telstra/story-e6frgaif-1226656563903

My bolds.


----------



## drsmith

Some interesting commentary after question time from Malcolm Turnbull in Parliament this afternoon.

He's claimed that the replacement of Telstra's pits has to do with inadequate size for NBN infrastructure. He's also claimed that the same applies to some of the ducts with the latter being NBN Co's responsibility.


----------



## boofhead

If what Rob Oakeshott has reported via Twitter as seen at The Register is true then it dead-ends the upgradability of Coalition's NBN for many customers to only whatever upgrades are available to copper technologies. The possibility of customers paying for upgrades to fibre or later the copper being replaced by fibre was a part of the selling point for some economic conservatives.


----------



## drsmith

boofhead said:


> If what Rob Oakeshott has reported via Twitter as seen at The Register is true then it dead-ends the upgradability of Coalition's NBN for many customers to only whatever upgrades are available to copper technologies. The possibility of customers paying for upgrades to fibre or later the copper being replaced by fibre was a part of the selling point for some economic conservatives.



I suspect that Rob Oakeshott might be reading a little too much into the above.


----------



## drsmith

An interesting piece in the AFR about Telstra's use of asbestos in its pits and pipes.

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/cleaning_up_telstra_asbestos_legacy_WJRqVjtoycxWHWvCIJ8wjK


----------



## Smurf1976

drsmith said:


> He's claimed that the replacement of Telstra's pits has to do with inadequate size for NBN infrastructure. He's also claimed that the same applies to some of the ducts with the latter being NBN Co's responsibility.



Big fibre cables can't be bent to the same fairly tight radius as copper cables can. So yes, you need some bigger pits unless the cable is just running straight through with no connections etc there.

As for conduit sizes, my experience is that whenever there's an old conduit the odds are fairly high that there's _something_ blocking it. Gravel that got down there somehow, silt due to water ingress, external damage during excavation works that was not properly repaired, dead rats, whatever. And the smaller the conduit, the more easily it gets blocked. If it's metal then add rust to the list of problems too. 

And don't get me started on the idiotic idea of putting rubber inside concrete to make a path that way - it's so bad that I always expected to be digging the whole lot up and was pleasantly surprised if the old "conduit" was actually still usable for a new cable. That's not fun, especially when you end up removing a lump of concrete the size of a car.

So in short, there's a practical need to replace at least some of the infrastructure in order to install the new cables.


----------



## drsmith

Smurf1976 said:


> Big fibre cables can't be bent to the same fairly tight radius as copper cables can. So yes, you need some bigger pits unless the cable is just running straight through with no connections etc there.



Malcolm Turnbull did offer a specific reason for the size inadequacy of the pits. Hopefully this will appear in Hansard and can be posted tomorrow.


----------



## DB008

I'm sure that Teltra knew about the asbestos in the pits a long, long, long time ago.


----------



## drsmith

Some interesting commentary from The Australian,



> The asbestos issue again dominated parliamentary question time yesterday, with the opposition challenging Labor's insistence that the issue is not the government's responsibility.
> 
> The government has continued to maintain that responsibility for the asbestos in the pits and ducts lies with Telstra.
> 
> *This is despite the chief executive of Comcare, Paul O'Connor, telling a Senate estimates hearing during the week that the commonwealth would be liable "at a general level". Asbestos lawyers have echoed this by saying that legal liability could also fall back to the commonwealth.*
> 
> Nevertheless, Julia Gillard has stood firm.
> 
> Yesterday she was quoting Telstra chief executive Thodey saying "we own the infrastructure and it's our responsibility" and continued to describe the responsibility as one for Telstra rather than the government.
> 
> "Clearly Telstra has stepped up, as is appropriate," the Prime Minister told parliament.
> 
> To be sure, the government held a crisis meeting on Monday and Telstra has taken actions including recruiting 200 extra safety specialists.




The paragraph in bold was a specific point that came up during question time in Parliament yesterday. It may explain why Telstra, publically at least, is playing Mr Nice Guy with all of this.

The following point also came up,



> But some, including the Coalition and independent senator Nick Xenophon, have likened the situation to the abandoned pink batts scheme that left four workers dead.
> 
> Both projects involved big outlays and tight time frames, with the pink batts program having raised concerns that unqualified contractors had installed the batts.
> 
> And as was the situation with the pink batts fiasco, questions will continue to mount and the fallout will continue for some time to come.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/how-did-it-happens-again/story-e6frg6z6-1226657318924


----------



## boofhead

I do know in the suburb where I live the conduit wouldn't be suitable to run any fibre in. In the late 1980s or early 90s when the lines were moved from above ground to under ground the PVC pipe was simply split up one side so the lines could be slipped in and it was a reasonably small diameter pipe. I have no idea how many other quick and easy fixes have been applied around Australia at the time.


----------



## Calliope

Turnbull explains how this asbestos issue has been blown out of proportions to a sneering Emma Alberici on Lateline.

http://www.abc.net.au/iview/?gclid=CPKN4d-9y7cCFQQipQodSh4A2g#/view/39583


----------



## Logique

Calliope said:


> Turnbull explains how this asbestos issue has been blown out of proportions to a sneering Emma Alberici on Lateline.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/iview/?gclid=CPKN4d-9y7cCFQQipQodSh4A2g#/view/39583



Emma came across as less the interviewer, and more the party political announcer for the ALP. Those lines weren't fed to her at all.


----------



## Calliope

The asbestos scare is a godsend to The Communications Electrical Plumbing Union, they will milk it for all it is worth.



> UNION leaders are demanding a halt to the National Broadband Network to ensure an end to asbestos exposure as they put forward a plan to dispatch independent assessors across the project to check on the danger to public health.
> 
> The union push seeks direct funding from Telstra and the government company building the network, NBN Co, to help federal authorities conduct random safety checks on dozens of subcontractors working on the $37.4 billion project.
> 
> The Communications Electrical Plumbing Union, which represents workers at most of the companies and contractors involved in the NBN, is not ruling out industrial action as a last resort to protect workers if its requests are not met by Telstra and NBN Co.
> 
> Telstra has stopped work at its sites but NBN Co is yet to do the same amid sharp differences over the two companies' responsibilities for safety breaches that have triggered stop-work orders from federal and state regulators.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...l&utm_campaign=editorial&net_sub_uid=17300093


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> Malcolm Turnbull did offer a specific reason for the size inadequacy of the pits. Hopefully this will appear in Hansard and can be posted tomorrow.




Further to this point yesterday, it's that the they are too small for the multiport device that the NBN is using for its fibre rollout.

The following from Hansard yesterday is what Malcolm Turnbull had to say about Telstra's pits and ducts,



> As of 2009, of course, the NBN was only just established. The company was formed in April 2009, and there was no plan to disturb Telstra's pits. Work was done to replace them from time to time when they had to be repaired, when things broke or when there was some upgrade. But then along came the NBN. The deal between the NBN and Telstra was for the NBN to use all of Telstra's infrastructure””all of its pits and ducts. What has happened is that Telstra has an obligation to upgrade those pits that are too small for the multiport device that the NBN is using for its fibre rollout. Many of these pits””hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of pits””are too small and have to be removed and replaced with a plastic pit. That is Telstra's responsibility to do that work. So you go from a position in 2009 where interference with and disturbance of Telstra's pits was an infrequent occurrence””and it was well known that many did contain asbestos””to the position where virtually every single pit in the country was or was likely or liable to be disturbed in this fashion.
> 
> Furthermore, Telstra's ducts””the pipes that carry the various cables, be they copper or fibre, around the country””are filled with copper and in many cases do not have the space to take the new fibre optic cables of the NBN Co., and have to be augmented with new pipes in the ground. That responsibility is actually not Telstra's; that is the NBN Co.'s. If those new pipes have to enter into an existing pit that is made out of fibrocement then of course there is an asbestos issue. The minister, Senator Conroy, was quite wrong yesterday when he said that the asbestos management issue was only an issue for Telstra. It is an issue for the NBN Co. as well. In any event, all of the work that is being done by Telstra is for and on behalf of the NBN Co.




http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-06-04.78.2



Calliope said:


> Turnbull explains how this asbestos issue has been blown out of proportions to a sneering Emma Alberici on Lateline.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/iview/?gclid=CPKN4d-9y7cCFQQipQodSh4A2g#/view/39583




Malcolm commented specifically about the differences in potential asbestos exposure between the FTTP and FTTN proposals. One specific aspect that the pits are bigger and the pipes wider (to take more copper) where the copper would be replaced with fibre under FTTN. He also commented about the management challenges in ensuring such a large workforce was adequately trained under the FTTP rollout model.

No transcript as yet on the ABC's Lateline site.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2013/s3774681.htm


----------



## drsmith

Last night's Lateline transcripts are now available from the above link,

First, Malcolm on the issue of a rapidly growing workforce,



> EMMA ALBERICI: To never extend it to the premises?
> 
> MALCOLM TURNBULL: No, we're saying it's an option, it's an option to do that and it may well be that we'll do that, when I say we'll do that, a future government may do that, who knows, many years into the future. *But the point is, the problem with the project at the moment is that you've got so much disturbance happening so quickly all at the same time, 15,000 contractors next year, and it has this resonance with pink batts where you've got a project that has suddenly grown, you've got thousands of contractors all working, of course they should all be following the asbestos management procedures. Of course they should be. But the more people you have doing this stuff, particularly if they're doing it for the first time, just as we saw with the pink batts, the more likely it is you will have people who don't follow the rules to the letter. It becomes a much more difficult management issue.* It becomes much more costly and, of course, imposes higher risks and our approach is less costly, faster to deploy and does impose fewer risks because you are disturbing much less asbestos containing material. That's a fact.




Second, on the pits and ducts for FTTN,



> EMMA ALBERICI: You intend to build 60,000 nodes on each street corner; won't that require extensive work in Telstra's pits?
> 
> MALCOLM TURNBULL: No, I won't actually. Would you like me to explain that? *The ducts that go from the exchanges to the distribution points, the pillars, the Telstra pillars that you see in the street are very large because they contain very big binders of copper cable. So pulling a fibre cable through that is very straight forward. It comes into the pit, the pit doesn't have - the pit that's below the pillar doesn't have to be disturbed, it comes through the existing duct, comes through the pit and then you install new electronic device on top of it.* I'm not saying that asbestos isn't an issue, Emma, but it is a very limited issue compared to what's happening with Telstra. Now with NBN their pits in the street, the ones that we would not touch, they are currently having to be taken out of the ground, so broken up, destroyed, lifted out and replaced with larger plastic ones and that is what is creating the asbestos disturbance issue. Now that is not a part of our scheme.




My bolds.


----------



## Smurf1976

I always used to think that a few Tasmanian politicians pushed the limits somewhat with their apparent knowledge of all things electric. 

But never, ever did I expect to hear senior federal politicians talking about pits, conduit and cable. Never thought I'd hear that, ever. It just sounds too detailed really, and somewhat strange that we've come to this point. I guess that's what happens in a country where real technical knowledge and skills haven't been valued for a generation.


----------



## sptrawler

Smurf1976 said:


> I always used to think that a few Tasmanian politicians pushed the limits somewhat with their apparent knowledge of all things electric.
> 
> But never, ever did I expect to hear senior federal politicians talking about pits, conduit and cable. Never thought I'd hear that, ever. It just sounds too detailed really, and somewhat strange that we've come to this point. I guess that's what happens in a country where real technical knowledge and skills haven't been valued for a generation.




LOL, that's priceless, just warms the cockles.


----------



## drsmith

Smurf1976 said:


> I always used to think that a few Tasmanian politicians pushed the limits somewhat with their apparent knowledge of all things electric.
> 
> But never, ever did I expect to hear senior federal politicians talking about pits, conduit and cable. Never thought I'd hear that, ever. It just sounds too detailed really, and somewhat strange that we've come to this point. I guess that's what happens in a country where real technical knowledge and skills haven't been valued for a generation.



I suspect the commentary MT has provided would be based from briefing material. It's accuracy would firstly be related to the quality of that briefing material and then obviously to any political spin that he adds.

On another front, it looks like Stephen Conroy hasn't been able to hoist the red underpants high enough in some trees.



> Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has conceded the national broadband network’s wireless rollout has been slower than expected, blaming tall trees and reticent councils for the delays.




http://www.afr.com/p/technology/trees_and_councils_slowing_nbn_wireless_2piSOSxUEjVhogO1Al6siN


----------



## NBNMyths

I wonder where all the "white elephant", "nobody want's it", "NBN takeup is pathetic" people are now?

....And I also wonder why the current takeup rates -which are by far the highest anywhere in the World- haven't made it into the mainstream media....

http://www.itnews.com.au/News/345123,nbn-cos-take-up-rates-soar.aspx/0
http://www.zdnet.com/au/nbn-maintains-rollout-forecast-shows-increase-in-up-take-rates-7000016156/

On average, NBN takeup is 1000-2000% higher than the takeup of ADSL in Australia 10 years ago.

Every NBN area that's been online for >12 months has exceeded the takeup rate of cable broadband in Australia (about 22% where available) after >10 years of availability.

After 2 years on line, some NBN areas have achieved over double the takeup rate of the 5-year-old US Verizon FiOS network.


That white elephant appears to be turning grey.


----------



## IFocus

drsmith said:


> I suspect the commentary MT has provided would be based from briefing material. It's accuracy would firstly be related to the quality of that briefing material and then obviously to any political spin that he adds.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/technology/trees_and_councils_slowing_nbn_wireless_2piSOSxUEjVhogO1Al6siN





Cannot wait for Coalition ministers taking responsibility for every issue a tradesman / tech screws up in their portfolios.


----------



## Julia

IFocus said:


> Cannot wait for Coalition ministers taking responsibility for every issue a tradesman / tech screws up in their portfolios.



A very reasonable point.  It's so easy to criticise from opposition.
Likewise, if the boats continue to pour in after the Coalition takes office, we can only begin to imagine the squirming.  Let's hope the Coalition actually has a real plan.  We will see, I guess.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> That white elephant appears to be turning grey.



Grey and blue in recent weeks.

It might be black and blue by the time the dust has settled.


----------



## drsmith

IFocus said:


> Cannot wait for Coalition ministers taking responsibility for every issue a tradesman / tech screws up in their portfolios.



Can't wait for Labor to take responsibility for all their screw ups.

99 days to go. :


----------



## drsmith

Some interesting insights on the asbestos issue from the AFR,

http://www.afr.com/p/national/telstra_cops_it_hard_for_nbn_wP1fHwrAOhkTmmp2Rkj6pI

The following article from The Australian on the rollout itself is also an interesting read,

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-big-drag-on-nbn/story-e6frgd0x-1226658953643


----------



## bigdog

Looks like is should be changed

*Statement from the Obama White House released yesterday on the way Americans are flocking to wireless broadband*

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...rovides-another-boost-wireless-broadband-and-

*The White House*

*Office of the Press Secretary*
For Immediate Release
June 14, 2013
Fact Sheet: *Administration Provides Another Boost to Wireless Broadband and Technological Innovation*

The President today announced several new Administration initiatives to bolster American leadership in wireless broadband and technological innovation, leveraging the latest advances in the wireless sector to accelerate job creation. These new initiatives are the latest in a series of actions the Administration has taken over the past four years to ensure American businesses and workers have the infrastructure they need to compete in the 21st century economy. Also, the White House released a report, Four Years of Broadband Growth, showing the vast progress we have made towards expanding broadband access in recent years, thanks, in part, to those actions. The report’s findings include that:

■    Since 2009, the percentage of American homes reached by high-speed broadband networks have more than quadrupled (from less than 20% to more than 80%) and average broadband speeds have doubled.
■    Between 2000 and 2010, the percentage of American households with a home connection to broadband has surged from 4.4% to 67%.
■    Annual investment in U.S. wireless networks grew more than 40% between 2009 and 2012, from $21 billion to $30 billion.

Today’s initiatives include a Presidential Memorandum directing Federal agencies to enhance the efficiency of their use of spectrum and make more capacity available to satisfy the skyrocketing demand of consumer and business broadband users.  The Memorandum directs agencies to increase their collaboration and data-sharing with the private sector, so a full range of stakeholders can contribute its collective expertise to maximizing spectrum efficiency, including through greater sharing of spectrum between Government and commercial users.  These efforts will provide access to more spectrum for wireless broadband providers and equipment vendors as they respond to increasingly rapid consumer adoption of smartphones, tablets, and other wireless devices.

The Memorandum also calls upon Federal agencies to increase public-private research and development (R&D) activities, emphasize spectrum efficiency in Government system procurements and spectrum assignments, and improve the accuracy and scope of their reporting on spectrum usage.  It empowers a White House-based Spectrum Policy Team to oversee implementation of the Memorandum and make further recommendations.  At the same time, the Memorandum requires appropriate safeguards to protect Government systems that rely on spectrum to keep Americans safe.

These actions build on the executive action the President took last week by launching ConnectED, a program that will build high-speed digital connections to America’s schools and libraries, ensuring that 99 percent of American students can benefit from advances in teaching and learning. The Administration will continue to take action and build on our multi-faceted wireless agenda that is helping American innovators and entrepreneurs unleash productivity in all sectors of the economy and society while introducing an avalanche of apps and services for the convenience and benefit of consumers. 

Other aspects of today’s announcements include:

Federal investments of $100 million in spectrum sharing and advanced communications:  By September, the National Science Foundation will award $23 million in spectrum-sharing research and development (R&D) grants and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency will announce the first of an expected $60 million in spectrum-sharing contracts to be awarded over the next five years.  In FY ’14, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) at the Department of Commerce will devote another $17.5 million towards spectrum and advanced communications research as well as accelerate public-private collaboration at Federal laboratories.

Technology Day:  NTIA and NIST announced plans to co-host a Spectrum Technology Day to showcase advances in spectrum sharing and other innovations aimed at satisfying the Nation’s surging demand for wireless services and applications.

Background

A combination of American entrepreneurship and innovation, private investment, and smart policy has vaulted the United States to a position of global leadership in wireless broadband technologies.  Annual investment in U.S. wireless networks grew more than 40% between 2009 and 2012, to $30 billion from $21 billion, and is projected to rise to $35 billion in 2013.  The U.S. wireless broadband industry contributes more than $150 billion in GDP annually; the United States is home to most of the world’s subscribers to cutting-edge 4G wireless service; U.S. companies dominate the market for smartphone operating systems and produce about a quarter of all smartphones; and two U.S. companies are responsible for more than 80% of mobile application downloads. Continuing demand for wireless apps and services creates the opportunity for a virtuous cycle of greater productivity and innovation, but only if we make available sufficient spectrum to fuel that cycle.                                     

Today’s announcements follow on a string of Administration initiatives and commitments to promote American leadership in wireless innovation:

■ In a June 28, 2010 memorandum, Unleashing the Wireless Broadband Revolution, the President directed NTIA to work with the FCC to repurpose 500 MHz of Federal and nonfederal spectrum to wireless broadband use within 10 years.  Based on NTIA’s recommendations, the FCC could repurpose up to 335 MHz of federally assigned spectrum in the next couple of years.

■ In his January 2011 State of the Union address, the President committed to making cutting-edge 4G wireless broadband service available to 98% of Americans by 2016, a goal the Administration is on track to meet.

■ In the American Jobs Act, the Administration proposed an array of spectrum-related provisions, the substance of which was enacted as part of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012.  That legislation expanded the authority of the FCC to auction particular bands of spectrum to wireless broadband providers, including spectrum voluntarily relinquished by TV broadcasters via a reverse auction.  The law also authorized the FCC to allocate more spectrum for innovative unlicensed uses, such as wi-fi, which is absorbing an increasing share of wireless data traffic and thus easing the crunch faced by commercial wireless providers.  Further, the law established FirstNet, an independent authority within NTIA empowered to design and deploy””in collaboration with state, local, and tribal authorities””a nationwide  interoperable wireless broadband network for first responders.  FirstNet is directed to partner with the private sector to maximize the efficient and shared use of spectrum and infrastructure.

Today’s actions will create opportunities for more efficient and innovative approaches to spectrum policy in line with the recommendations made in a July 2012 report from the President’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology (PCAST), Realizing the Full Potential of Government-Held Spectrum to Spur Economic Growth and a new report from the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and National Economic Council, Four Years of Broadband Growth, released today.

6823


----------



## NBNMyths

bigdog said:


> Looks like is should be changed
> 
> *Statement from the Obama White House released yesterday on the way Americans are flocking to wireless broadband*
> 
> http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...rovides-another-boost-wireless-broadband-and-
> 
> snip




Just as here, wireless broadband in the US is complementary to fixed broadband. Wireless is great for low volume convenience use, but it cannot provide the bandwidth required for a high number of users downloading large files such as video.

There is not a single country in the World, including the US, where wireless broadband is proposed to replace urban fixed broadband.

The laws of physics simply prevent this from being possible. A single strand of optical fibre can carry 20,000 times more data than their entire radio spectrum combined, let alone the tiny portion of spectrum available for mobile broadband usage.

To illustrate the differing usage, here is the current data volume usage in Australia. According to the Cisco reports, this trend is typical worldwide:


----------



## Smurf1976

I understand the point NBNMyths is making about data volume on fixed versus wireless although I question the actual figures.

Looking at my own circumstances, going back 5 years very few people had anything resembling a "smart" phone. A phone was still used primarily to make calls and send texts. Sure, a few people employed in IT or in certain office-based professions had a BlackBerry but they were never a mainstream product used by the masses.

Now in 2013 smart phones are pretty much everywhere, to the point that it is generally assumed that a mobile phone is a "smart" one. Tablets are also increasingly common too.

Meanwhile, there has been a massive deployment of 3G / 4G communications devices across all sorts of industries. Everything from monitoring weather to controlling electronic road signs is going this way and the vast majority of those installations have been installed within the past 5 years, indeed the roll-out of such things is still in progress. Where once it would have been communicated by radio or fixed line, now there's just no point bothering with that if it's in a location where 3G is available. 

4 years ago people took video at outdoor concerts, festivals and the like and uploaded it when they got home. Now they do it whilst they're still at the festival and the band is still playing. That's just one of the many things which are now using 3G / 4G data.

In short, I find it hard to believe that 3G/4G data volumes are trending flat to down. Agreed that there's still a need for fixed broadband, but I find those 3G / 4G figures hard to believe given what I see going on in my day to day life.


----------



## drsmith

What could be happening is that the number of plans involving mobile data could be rising much more quickly than the number of fixed line internet plans.

If that's the case, it could explain why data usage per mobile account is constant, but that would not necessarily be reflective of the overall trend in mobile data usage.


----------



## sydboy007

Smurf1976 said:


> In short, I find it hard to believe that 3G/4G data volumes are trending flat to down. Agreed that there's still a need for fixed broadband, but I find those 3G / 4G figures hard to believe given what I see going on in my day to day life.




I think the problem with wireless internet stats is pretty much anyone on a mobile plan these days is included to have wireless internet connection as well.

I have 2GB limit with my plan each month, and only if I really try to use it do I get up to something like 500MB in a month.

Compare that to my house where 2 of the residents are streaming their Thai TV shows every day, and I'm watching a lot of streaming video, and we quite easily get through around 150GB of data in a month.

I'd say the majority of people who are wireless only for their internet are so because;

They have no choice
They don't really do much to warrant the cost of fixed line internet access
They rent so don't want the cost of connection ADSL each time they move

It would be quite interesting to know if any of the the people arguing that wireless will kill the NBN if they:

Use the internet a lot
Are they a wireless only internet user.

I'd expect most to say NO and NO.

It's quite easy to get internet plans on the NBN for around $1 a day, with the added worry free shapping should you go over your monthly limit.

Compare that to wireless plans which can end up costing you hundreds of dollars if you go over you monthly limit - stats can be up to 48 hours behind so the room for over use is quite high.

When I've been on holidays I've tethered my mobile to provide internet access on my laptop.  The lag is quite noticeable compared to ADSL.  I'd definitely not want it as my primary connection.


----------



## NBNMyths

Smurf1976 said:


> I understand the point NBNMyths is making about data volume on fixed versus wireless although I question the actual figures.
> 
> Looking at my own circumstances, going back 5 years very few people had anything resembling a "smart" phone. A phone was still used primarily to make calls and send texts. Sure, a few people employed in IT or in certain office-based professions had a BlackBerry but they were never a mainstream product used by the masses.
> 
> Now in 2013 smart phones are pretty much everywhere, to the point that it is generally assumed that a mobile phone is a "smart" one. Tablets are also increasingly common too.
> 
> Meanwhile, there has been a massive deployment of 3G / 4G communications devices across all sorts of industries. Everything from monitoring weather to controlling electronic road signs is going this way and the vast majority of those installations have been installed within the past 5 years, indeed the roll-out of such things is still in progress. Where once it would have been communicated by radio or fixed line, now there's just no point bothering with that if it's in a location where 3G is available.
> 
> 4 years ago people took video at outdoor concerts, festivals and the like and uploaded it when they got home. Now they do it whilst they're still at the festival and the band is still playing. That's just one of the many things which are now using 3G / 4G data.
> 
> In short, I find it hard to believe that 3G/4G data volumes are trending flat to down. Agreed that there's still a need for fixed broadband, but I find those 3G / 4G figures hard to believe given what I see going on in my day to day life.




The problem with mobile data is cost for volume. It has always been the problem, and it will always be the problem. The cost is high for two reasons:
1. The cost of spectrum is high.
2. Carriers have to make the cost high in order to keep the networks viable. If mobile broadband was cheap or unlimited, then the networks would collapse under the strain, because more people might think it was a good idea to dump their fixed line. Hence the carrier's spectrum would be insufficient for the amount of bandwidth being demanded.

Your comment about people uploading video at an event indicates that you've never tried to do it. I was at Bathurst last year, and despite being with the best 3G network (Telstra), and their installation of a temporary cell tower 50m from my location, it took a good hour and several attempts to upload a single photo to Facebook. A video would have taken days. I'd suggest you go to a major sporting event or concert and try to upload a video via cellular and see what happens.

And that example is exactly the problem with mobile as a replacement. It is simply unable to cope with a high number of simultaneous users. It's great for low volume things like road signs, traffic lights etc. It's acceptable for low population density rural areas. But it is no good for urban home or business usage in an era where 1080p video is the norm, and 4k/8k is around the corner. A single 1080p movie download would consume the entire amount of Telstra's biggest consumer 4G mobile broadband plan (15GB), at a cost of $110/month.

I don't think there's any reason to doubt the numbers in the graph. How many people do you know that use more than 1.5GB/month on their mobile plan? Telstra don't even offer more data than that until you hit their $100/month phone plan, and they are the clear market leader.




drsmith said:


> What could be happening is that the number of plans involving mobile data could be rising much more quickly than the number of fixed line internet plans.
> 
> If that's the case, it could explain why data usage per mobile account is constant, but that would not necessarily be reflective of the overall trend in mobile data usage.




Yes, that is the case. Fixed broadband is almost a saturated market. Almost everyone already has it, although the number of subscribers is still growing at about double the number of new premises each year. But each user typically doubles their consumption each year.

Mobile broadband, on the other hand, is an emerging market where the number of connections is growing very rapidly. This is partly because many people don't have a connection, and partly because many people and households are adding multiple connections.

In my household we only have 1 fixed line connection, but we have a total of 5 mobile broadband connections. But the fixed line gives a total of 400GB/month, while all the mobile connections combined only give 2.5GB/month.


----------



## NBNMyths

sydboy007 said:


> Compare that to wireless plans which can end up costing you hundreds of dollars if you go over you monthly limit - stats can be up to 48 hours behind so the room for over use is quite high.
> 
> When I've been on holidays I've tethered my mobile to provide internet access on my laptop.  The lag is quite noticeable compared to ADSL.  I'd definitely not want it as my primary connection.




You're not wrong. After installing Mountain Lion last month, I forgot to disable automatic software update downloads. Next night at work, I had my iPhone tethered and the laptop downloaded 1.9GB of software updates in the background. It wasn't until the next day that my phone alerted me to the fact I'd used 190% of my monthly data in one sitting.

Ouch. That'll be an extra $90, thanks.


----------



## Smurf1976

I see that I've made an error in not noticing that the graph shows usage per connection. I looked at it and thought it was referring to total volume, not per customer. So I'll stand corrected on that one. I'm pretty sure that total volume would be strongly growing however.

In terms of uploading videos etc at events, correct that I haven't done it personally. I have however watched the videos uploaded by others whilst the event is still in progress so it can be done certainly.

I see all of this as being a bit like building 10 lane highways to cope with the traffic. It facilitates growth certainly, but for what actual purpose? If we've got this massive growth in data volume then what, exactly, is it achieving? How much of it is bloat that doesn't serve an actual purpose (eg the way certain news websites operate)? And how much is actually useful?

Take banking for example. In terms of the data actually needed to do banking transactions, there's no reason why an old 9.6K modem shouldn't suffice. But in practice, even a 256K connection seems slow due to the huge amounts of bloat in the data being transmitted. You could take out 90%+ of that data with no practical effect on the ability to do banking online. The same goes for a lot of other things too.


----------



## drsmith

Smurf1976 said:


> I see all of this as being a bit like building 10 lane highways to cope with the traffic. It facilitates growth certainly, but for what actual purpose? If we've got this massive growth in data volume then what, exactly, is it achieving? How much of it is bloat that doesn't serve an actual purpose (eg the way certain news websites operate)? And how much is actually useful?



The utility value of capacity relative to cost.

That's a point I've heard someone else make.


----------



## NBNMyths

Smurf1976 said:


> I see that I've made an error in not noticing that the graph shows usage per connection. I looked at it and thought it was referring to total volume, not per customer. So I'll stand corrected on that one. I'm pretty sure that total volume would be strongly growing however.
> 
> In terms of uploading videos etc at events, correct that I haven't done it personally. I have however watched the videos uploaded by others whilst the event is still in progress so it can be done certainly.
> 
> I see all of this as being a bit like building 10 lane highways to cope with the traffic. It facilitates growth certainly, but for what actual purpose? If we've got this massive growth in data volume then what, exactly, is it achieving? How much of it is bloat that doesn't serve an actual purpose (eg the way certain news websites operate)? And how much is actually useful?
> 
> Take banking for example. In terms of the data actually needed to do banking transactions, there's no reason why an old 9.6K modem shouldn't suffice. But in practice, even a 256K connection seems slow due to the huge amounts of bloat in the data being transmitted. You could take out 90%+ of that data with no practical effect on the ability to do banking online. The same goes for a lot of other things too.




The total volume graph isn't much different. It shows that while total mobile volume doubled between 2009 and 2012, fixed volume quadrupled:



No doubt it's true that there's a lot of 'fluff' on websites that isn't technically required to do the job or display the required information.

However, we've shown as a species that we like such things. We like pretty, interactive, visual displays. Otherwise we'd still be using DOS and websites wouldn't be media-rich. By all means, you could suggest to a bank that they revert to minimalist, practical, graphic-free layouts, but I don't think they'd be very popular!


I saw an interesting comparison a while back between a ~1985 Mac Plus and a ~2000 Power Mac G3. Performing similar operations in Word and Excel, the old Mac was actually faster in many tests, because the software had become so bloated and pretty over the years that it was gobbling up the processing power advantage.


----------



## bellenuit

NBNMyths said:


> I saw an interesting comparison a while back between a ~1985 Mac Plus and a ~2000 Power Mac G3. Performing similar operations in Word and Excel, the old Mac was actually faster in many tests, because the software had become so bloated and pretty over the years that it was gobbling up the processing power advantage.




Yes, another variation of Parkinson's Law. Without necessarily adding much functionality, apps will expand to use up the CPU power available. Microsoft Word being a great example. Probably 98% of the functionality most users require was already in the earlier versions, but each new release adds little of value while at the same time requiring more memory and CPU to run the program.


----------



## sydboy007

bellenuit said:


> Yes, another variation of Parkinson's Law. Without necessarily adding much functionality, apps will expand to use up the CPU power available. Microsoft Word being a great example. Probably 98% of the functionality most users require was already in the earlier versions, but each new release adds little of value while at the same time requiring more memory and CPU to run the program.




I'll partially agree with that statement, though a couple of years ago I was using Office 2010 quite a bit, having been a 2003 user for an extended period of time.

Took me about an hour to get used to the new way to do things, and then I found I was using the more advanced features simply because they were easier to find.  Common tasks were also done much faster.

Certainly I'd love to see s/w companies maybe bring out a new version without any new features, but just something that works faster and requires less resources.  Ain't gonna happen because the average punter wont pay for it.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> The utility value of capacity relative to cost.
> 
> That's a point I've heard someone else make.




I'd argue that it's only a recent development where cheap capacity is reaching the point where we can have the Internet the way we've always wanted it.  previously there's been a compromise due to low connection speeds.  As the majority of users have faster connections the complexity of web pages can increase.  Maybe not always a good thing, but I remember the internet from the early 90s and it was a pain to navigate.  Early web pages were quite dull and far less interactive than they are today.

The Southern Cross cable consortium are upgrading the equipment at both ends to double the bandwith currently available.  Another upgrade will double it gain within the next year or so. The cost of increase, compared to the original cable install costs, is quite small.  Similar cheap capacity increases will be common place now that 100Gbs / wavelength is hitting the market, with 40 to 80 wavelengths / fibre the ultimate end.  Huwaweii has been trialling terabit transmission over a single fibre in China, so we've got a LOOOOOONG way to go before we really need to worry about laying much more cable in the ground. 

All this means is that the cost of data transmission is on a downward slope because the amount of capacity available is able to increase faster than demand, and the cost of increase is much lower than the initial install cost of capacity.


----------



## drsmith

Telstra has revealed which horse it's backing,

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...ays-david-thodey/story-e6frgaif-1226666978374


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> Telstra has revealed which horse it's backing,
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...ays-david-thodey/story-e6frgaif-1226666978374




And the relentless negativity of all things tainted Labor continues....Amazing and news worthy that Telstra thinks its copper network will last another 100 years  no mention of the billions NBN Co/Half assed Noalition Co will be paying them to maintain it.


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> And the relentless negativity of all things tainted Labor continues....Amazing and news worthy that Telstra thinks its copper network will last another 100 years  no mention of the billions NBN Co/Half assed Noalition Co will be paying them to maintain it.




Ah yes negativity, the name for someone who doesn't agree with dumb policy.

Much better to be positive and follow fools blindly.

Reminds me of union meetings I attended.


----------



## Smurf1976

Copper comms cables are still made therefore it is possible to continue maintaining the copper network practically forever. 

Whether it is economic and/or sensible to do so is an entirely different question.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Telstra has revealed which horse it's backing,
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...ays-david-thodey/story-e6frgaif-1226666978374




Thodey: _"The state's copper network is in good working order and will remain so for generations to come"._

I had to check the date to make sure it wasn't April 1.

http://delimiter.com.au/2012/05/01/worst-of-the-worst-photos-of-australias-copper-network/


----------



## Calliope

So_Cynical said:


> And the relentless negativity of all things tainted Labor continues....Amazing and news worthy that Telstra thinks its copper network will last another 100 years  no mention of the billions NBN Co/Half assed Noalition Co will be paying them to maintain it.




You are not only the ASF's ace trader, but now you are joining Myths as an expert on broadband roll-out. However with the imminent demise of Labor, I detect a touch of hysteria here. You have never been Cynical about all things Labor...So_Gullible.


----------



## So_Cynical

Calliope said:


> You are not only the ASF's ace trader, but now you are joining Myths as an expert on broadband roll-out. However with the imminent demise of Labor, I detect a touch of hysteria here. You have never been Cynical about all things Labor...So_Gullible.




Labor is gone...ive said it, its fact 100%, Abbott is a tosser ive said it 100% and i cant take it back, Happy?

I doubt it

For you clowns its a right and wrong game, im a true believer, Keating spoke to me when he addressed the true believers back in 1993, its always been about what's right and just and inevitable...your side of politics is about denial and disadvantage.


----------



## sails

Had a phone call from Telstra today to tell us the NBN is coming our way soon and did we want to sign up.  I told him I was concerned about land lines going dead in floods and power blackouts - and he told me the old system will still be there and will be used as back-up.  I presume that means the copper wire will be left in place.  I feel very nervous as anything labor does seems to not be managed well at all.... 

They have offered a pretty good deal - but will it stay so good?  Maybe they are desperate to get people to sign up - I don't know.

Any thoughts?


----------



## sails

So_Cynical said:


> ......your side of politics is about denial and disadvantage....




SC - that's your opinion.  Nothing more, nothing less.

I think the opposite that your side of politics is about denial and disadvantage and hopeless management and lies as well.


----------



## So_Cynical

sails said:


> SC - that's your opinion.  Nothing more, nothing less.
> 
> I think the opposite that your side of politics is about denial and disadvantage and hopeless management and lies as well.




Lies like Never ever a GST, or how good is work no choices? the thing is about us leftists is that we can step aside form the political BS and see the reality...how many on the right side of politics were urging Howard to go in 06/07??? how many will urge Abbott to go in 2015/16???

You guys have no vision..its all hindsight with the right, its a rear view vision perspective.


----------



## DB008

So_Cynical said:


> Lies like Never ever a GST, or how good is work no choices? the thing is about us leftists is that we can step aside form the political BS and see the reality...how many on the right side of politics were urging Howard to go in 06/07??? how many will urge Abbott to go in 2015/16???
> 
> You guys have no vision..its all hindsight with the right, its a rear view vision perspective.




Hey?

Hold on mate. You are surely jesting, are you not?




> Lies like Never ever a GST




And then he put it out there before the election.

I think what you meant to type, and somehow hit the wrong keys on your keyboard were...



> Lies like Never ever a CARBON TAX


----------



## NBNMyths

sails said:


> Had a phone call from Telstra today to tell us the NBN is coming our way soon and did we want to sign up.  I told him I was concerned about land lines going dead in floods and power blackouts - and he told me the old system will still be there and will be used as back-up.  I presume that means the copper wire will be left in place.  I feel very nervous as anything labor does seems to not be managed well at all....
> 
> They have offered a pretty good deal - but will it stay so good?  Maybe they are desperate to get people to sign up - I don't know.
> 
> Any thoughts?




Telstra's NBN prices are essentially the same as their ADSL prices. There's little chance of them changing significantly, as the NBN wholesale prices are regulated by the ACCC.

Check out any of the other major or minor NBN providers though (There are about 40 of them), and you'll find you can probably save 50-100% on what Telstra want to charge you for the same service. They are at the high end of the market.

The copper will be switched off 18 months after an area is fibered, so eventually it will probably be ripped out for scrap. And you won't really have any choice but to change to the NBN, or move to mobile.

Telstra are the only provider keeping NBN customers on copper for the phone side of their service until the copper is switched off. No idea why, probably to wring the last bit of revenue out of the network (Since they will keep charging you ~$30 line rental for copper, unlike all the other providers who use the NBN for voice and so don't charge line rental).

The NBN does have a battery backup for voice.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> You guys have no vision..its all hindsight with the right, its a rear view vision perspective.



Looking skyward is fine, but it does pay to look downwards occasionally as well to make sure your next step isn't into thin air.


----------



## NBNMyths

So_Cynical said:


> You guys have no vision..its all hindsight with the right, its a rear view vision perspective.




That's just the conservative way. Never fear though, they almost always lose out to progress in the end. Perhaps kicking and screaming, but they get there eventually.


The positions of today's progressives are those of tomorrow's conservatives.

The positions of today's conservatives are those of tomorrow's comedy, ridicule and incredulity.


Remember that it was only a couple of years ago that the Coalition members said we didn't need an NBN at all, and then that _"12Mbps was enough for any application"_. Now we have them promising an NBN with 23% 1000Mbps FTTP and of 25-50Mbps minimum for the rest.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> That's just the conservative way. Never fear though, they almost always lose out to progress in the end. Perhaps kicking and screaming, but they get there eventually.



Within that broader political context, what then is Labor's vision for border security and how does outsourcing immigration to illegal people smugglers fit in with that vision ?

The problem with Labor at the present time is that it's vision is largely about itself. This has been no Hawke/Keating government and their policy outcomes reflect that.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Within that broader political context, what then is Labor's vision for border security and how does outsourcing immigration to illegal people smugglers fit in with that vision ?
> 
> The problem with Labor at the present time is that it's vision is largely about itself. This has been no Hawke/Keating government and their policy outcomes reflect that.




It's not an issue of border _security_ though. The arrivals are detained. There is no security issue as such.

I'm not concerned about the numbers involved. A few thousand in a country of tens-of-millions is a drop in the ocean, and they don;t add to our total numbers of refugees accepted anyway. I have two concerns though. 1. Arriving by boat is dangerous. People will die unnecessarily; and 2. There are people who have been sitting in camps for a decade waiting for refuge, and I have no doubt that many of the boat arrivals are "jumping" them.


That said, o be honest I don't know what the solution is to people smuggling. I feel for those who would do anything to escape their circumstances and let's be honest, putting yourself in those people's shoes, would you do anything different to what they are doing? Desperate situations call for desperate measures.

There is little difference now between Labor's policy and the Coalition's.... Temporary protection Visas and a plan to turn around boats...

TPV's are very inhumane. Imagine arriving here, building a life for 10 years, having kids etc, then being told "OK, the war's over, back to Sri Lanka for you." That's pretty scummy.

Turning back boats won't work, because it cannot be done if safety is an issue. So the first thing you'd do if on one of those boats is to ensure safety is an issue, by damaging the boat in some way. That's what I'd do.​

As for vision, well since forming Govt we have the NBN, the NDIS, Gonski, 12% super, paid parental leave, e-Health records. All very future-looking/visionary programs and most originally (or still) opposed by the coalition. And all (should they survive) will likely be taken for granted in 20 years time, just as medicare and superannuation are today.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> I'm not concerned about the numbers involved. A few thousand in a country of tens-of-millions is a drop in the ocean, and they don;t add to our total numbers of refugees accepted anyway.



Upon reading that comment alone, it's clear you're at a disadvantage on the detail of this specific issue.

If genuinely interested, have a read of the asylum seeker thread. It will fill you in on both what the present situation is and how it has evolved.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Telstra has revealed which horse it's backing,
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...ays-david-thodey/story-e6frgaif-1226666978374




http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2013/6/21/technology/squeezing-life-out-telstras-copper



> David Thodey is no doubt an adroit diplomat but the Telstra CEO's comments on the longevity of the copper network highlights that he’s got a good sense of humour as well.
> 
> ...
> 
> In keeping with the spirit of the Thodey’s comments let us examine the 1919 Model-T Ford which has been in operation for nearly 100 years and are still working today. But are they being used by the majority of people? No.
> 
> Telstra’s copper network and the Model-T Ford have a lot in common. Both are examples of leading edge technology when they were first created and with careful and timely maintenance, they can both be kept functional.
> 
> The Model-T Ford maintains its value by remaining in a pristine “as-new” state. However, if this vehicle was upgraded with a new engine it could go faster but would still provide a rough ride.
> 
> If springs were added the vehicle would still be unable to go much faster because the power train was not designed to do so. If the power train was replaced the limitation would be the tyres. Fix the tyres and the problem becomes the brakes. Fix the brakes and….you get the picture.
> 
> A Model-T Ford will always remain what it is.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> That's just the conservative way. Never fear though, they almost always lose out to progress in the end. Perhaps kicking and screaming, but they get there eventually.
> 
> 
> The positions of today's progressives are those of tomorrow's conservatives.
> 
> The positions of today's conservatives are those of tomorrow's comedy, ridicule and incredulity.
> 
> 
> Remember that it was only a couple of years ago that the Coalition members said we didn't need an NBN at all, and then that _"12Mbps was enough for any application"_. Now we have them promising an NBN with 23% 1000Mbps FTTP and of 25-50Mbps minimum for the rest.




You will just have to get over it, on 25Mbps, princess leigh and the dark night will kick your butt.
However Australia may save $25B, tough break but we have to move on.


----------



## Calliope

sptrawler said:


> You will just have to get over it, on 25Mbps, princess leigh and the dark night will kick your butt.
> However Australia may save $25B, tough break but we have to move on.



Myths will never get over it. How he ever championed a project that has never been subjected to a cost-benefit analysis shows he is away with the fairies, and certainly no business man. All he has is faith in Conroy.


----------



## medicowallet

Hey NBNMyths,

Has anyone done any analysis on the increased consumption vs increased exports driven by the NBN in cities where it has been rolled out.

I mean has Armidale seen a boom in economic development, or is it exporting it services to India?

The elephant in the room is the future billions of dollars going overseas with the increased consumption enabled by the NBN.

MW


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> You will just have to get over it, on 25Mbps, princess leigh and the dark night will kick your butt.
> However Australia may save $25B, tough break but we have to move on.






Calliope said:


> Myths will never get over it. How he ever championed a project that has never been subjected to a cost-benefit analysis shows he is away with the fairies, and certainly no business man. All he has is faith in Conroy.




I assume that's a reference to an online game? Sorry, I think I've only ever played one online game, and that was many years ago.

I'm more concerned that the image files that currently take 12-14 hours to upload to a client, will still take 6 hours on FTTN instead of 12 minutes on FTTP. But, I guess that's only 5-odd hours of lost productivity for them. Tough break.

And no, Australia won;t save $25bn. We may defer it for a few years, but sooner or later it will be spent, plus another $10 or $15bn thanks to inflation and scrapping of redundant equipment. Tough break.

Alas, even though my area has now been scheduled for the NBN, I think I'll be stuck on copper for another decade or so. C'est la vie.


I believe I've asked you before, Calliope, how one could do a valid CBA on an enabling tech like the NBN? How would it be possible to value uses for the network that have not yet been invented? Or do you think every possible use for broadband is already here? I guess that would be the case under So Cynical's frighteningly accurate description of the conservative rear view perspective.

Also interesting that the coalition have a policy for their NBN, also without a CBA. If the CBA hasn't been done, how can they have a policy? How do they know what the outcome will be?

Lucky you weren't around when the Australian Government were proposing to spend the same amount of money (per capita, inflation adjusted) rolling out the copper network. What a horrendous waste of money for a unnecessary new-fangled technology that could only ever be used for people to spread worthless gossip..... Maybe your grandpa was there for the occasion though...




The parallels with the NBN debate are astounding. Just replace "messengers" with "copper", and it could have been written today.


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> Hey NBNMyths,
> 
> Has anyone done any analysis on the increased consumption vs increased exports driven by the NBN in cities where it has been rolled out.
> 
> I mean has Armidale seen a boom in economic development, or is it exporting it services to India?
> 
> The elephant in the room is the future billions of dollars going overseas with the increased consumption enabled by the NBN.
> 
> MW




I doubt anyone has done such a study.

But are you advocating then that we artificially stymie technological progress on that hypothesis?

That'll work.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> I believe I've asked you before, Calliope, how one could do a valid CBA on an enabling tech like the NBN? How would it be possible to value uses for the network that have not yet been invented? Or do you think every possible use for broadband is already here? I guess that would be the case under So Cynical's frighteningly accurate description of the conservative rear view perspective.
> 
> Also interesting that the coalition have a policy for their NBN, also without a CBA. If the CBA hasn't been done, how can they have a policy? How do they know what the outcome will be?
> 
> Lucky you weren't around when the Australian Government were proposing to spend the same amount of money (per capita, inflation adjusted) rolling out the copper network. What a horrendous waste of money for a unnecessary new-fangled technology that could only ever be used for people to spread worthless gossip..... Maybe your grandpa was there for the occasion though...The parallels with the NBN debate are astounding. Just replace "messengers" with "copper", and it could have been written today.




I note the hysteria setting in. Like that odious spin doctor David McTernan, your ten minutes of fame is coming to an end.

_malus bonum ubi se simulat, tunc est pessimus_


----------



## NBNMyths

NBNMyths said:


> I believe I've asked you before, Calliope, how one could do a valid CBA on an enabling tech like the NBN? How would it be possible to value uses for the network that have not yet been invented? Or do you think every possible use for broadband is already here? I guess that would be the case under So Cynical's frighteningly accurate description of the conservative rear view perspective.
> 
> Also interesting that the coalition have a policy for their NBN, also without a CBA. If the CBA hasn't been done, how can they have a policy? How do they know what the outcome will be?




I suspected you would have no answer for the above, and would resort to your standard response in such situations, an ad-hom....



Calliope said:


> I note the hysteria setting in. Like that odious spin doctor David McTernan, your ten minutes of fame is coming to an end.
> 
> _malus bonum ubi se simulat, tunc est pessimus ("a bad man, when he pretends to be a good man, is the worst man of all")_





Tick.


----------



## Calliope

Your guide and mentor Stephen Conroy, with whom you share an aversion to cost/benefit analyses, will be history if Rudd ousts Gillard.  In any case he and Quigley and yourself will be irrelevant after the election.




> COMMUNICATIONS Minister Stephen Conroy will refuse to serve on the front bench if Kevin Rudd is successful in wresting the prime ministership from Julia Gillard.
> 
> *Senator Conroy acknowledged the government had failed to sell its message properly on a range of issues including the economy, education funding reform and the national broadband network*.




I think you must share the blame Myths. In any case _fecistis cultioribus_

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...owdown-next-week/story-fn59niix-1226668264371


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Your guide and mentor Stephen Conroy, with whom you share an aversion to cost/benefit analyses, will be history if Rudd ousts Gillard.




As opposed to having an aversion to debating the facts/policy, rather than personally attacking the person you disagree with? It's the sign of a very weak argument. Amusing though.


----------



## Calliope

'Aversion to debating facts''??? How do you debate facts? It sounds oxymoronic to me.:shake: Anyway, you are not for turning, so I will be happy to let the electors decide the Conroy/Turnbull issue... may the best facts and policies win. OK?


----------



## sptrawler

Was it the unions that put a stop to the nbn rollout, with regard asbestos?

The unions are now saying the copper has to have plastic bags to stop water ingress.

Rings of another blow the feet off moment for the unions and Labor, we can't have either

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-...rk-in-a-state-of-disrepair-say-unions/4774342


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> 'Aversion to debating facts''??? How do you debate facts? It sounds oxymoronic to me.:shake: Anyway, you are not for turning, so I will be happy to let the electors decide the Conroy/Turnbull issue... may the best facts and policies win. OK?




Yes, because the result of the September election will be decided on a single policy, the NBN.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Was it the unions that put a stop to the nbn rollout, with regard asbestos?
> 
> The unions are now saying the copper has to have plastic bags to stop water ingress.
> 
> Rings of another blow the feet off moment for the unions and Labor, we can't have either
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-...rk-in-a-state-of-disrepair-say-unions/4774342




NBN work hasn't stopped. Telstra asbestos remediation stopped for a time, but is underway again now I believe (I saw Theiss contractors replacing Telstra ducts in Richmond NSW yesterday).

All the unions asked for was for the Telstra workers to get proper asbestos handling training, which seems rather logical.

Telstra have long used plastic bags and other bits and pieces to try to keep water out. That's the big problem with copper. When water gets into the joints, it causes corrosion and signal degradation. That's why Telstra's fault rates go through the roof in wet weather.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> I assume that's a reference to an online game? Sorry, I think I've only ever played one online game, and that was many years ago.
> 
> I'm more concerned that the image files that currently take 12-14 hours to upload to a client, will still take 6 hours on FTTN instead of 12 minutes on FTTP. But, I guess that's only 5-odd hours of lost productivity for them. Tough break.
> 
> And no, Australia won;t save $25bn. We may defer it for a few years, but sooner or later it will be spent, plus another $10 or $15bn thanks to inflation and scrapping of redundant equipment. Tough break.
> 
> .




I must appoligise, I thought the coalition has said business will get fibre, only residential will still utilise copper?
Therefore to upload your image to your client shouldn't be any slower, under Labor or the coalition.

Also I thought they said if a person wished to have fibre to the home, they could pay for it to be installed from the node.

The cost to run fibre to the home has just gone up exponentionally, with the asbestos issue.
Wouldn't you think?


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> NBN work hasn't stopped. Telstra asbestos remediation stopped for a time, but is underway again now I believe (I saw Theiss contractors replacing Telstra ducts in Richmond NSW yesterday).
> 
> All the unions asked for was for the Telstra workers to get proper asbestos handling training, which seems rather logical.
> 
> Telstra have long used plastic bags and other bits and pieces to try to keep water out. That's the big problem with copper. When water gets into the joints, it causes corrosion and signal degradation. That's why Telstra's fault rates go through the roof in wet weather.




Yes I saw a heap of NBN workers the other day, you can see they are on a time not lengh based contract.

I don't disagree with your sentiment, just have been around long enough to know, it ain't going to happen. 
Well I should qualify that, not in my lifetime.

By the way, I know the issues with copper on low voltage systems, also know how usefull matchsticks are in pabx stepping relays.


----------



## DB008

*Copper good for 100 years, says Thodey*
http://delimiter.com.au/2013/06/21/copper-good-for-100-years-says-thodey/


*Unions raise doubts over Telstra's copper network; workers using plastic bags to waterproof cables*




> Unions have told the ABC that Telstra's copper network is in a state of disrepair, with workers at the coalface of the infrastructure using plastic bags to protect cables from water.
> 
> The telecommunications pits have been nicknamed 'bag-dad' by contractors because of the plastic bags, that are in theory supposed to keep the water out.
> 
> The copper network is a crucial element of the Opposition's alternative broadband plan.
> 
> But Shane Murphy, the assistant secretary of CEPU's New South Wales branch, says as far as he is concerned, there is no other option than to replace the ageing copper wires.
> 
> "Unless we do it, customers around western Sydney and across Australia will have poor internet and phone services for many many years ahead," he said.


----------



## sptrawler

DB008 said:


> *Copper good for 100 years, says Thodey*
> http://delimiter.com.au/2013/06/21/copper-good-for-100-years-says-thodey/
> 
> 
> *Unions raise doubts over Telstra's copper network; workers using plastic bags to waterproof cables*




Yes Danny IMO, the union is trying to backfill the hole they dug with the asbestos scare, putting the fibre roll out in doubt.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> I must appoligise, I thought the coalition has said business will get fibre, only residential will still utilise copper?
> Therefore to upload your image to your client shouldn't be any slower, under Labor or the coalition.
> 
> Also I thought they said if a person wished to have fibre to the home, they could pay for it to be installed from the node.
> 
> The cost to run fibre to the home has just gone up exponentionally, with the asbestos issue.
> Wouldn't you think?




They are saying business _centres_ will still get fibre, not businesses per se. Although they haven't defined a centre.

My business runs out of a residential property, and therefore won't get FTTP under the coalition. My only possible saviour will be if NBN Co renew the NSW FTTP rollout contract for 3+ years, since my suburb is scheduled to begin rollout in June 2015. I'm not holding my breath.

Turnbull has said that they would offer user-pays FTTP, but no details have been provided ie: 
Is it a flat rate, or based on individual circumstances;
Does the 'first' user have to cover the cost of the GPON module and related hardware?;
Does Telstra still pay to remediate their pit&pipe? (or, if not);
Does the first user have to cover the cost of pit&pipe remediation?;
Can users install their own FTTP upgrade?;
Will the usage costs be the same as existing NBN FTTP areas?;

Then Abbott said in parliament during the asbestos blowup that under their policy "the last 500m would not be disturbed". So how can they offer FTTP upgrades at all?

There's no reason why the asbestos issue should add to costs. Telstra are paying for it. They already knew it was there and budgeted for it in their remediation costings, which they have estimated at $2bn. They've already been remediating it for 20 years as required, and for 3 years of the NBN rollout. The only issue that came to bite them was a few untrained contractors, which they have now addressed (or claim to have).


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> They are saying business _centres_ will still get fibre, not businesses per se. Although they haven't defined a centre.
> 
> My business runs out of a residential property, and therefore won't get FTTP under the coalition. My only possible saviour will be if NBN Co renew the NSW FTTP rollout contract for 3+ years, since my suburb is scheduled to begin rollout in June 2015. I'm not holding my breath.
> 
> Turnbull has said that they would offer user-pays FTTP, but no details have been provided ie:
> Is it a flat rate, or based on individual circumstances;
> Does the 'first' user have to cover the cost of the GPON module and related hardware?;
> Does Telstra still pay to remediate their pit&pipe? (or, if not);
> Does the first user have to cover the cost of pit&pipe remediation?;
> Can users install their own FTTP upgrade?;
> Will the usage costs be the same as existing NBN FTTP areas?;
> 
> Then Abbott said in parliament during the asbestos blowup that under their policy "the last 500m would not be disturbed". So how can they offer FTTP upgrades at all?
> 
> There's no reason why the asbestos issue should add to costs. Telstra are paying for it. They already knew it was there and budgeted for it in their remediation costings, which they have estimated at $2bn. They've already been remediating it for 20 years as required, and for 3 years of the NBN rollout. The only issue that came to bite them was a few untrained contractors, which they have now addressed (or claim to have).




As to who covers the cost of the GPON, who knows?
I do know I built a house on a rural block 30 years ago and had to contribute a deposit to the rural supply scheme.
Funny enough, it was only about 6 months ago I recieved a cheque in the mail, which was my refund.lol

I will stick my neck out and say you will have a better chance of fibre to the home, with the fibre to the node model.
The fibre to the home model will blow out beyond belief, IMO, and will end up with the whole scheme abandoned.
Like I say, only my opinion, but fibre to the node is a chewable sized project.


----------



## Julia

NBNMyths said:


> Yes, because the result of the September election will be decided on a single policy, the NBN.



I disagree.  It's but one of several fronts on which the government will almost certainly lose.  Control of our borders is a main issue with much of the population, plus undue influence of unions, the carbon tax and probably even Gonski.


----------



## NBNMyths

Julia said:


> I disagree.  It's but one of several fronts on which the government will almost certainly lose.  Control of our borders is a main issue with much of the population, plus undue influence of unions, the carbon tax and probably even Gonski.




Perhaps my sarcasm was too subtle. Of course the result will be based on numerous factors.


----------



## DB008

I don't believe that copper will be good for another 100 years.
It's only been here some 50 (or 60) or so years and it's already stuffed.


----------



## sptrawler

DB008 said:


> I don't believe that copper will be good for another 100 years.
> It's only been here some 50 (or 60) or so years and it's already stuffed.




What!! your phone isn't working.lol


----------



## DB008

sptrawler said:


> What!! your phone isn't working.lol




LOL!


----------



## Smurf1976

Yes, the copper can be made to keep working for another 100 years. No problems there.

But it's a bit like that 100 year old axe that's had 4 new heads and 5 new handles over its' lifetime.


----------



## So_Cynical

I get the Train to and from work, Sydney metro trains are a mix of the very old and the very new, the 35 year old trains (rattlers i call em) are cold/hot, have little ventilation, no heating A/C, crappy vinyl seats and make a lot of noise...the new Waratah trains are the complete opposite.

Do both trains get me where i need to go? Yes

Is the price to ride both trains the same? Yes

What train do i prefer (what's the better train)? The Waratah...imagine the out cry if the government decided to simply upgrade the old crappy trains with fixed up old crappy trains.


----------



## sydboy007

So_Cynical said:


> What train do i prefer (what's the better train)? The Waratah...imagine the out cry if the government decided to simply upgrade the old crappy trains with fixed up old crappy trains.




Exactly!  There is no cost to end users with this upgrade.

NBN plans are the same or cheaper than currently ADSL offerings.

Add in the extra stability and knowing the speed you will get and it seems to be a no brainer to me.

Oh, and I love the fact that people can easily move to reliable VOIP and shaft Telstra out of its 90%+ profit margins on calls.


----------



## drsmith

With regards to the physical state of Telstra's copper network, has it been audited in any meaningful form, by anyone ?

On another note, I saw on the ABC a blue (fibre optic ?) cable being laid into a pit with a lot of water in it. This was during a news segment on the state of Telstra's copper network.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> With regards to the physical state of Telstra's copper network, has it been audited in any meaningful form, by anyone ?
> 
> On another note, I saw on the ABC a blue (fibre optic ?) cable being laid into a pit with a lot of water in it. This was during a news segment on the state of Telstra's copper network.




Not that I know of. There is a Telstra worker who documents some of it on his travels:
http://www.canofworms.org/coppermine/

No problem laying fibre in water. They do try to keep the joins dry though to prevent signal loss.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Not that I know of. There is a Telstra worker who documents some of it on his travels:
> http://www.canofworms.org/coppermine/
> 
> No problem laying fibre in water. They do try to keep the joins dry though to prevent signal loss.




No problem laying insulated copper in water. They do try to keep the joints dry though to prevent signal loss.


----------



## medicowallet

So_Cynical said:


> What train do i prefer (what's the better train)? The Waratah...imagine the out cry if the government decided to simply upgrade the old crappy trains with fixed up old crappy trains.




And those trains were paid for by all people, including those who would never use them.

And then the $$ for those trains stopped spending on vital infrastructure elsewhere.

And all those trains ended at the Chinese Mardi Gras .... sure a sugar hit for a while, but the profits from the fabled mardi Gras goes overseas.

In this scenario, let the Capital city people use their trains (which is already better than the zero public transport we get here in my rural area) as I would prefer to keep local jobs here, and use that vital infrastructure. 

MW


----------



## So_Cynical

medicowallet said:


> And those trains were paid for by all people, including those who would never use them.




I think we can say with some confidence that the average 35 year old train has paid for its self about a dozen times over, i pay $150 a month to travel on those pieces of ****.


----------



## Aussiejeff

So_Cynical said:


> I think we can say with some confidence that the average 35 year old train has paid for its self about a dozen times over, *i pay $150 a month to travel on those pieces of *****.




Or, you could go and live in Mumbai for 12 months and catch the daily rattlers there, to see whether the standard of living we enjoy _here_ with regard to train travel is actually satisfactory in comparison?


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> With regards to the physical state of Telstra's copper network, has it been audited in any meaningful form, by anyone ?
> 
> On another note, I saw on the ABC a blue (fibre optic ?) cable being laid into a pit with a lot of water in it. This was during a news segment on the state of Telstra's copper network.




I am not aware of any audit being done.  I would say Telstra isn't interested in doing one because it would then have to start fixing up any issues it found - a costly exercise.

But without an audit of the copper network, how can MT say that his FTTN is cheaper and going to be faster to install?

There is no estimated maximum cable length in the 2016 rollout to provide 25Mbs speeds - so you can't estimate how many nodes will be required.

The same goes for he 2019 rollout to a minimum of 50Mbs.

To be honest, if the Liberals are in later this year, I'd prefer them to be honest and say they don't see the point of ubiquitous fast broadband, and just can the whole rollout and leave it till the public pushes hard enough that this is a policy are they want action taken on.

About the only area I can see FTTN being worthwhile may be some of the larger towns getting fixed wireless that may be better served by using FTTN.  I only say this because the Govt has committed to keeping the copper working for phone services so it _might _be cheaper to use FTTN over fixed wireless.


----------



## DB008

*Parliament Arguing About Copper Wires In 1910 Makes For Some Amazing Reading*

http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2013/06/parliament-arguing-about-copper-wires-in-1910-makes-for-some-amazing-reading/


----------



## So_Cynical

Aussiejeff said:


> Or, you could go and live in Mumbai for 12 months and catch the daily rattlers there, to see whether the standard of living we enjoy _here_ with regard to train travel is actually satisfactory in comparison?




Tell you what, i was in Manila (The Philippines) 3 weeks ago and travelled on all 3 of the Metro lines there (3 different operators) and will make the following points.

ALL the trains i travelled in were less then 15 years old, ALL were air conditioned and ALL ran on time, ok there was a little over crowding in the afternoon peak but it was air conditioned over crowding and my ticket only cost me 40c


So on a like for like basis the Sydney Metro train service is expensive and second rate to a third world country.

-----------------

Oh and on Topic, in certain parts of Manila (Philippines third world country) i can get a fibre connection to my home,  200Mbps


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> *Parliament Arguing About Copper Wires In 1910 Makes For Some Amazing Reading*
> 
> http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2013/06/parliament-arguing-about-copper-wires-in-1910-makes-for-some-amazing-reading/





Isn't the similarity to the debate today absolutely amazing?



> *James Mathews MP:*
> Some time ago I met a gentleman who came here from the Old Country, who ridiculed the expensive practice of using copper wire where iron wire would do...
> 
> *Thomas Brown MP*
> Copper is used for greater efficiency.
> 
> *James Mathews MP:*
> The practical men in the Department, not the theorists, think that nothing is gained by using copper wire for short lines. Some of the iron wire lines have been in use for thirty years, and give as good results now as copper wire lines. Last year an iron wire line, put up when I was a boy, to connect the Age office with Mr. David Syme’s house on the Yarra, at Hawthorn, was still giving satisfactory results, although for a good part of its length it ran parallel with the railway line, and was exposed to the smoke of locomotives, which was prejudicial to its life.





Does this look more familiar?



> *Malcolm Turnbull MP:*
> Some time ago I met a gentleman who came here from the Old Country, who ridiculed the expensive practice of using *optical fibre* where *copper wire* would do...
> 
> *Sen Stephen Conroy*
> *optical fibre* is used for greater efficiency.
> 
> *Malcolm Turnbull MP:*
> The practical men in the Department, not the theorists, think that nothing is gained by using *optical fibre* for short lines. Some of the *copper wire* lines have been in use for thirty years, and give as good results now as *optical fibre* lines. Last year an *copper wire* line, put up when I was a boy, to connect the Age office with Mr. David Syme’s house on the Yarra, at Hawthorn, was still giving satisfactory results, although for a good part of its length it ran parallel with the railway line, and was exposed to the smoke of locomotives, which was prejudicial to its life.





At least back in 1910, common sense ruled over backward thinking. I suspect that when my great-grand children look back on the hansards and newspapers of 2013, the Abbott brigade will look rather stupid.


----------



## Aussiejeff

NBNMyths said:


> I suspect that when my great-grand children look back on the hansards and newspapers of 2013, *the Abbott brigade will look rather stupid*.




Gee. I wonder how the Gillard rabble will look in comparison?

So, how's that NBN rollout going Myths? On time, on target?


----------



## NBNMyths

Aussiejeff said:


> Gee. I wonder how the Gillard rabble will look in comparison?
> 
> So, how's that NBN rollout going Myths? On time, on target?




Pretty well, I would think. History probably won't remember all the petty squabbling, because it usually doesn't.

However, it will remember the 23,000 new school buildings, the renewable energy generation, the Optical Fibre NBN (even if incomplete), the 12% superannuation and DisabilityCare.


The NBN's not going too badly. It's on budget and in most areas is now running on target (admittedly, the revised-down targets of earlier this year rather than the originals). Takeup is way ahead of forecasts, and ARPU is also ahead of forecasts. They've just activated the 25Mbps option on the wireless service, which is double the promised speed and was activated ahead of schedule.

Of course, no-one would be happier than myself if the fibre rollout were going faster, but such is the way with essentially every major infrastructure project, be it public or private. If the Coalition can achieve a faster rollout of the real NBN, then all the better. But they won't.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> However, it will remember the 23,000 new school buildings, the renewable energy generation, the Optical Fibre NBN (even if incomplete), the 12% superannuation and DisabilityCare.



Don't forget the pink batts and a profitable illegal people smuggling business model through SE Asia.

It's fine to have vision, but not at any cost.

With regard to the physical state of Telstra's copper network, it's clear from the above posts that no one knows it's actual state. That could mean that a Liberal government could end up laying more fibre than it's current plan suggests, but at the same time it's not confirmation that the copper should be discarded as a whole based on it's physical state.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> With regard to the physical state of Telstra's copper network, it's clear from the above posts that no one knows it's actual state. That could mean that a Liberal government could end up laying more fibre than it's current plan suggests, but at the same time it's not confirmation that the copper should be discarded as a whole based on it's physical state.




Its physical state is but one parameter. Even in a good state, the capability of copper pairs is limited. Last time I saw data, 44% of NBN fibre connections so far had chosen the 100/40Mbps speed and a further 23% had chosen 50/20Mbps. That's 67% of users that have chosen a speed tier that's essentially not possible over copper pairs. Even brand-new copper. And it's only 2013! What will the demand curve look like in a decade?


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Its physical state is but one parameter. Even in a good state, the capability of copper pairs is limited. Last time I saw data, 44% of NBN fibre connections so far had chosen the 100/40Mbps speed and a further 23% had chosen 50/20Mbps. That's 67% of users that have chosen a speed tier that's essentially not possible over copper pairs. Even brand-new copper. And it's only 2013! What will the demand curve look like in a decade?




People who want it can have it. 
If you want fibre to your house Myths, you can have it, so can Sydboy and So Cynical. You will have to pay from the node, that's the only difference.

That shouldn't worry you. Why does everything have to be about getting everything subsidised?

When I chose to build a house on a rural block, I had to pay extra to get the power connected, even though it ran across the front of the block. I accepted that as it was my choice to build there.

Why, if you have the same telecommunication cable to your house as I do, should I subsidise your upgrade?
When I'm quite happy with my existing connection?

When my connection is no longer serviceable, or obsolete, I will get it upgraded. The same as I have done with my T.V, computer, fridge, car and just about everything else.

It smacks of the same flawed logic, that was applied when those who paid to insulate their houses, then had to subsidise everyone else who got it for free.
How does that bring about a better society, when everyone sits back with the expectation someone else will pay for everything? How does that encourage endevour and self improvement?
Didn't mean it to be a sermon


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> People who want it can have it.
> If you want fibre to your house Myths, you can have it, so can Sydboy and So Cynical. You will have to pay from the node, that's the only difference.
> 
> That shouldn't worry you. Why does everything have to be about getting everything subsidised?
> 
> When I chose to build a house on a rural block, I had to pay extra to get the power connected, even though it ran across the front of the block. I accepted that as it was my choice to build there.
> 
> Why, if you have the same telecommunication cable to your house as I do, should I subsidise your upgrade?
> When I'm quite happy with my existing connection?
> 
> When my connection is no longer serviceable, or obsolete, I will get it upgraded. The same as I have done with my T.V, computer, fridge, car and just about everything else.
> 
> It smacks of the same flawed logic, that was applied when those who paid to insulate their houses, then had to subsidise everyone else who got it for free.
> How does that bring about a better society, when everyone sits back with the expectation someone else will pay for everything? How does that encourage endevour and self improvement?
> Didn't mean it to be a sermon




You could just as easily make the same argument about FTTN, or even ADSL.

Anyone can get an FTTP connection to their house right now, if they are willing to pay the cost of it.


There are many people who don't even want ADSL, let alone VDSL2 via FTTN.

So why should Grandma who only wants voice have paid for Telstra to install ADSL equipment a decade ago through her overpriced line rental charges?

Why should the Coalition fund an FTTN rollout to everyone?

How about we do nothing at all, and just let people pay up-front for the upgrades they want.

.....

It is your logic that is flawed. The NBN rollout is funded from the monthly fees of those who connect. People who choose a higher speed plan pay more for that privilege. Hence, they do "pay for it themselves", just monthly rather than up-front. On the FTTP NBN, people who connect at 100Mbps pay 50% more per month than those who connect at 25Mbps. It's actually the 50/100/250/500/1000Mbps plans that subsidise the 12/25Mbps plans, because they earn so much more monthly revenue.

Speed for speed, the monthly fees for FTTN won't be any less than the monthly fees for FTTP. Because while the capex will be less, the revenue will also be less because the revenue-generating high end plans will not exist for most people. Yes, they could pay $3,000 for an upgrade, but most won't. There are *a lot* of people who would be more than happy to pay an extra $20/month for 100Mbps, but they would not (or could not) pay $3k up-front for that privilege. 

Worse, under the "user pays" FTTP upgrade proposed by the Coalition, the high end users will pay twice. Not only are they asked for an up-front ~$3k fee for fibre, but they would also pay the original FTTP monthly fee which was set at that level to fund the FTTP rollout.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Why should the Coalition fund an FTTN rollout to everyone?
> 
> How about we do nothing at all, and just let people pay up-front for the upgrades they want.




Nobody is saying do nothing, some are saying take a sensible step, don't jump in the deep end. Others have a vested interest, if all self interested groups are pandered to, chaos rules.

.....


NBNMyths said:


> It is your logic that is flawed. The NBN rollout is funded from the monthly fees of those who connect. People who choose a higher speed plan pay more for that privilege. Hence, they do "pay for it themselves", just monthly rather than up-front. On the FTTP NBN, people who connect at 100Mbps pay 50% more per month than those who connect at 25Mbps. It's actually the 50/100/250/500/1000Mbps plans that subsidise the 12/25Mbps plans, because they earn so much more monthly revenue.
> 
> Speed for speed, the monthly fees for FTTN won't be any less than the monthly fees for FTTP. Because while the capex will be less, the revenue will also be less because the revenue-generating high end plans will not exist for most people. Yes, they could pay $3,000 for an upgrade, but most won't. There are *a lot* of people who would be more than happy to pay an extra $20/month for 100Mbps, but they would not (or could not) pay $3k up-front for that privilege.
> 
> Worse, under the "user pays" FTTP upgrade proposed by the Coalition, the high end users will pay twice. Not only are they asked for an up-front ~$3k fee for fibre, but they would also pay the original FTTP monthly fee which was set at that level to fund the FTTP rollout.




Like the example I gave with the insulation, those people paid twice, I didn't hear outrage.

The blowout in cost of fttp will IMO, be enormous and will result in a botched system that costs heaps more than estimated and will be aborted. That will affect everyone one way or another, some will have others will have nothing. But everyone will pay extra for the stuff up.IMO

To bring in an example. In W.A the Government was going to retro fit an old 240MW Power Station, well this week they have pulled the pin, overtime, overbudget, not working.

Myths I have great respect for your knowledge, but I think fibre to the node IMO is the only model that will get up universally.
Only my opinion.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> but at the same time it's not confirmation that the copper should be discarded as a whole based on it's physical state.




Current state of the copper network is pretty much a non issue..its old technology that was superseded 20 years ago that's why it has to go...it served the nation well since the 20's but its time is over.



sptrawler said:


> People who want it can have it.
> If you want fibre to your house Myths, you can have it, so can Sydboy and So Cynical. You will have to pay from the node, that's the only difference.




Great so basically 2 delivery networks and one backbone, a fibre backbone, wonder why they have chosen fibre for the back bone? wonder why Telstra has been laying Fibre back bones for 20 years???

In a decade we will end up with streets where half the households have paid for Fibre and half the houses are on copper with more leaving copper every year while the nodes will continue needing power and maintenance...its crazy.


----------



## Smurf1976

sptrawler said:


> To bring in an example. In W.A the Government was going to retro fit an old 240MW Power Station, well this week they have pulled the pin, overtime, overbudget, not working.



I'm pretty sure that was one of those "public - private" things wasn't it?

The ones where the private sector takes all the profits and the taxpayer carries all the risks as seen in this example. The NBN is very similar in a broad sense to that concept - taxpayers are taking the risks but the profits are largely privatised.


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> Current state of the copper network is pretty much a non issue..its old technology that was superseded 20 years ago that's why it has to go...it served the nation well since the 20's but its time is over.
> 
> 
> 
> Great so basically 2 delivery networks and one backbone, a fibre backbone, wonder why they have chosen fibre for the back bone? wonder why Telstra has been laying Fibre back bones for 20 years???
> 
> In a decade we will end up with streets where half the households have paid for Fibre and half the houses are on copper with more leaving copper every year while the nodes will continue needing power and maintenance...its crazy.




So Cynical, I don't mind debating with Myths he has some knowledge of the issue.

But for you to say "great 2 delivery networks and one backbone".  
I don't hear you standing up for people who only have single phase on their house, yet others have three phase.

Then again you could really jump up and down for people who live on rural properties and only recieve 500v two phase. 

Yet they are all on the same backbone, why don't they all have 440v three phase? 
I'll tell you why, because it doesn't make sense.
Why not? because the requirement doesn't justify the cost.

But trust me every farmer would love three phase power supplied by the taxpayer.

In answer to your last comment about half the street on fibre half on copper.

You already have half the households in the street on single phase and half on three phase,.
Why because half only need single phase and the other half want three phase.

It would be as dumb as $hit to give everyone three phase when they don't require it. 
But that reasononing seems to be lost on the self serving, who want it, because they can.


----------



## sptrawler

Smurf1976 said:


> I'm pretty sure that was one of those "public - private" things wasn't it?
> 
> The ones where the private sector takes all the profits and the taxpayer carries all the risks as seen in this example. The NBN is very similar in a broad sense to that concept - taxpayers are taking the risks but the profits are largely privatised.




Yes, absolute disaster, initial concept to burn biofuel(carbon tax). 
60 year old mild steel boilers with no reheater, what were they thinking?


----------



## So_Cynical

sptrawler said:


> So Cynical, I don't mind debating with Myths he has some knowledge of the issue.
> 
> But for you to say "great 2 delivery networks and one backbone".
> I don't hear you standing up for people who only have single phase on their house, yet others have three phase.
> 
> Then again you could really jump up and down for people who live on rural properties and only recieve 500v two phase.
> 
> Yet they are all on the same backbone, why don't they all have 440v three phase?
> I'll tell you why, because it doesn't make sense.
> Why not? because the requirement doesn't justify the cost.




Who the hell wants 3 phase? seriously what the **** are you talking about? 

Drinking?

I cant be bothered goggling but does 3 phase require its own street wiring like copper/fibre do?

Answered my own question, 3 phase comes from the pole so does not require dedicated street wiring unlike copper/fibre.


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> Who the hell wants 3 phase? seriously what the **** are you talking about?
> 
> Drinking?
> 
> I cant be bothered goggling but does 3 phase require its own street wiring like copper/fibre do?
> 
> Answered my own question, 3 phase comes from the pole so does not require dedicated street wiring unlike copper/fibre.




Lots of people want three phase, farmers, like I said have had to buy expensive two phase motors for years. 
But no one has jumped up and down about their disadvantage, at not having state of the art technology.lol
The rest of Australia has had 3 phase for 100years, yet they have had to manage.

Plenty of people have sheds where they want three phase machinery, it costs less.

Does 3 phase require street wiring? yes. 
Is it available? yes
Do you have to pay extra to get it connected? yes

Does it down load movies? no
Does it give access to pr0n? no
Does it make things work more efficiently? yes


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> Nobody is saying do nothing, some are saying take a sensible step, don't jump in the deep end. Others have a vested interest, if all self interested groups are pandered to, chaos rules.
> 
> .....
> 
> The blowout in cost of fttp will IMO, be enormous and will result in a botched system that costs heaps more than estimated and will be aborted. That will affect everyone one way or another, some will have others will have nothing. But everyone will pay extra for the stuff up.IMO.




So you think the Liberal FTTN will come in on time and on budget?

Just for fun, when do you think the first FTTN node will go live?

Do you believe MT when he say EVERYONE will have a minimum of 25 Mbs download speeds by Dec 31 2016? - That would require probably 2/3 of the estimate 50-60 thousand nodes to have been installed - Quite an engineering feat.  MT has not advised what the maximum cable length is for his 2 stage rollout so it's hard to know exactly what the cost will end up being.


----------



## Calliope

NBN Co will now probably fall in a heap, having lost their great project manager...Stephen Conroy.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> NBN Co will now probably fall in a heap, having lost their great project manager...Stephen Conroy.




Go Kev!


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Go Kev!



misogynist.


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> So you think the Liberal FTTN will come in on time and on budget?
> 
> Just for fun, when do you think the first FTTN node will go live?
> 
> Do you believe MT when he say EVERYONE will have a minimum of 25 Mbs download speeds by Dec 31 2016? - That would require probably 2/3 of the estimate 50-60 thousand nodes to have been installed - Quite an engineering feat.  MT has not advised what the maximum cable length is for his 2 stage rollout so it's hard to know exactly what the cost will end up being.




Very few, if any major projects come in on time or on budget.
I doubt very much that the FTTN will be fully rolled out. Possibly in major towns, but I would think it will be doubtfull small country towns will be done in the foreseeable future.

However FTTN would be a lot easier to deliver than FTTP and cost containment wouldn't be easier to manage. There would be minimal interaction with the public, which has to be a good thing.
IMO the FTTN would be an ongoing roll out, with fairly predictable timeframes and costs (what they will be I wouldn't know). 
However fitting a cubicle in the street and terminating the main feeder cable and existing outgoing pairs, is a lot easier than also replacing the outgoing pairs to the premise.
So my honest opinion is, the chances of a universal upgrade is more probable with FTTN. 
If the FTTP had continued, we would be both dead and gone before it would have been finished.
Like I said only my opinion.


----------



## drsmith

NBN Co's selective sign up incentives,



> NBN Co has paid out just over $110,000 in credits to Australia’s second biggest ISP iiNet to encourage it to sign new customers onto the National Broadband Network.
> 
> iiNet has signed on around 5500 new NBN fibre customers since January when NBN Co launched its migration incentive ”” a $108 payment to ISPs, valid to June 30 this year, to encourage them to move customers off their own infrastructure and onto the NBN.
> 
> NBN Co recommended the payment be passed on to consumers. iiNet offered its customers a $100 credit and free BoB Lite modem.
> 
> Of the 5500 new sign-ups made by iiNet since January, only 1020 customers were eligible for the incentive.
> 
> The payment is applicable to customers in pre-determined fibre-serving areas (FSAs) and wireless-service areas (WSAs), as well as other areas nominated by NBN Co.
> 
> Eligible FSAs include Coffs Harbour, Crace, South Morang, Mernda, Toowoomba, Townsville and Gulliver.
> 
> Applicable WSAs include Ballarat, Huonville-Ranelagh, Tamworth and Toowoomba.




http://www.itnews.com.au/News/348101,nbn-co-paid-iinet-110k-for-new-customers.aspx

On another issue (past discussed in this thread),



> iiNet chief executive Michael Malone said Senator Conroy’s departure represented an opportunity for Labor to change small but vitally important aspects of the national broadband network.
> 
> He said adopting the Coalition’s favoured approach for bringing broadband to apartments, which installs fibre to the basement instead of every single unit, would save a large amount of time and money.
> 
> “This is something [many people support] but NBN Co was given a directive not to from the government,” he said. “The positive out of [Prime Minister Kevin] Rudd’s speech last night is he said he’d reach out to business, although there’ll be some scepticism about that from the community.
> 
> “I think there was a complete lack of consultation ... and so it all became a bit of a debacle.”




http://www.afr.com/p/technology/telco_chiefs_call_for_nbn_changes_tn6jqq20eE7CkEEnY6Dd7M


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> _However FTTN would be a lot easier to deliver than FTTP and cost containment wouldn't be easier to manage. _




How? No audit has been done on the copper network, no determination of maximum cable lengths.  Replacing faulty copper will be a major cause of cost blow out and as yet I've not been able to find anything that the Libs have published that shows if they have included any form of copper remediation in their costings.



sptrawler said:


> _However fitting a cubicle in the street and terminating the main feeder cable and existing outgoing pairs, is a lot easier than also replacing the outgoing pairs to the premise._




Major issue will be there is no updated records for how the main cable pair to the pillar connects from the pillar to the house.  I can see extended outages due to this issue as all services will be off the air while the main cable is cut over to the node and then the techs have to try and sort through 100 (maybe more) pairs to house and connect them to the right main cable pair.

I see the FTTN entrenching Telstra's dominance of the network.  I'll be surprised if a node can even be installed before a new contract with Telstra has been agreed, passed by the ACCC, voted on by shareholders, then signed.

It might be sometime in 2015 before much happens, and Telstra knows they have MT by the cajones and that every month without a deal just makes it more likely they'll get what they want.


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> How? No audit has been done on the copper network, no determination of maximum cable lengths.  Replacing faulty copper will be a major cause of cost blow out and as yet I've not been able to find anything that the Libs have published that shows if they have included any form of copper remediation in their costings..



Currently the copper network works, therefore the parameters built into the outlet ports at the node would conform to the current requirements. That is easy. 




sydboy007 said:


> Major issue will be there is no updated records for how the main cable pair to the pillar connects from the pillar to the house.  I can see extended outages due to this issue as all services will be off the air while the main cable is cut over to the node and then the techs have to try and sort through 100 (maybe more) pairs to house and connect them to the right main cable pair.




The cable to the house, isn't a two wire cable it is a six or seven wire cable, only two are used.
You don't need records to know which wires to use, you just bell them out.
At the same time you can test the resistance, if it is high you could use another conductor. Sorry if your from an electrical background, not being patronising.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> Currently the copper network works, therefore the parameters built into the outlet ports at the node would conform to the current requirements. That is easy.




VDSL and vectoring is a whole different beast to ADSL2+.  Far less forgiving of line issues, or you wont get the speeds being forecast / promised.



sptrawler said:


> The cable to the house, isn't a two wire cable it is a six or seven wire cable, only two are used.
> You don't need records to know which wires to use, you just bell them out.
> At the same time you can test the resistance, if it is high you could use another conductor. Sorry if your from an electrical background, not being patronising.




I support ULLs at work - the same copper pair that will be used for FTTN.  Telstra seems to have mass disruptions over half the country.  Currently taking 2 - 3 weeks in some areas to get a tech to work on a fault.  Talk to our field techs or people in the area - no floods / bush fires or natural disasters.  One has to wonder what is going on.  Oh and we're not talking about remote places.  We've had suburbs of Melbourne and Sydney in this situation.

one of the bosses lives over in Manly.  He's lucky to get 3.5Mbs.  We fault his line to Telstra on a monthly basis.  So far they've been unwilling / unable to fix the issue.  he needs a new copper pair, but seems none is available.  I would argue that a lot of houses don't have an alternative working pair.

As for just belling out the lines, no idea how many hours of work that's going to be, but it just adds to the down time for the home user - no phone or internet.

at least with the current NBN there's little to no down time on changing over.


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> one of the bosses lives over in Manly.  He's lucky to get 3.5Mbs.  We fault his line to Telstra on a monthly basis.  So far they've been unwilling / unable to fix the issue.  he needs a new copper pair, but seems none is available.  I would argue that a lot of houses don't have an alternative working pair.
> .




That would be a perfect example of where a fibre cable would be installed, as the copper sounds unservicable.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> That would be a perfect example of where a fibre cable would be installed, as the copper sounds unservicable.




What is the process for this to occur with the Liberal FTTN?  So far i can't see any details for how the copper replacement will work in practice.  I think you'll agree with my cynicism that what the donkey says and what the donkey does in politics is quite often very different.  Black and white policy document would be a nice clarification to this issue.

Are nodes installed, then copper tested and either replaced with another pair or fiber?

How long does the testing process take?  It will cause an outage for every service tested.  Will there be a special process for someone with a medical priority line?  Hate to think what could happen if someone's phone is off the air for 30 minutes and they needed to call an ambulance.  What happens if they take a large number of services off line to do the testing in bulk so as to make the overall process faster??

What happens if the majority of copper for a node needs to be replaced?  Would it have been more sensible to have then done GPON from the exchange rather than running an active node that only deals with fiber?

Since no tender for nodes has gone out, we don't even know how many fiber connections a node could support.  I can see the situation occurring where a lot of copper is replaced, and some poor sod who'd like fiber style speeds can't get it because there's no free ports at the node.

I still don't understand why people are so against the Labor NBN when prices of plans are the same as current ADSL, and most people are getting around a doubling (based on average ADSL speeds of around 5-6Mbs) for the same price.  Throw in the fact everyone can now get naked internet access and kill off the land line rental if they choose (remember anyone outside a major town or capital city is forced by Telstra to have an active phone service), and I'd expect a lot of people to be saving money.

The added benefit of the current NBN is that those going on the top 2 to 3 tiers - ie the business / first class passengers - are subsidising the low speed users, which seems fair since they are gaining the biggest benefits in terms of speed increase.

In every area the NBN is available the high tier speeds are the most popular plans, so it does seem to indicate there's a desire to have the bandwidth available so that everyone in the household can do their interweby stuff at reasonably fast speeds all at the same time.  You don't have to need applications that require 100Mbs speeds, not when 3 or 4 people could all be doing their own thing requiring _just _20 Mbs each.

I have that issue in my house where if my 2 house mates are streaming their thai tv shows at the same time then web browsing gets quite slow.  If I could get the NBN now I'd be happy to try a 25Mbs plan for an extra $5 and if still find things a bit slow pay $15 a month extra for a 50Mbs plan.

So I might get option the 25Mbs option from the Liberals by Dec 31 2016, and might get the 50Mbs option by Dec 31 2019, but considering that in the last 6 years I've gone from 512 Kbs to 1.5mbs to around 12Mbs (lower today with all the rain) I can see that kind of growth in speed continuing.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> What is the process for this to occur with the Liberal FTTN?  So far i can't see any details for how the copper replacement will work in practice.  I think you'll agree with my cynicism that what the donkey says and what the donkey does in politics is quite often very different.  Black and white policy document would be a nice clarification to this issue.
> 
> Are nodes installed, then copper tested and either replaced with another pair or fiber?
> 
> How long does the testing process take?  It will cause an outage for every service tested.  Will there be a special process for someone with a medical priority line?  Hate to think what could happen if someone's phone is off the air for 30 minutes and they needed to call an ambulance.  What happens if they take a large number of services off line to do the testing in bulk so as to make the overall process faster??
> 
> What happens if the majority of copper for a node needs to be replaced?  Would it have been more sensible to have then done GPON from the exchange rather than running an active node that only deals with fiber?
> 
> Since no tender for nodes has gone out, we don't even know how many fiber connections a node could support.  I can see the situation occurring where a lot of copper is replaced, and some poor sod who'd like fiber style speeds can't get it because there's no free ports at the node.



Have you put these questions to the Coalition ?


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Have you put these questions to the Coalition ?




Considering I've yet to get a response to an email I sent with questions about the Liberal policy just after it was launched, it seems to me they are unable / unwilling to answer the hard questions about their policy.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Considering I've yet to get a response to an email I sent with questions about the Liberal policy just after it was launched, it seems to me they are unable / unwilling to answer the hard questions about their policy.



Questions that delve into the detail like the above I would present formally by letter.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Questions that delve into the detail like the above I would present formally by letter.




UM, I seem to remember our putative Leader-in-waiting told me that Malcolm practically invented the interweb in Australia.

If he's going to have a nice green Contact Malcolm icon on his web page, then by rights he should take an email listing various technical questions about his policy as seriously as a letter in the post.

If you're right, and a letter would be more likely to get a response for a Coalition member, well that in itself speaks volumes about just how far behind they are.

Personally, I don't think there's much detail behind the glossy broad strokes of the aspirational parts of their document - I can't really bring myself to call it a policy as so far they have no details on exactly how those aspirations will be achieved ie the actual policy process.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> UM, I seem to remember our putative Leader-in-waiting told me that Malcolm practically invented the interweb in Australia.
> 
> If he's going to have a nice green Contact Malcolm icon on his web page, then by rights he should take an email listing various technical questions about his policy as seriously as a letter in the post.
> 
> If you're right, and a letter would be more likely to get a response for a Coalition member, well that in itself speaks volumes about just how far behind they are.
> 
> Personally, I don't think there's much detail behind the glossy broad strokes of the aspirational parts of their document - I can't really bring myself to call it a policy as so far they have no details on exactly how those aspirations will be achieved ie the actual policy process.



Formality is the means by which you get past most organisation's crap filter.

Beyond that, it's just a question as to how seriously you actually want substantial answers to the points you raise.


----------



## DB008

sydboy007 said:


> UM, I seem to remember our putative Leader-in-waiting told me that Malcolm practically invented the interweb in Australia.




Well, idiotic statement like this don't help the Libs.... 

*Tony Abbott: Malcolm Turnbull Invented The Internet In Australia*



> “We have a strong and credible broadband policy because the man who has devised it, the man who will implement it virtually invented the Internet in this country. Thank you so much, Malcolm Turnbull.”




http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2013/06/tony-abbott-malcolm-turnbull-invented-the-internet-in-australia/


----------



## Smurf1976

sydboy007 said:


> If you're right, and a letter would be more likely to get a response for a Coalition member, well that in itself speaks volumes about just how far behind they are.



I've dealt with many politicians (Labor, Liberal, Green) and large organisations over the years. In short, write a letter and post it - that means paper, not email, if you want to get taken seriously.

The underlying reason is fairly simple, in that actually posting a paper letter requires some effort. It's one of the oldest management tricks - just dismiss as irrelevant anything that hasn't had some effort put into it, regardless of the content, and see if they come back again with some more effort. Most won't but if they do then take them seriously.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> NBN Co's selective sign up incentives,
> 
> NBN Co has paid out just over $110,000 in credits to Australia’s second biggest ISP iiNet to encourage it to sign new customers onto the National Broadband Network.
> 
> iiNet has signed on around 5500 new NBN fibre customers since January when NBN Co launched its migration incentive ”” a $108 payment to ISPs, valid to June 30 this year, to encourage them to move customers off their own infrastructure and onto the NBN.
> 
> NBN Co recommended the payment be passed on to consumers. iiNet offered its customers a $100 credit and free BoB Lite modem.
> 
> Of the 5500 new sign-ups made by iiNet since January, only 1020 customers were eligible for the incentive.
> 
> The payment is applicable to customers in pre-determined fibre-serving areas (FSAs) and wireless-service areas (WSAs), as well as other areas nominated by NBN Co.
> 
> Eligible FSAs include Coffs Harbour, Crace, South Morang, Mernda, Toowoomba, Townsville and Gulliver.
> 
> Applicable WSAs include Ballarat, Huonville-Ranelagh, Tamworth and Toowoomba.
> 
> 
> http://www.itnews.com.au/News/348101,nbn-co-paid-iinet-110k-for-new-customers.aspx
> 
> On another issue (past discussed in this thread),




The incentive scheme was selective because it was a trial. I believe they wanted to test the takeup in areas with the incentive and without, so they could determine whether it increased the rate of takeup and was therefore money well spent.

As each customer earns NBN co between $24 and $37/month, if the incentive leads them to connect >3-4 months earlier than they otherwise would, then it makes it a worthwhile project. Otherwise it doesn't. I guess we'll know if they decide to keep it going or not.

FYI, iiNet's 5,500 new customers earn NBN Co between $132,000 and ~$210,000 per month, depending on the speed mix and ISP volume usage.


----------



## sydboy007

DB008 said:


> Well, idiotic statement like this don't help the Libs....
> 
> *Tony Abbott: Malcolm Turnbull Invented The Internet In Australia*
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2013/06/tony-abbott-malcolm-turnbull-invented-the-internet-in-australia/




Considering Ozemail was, ah, only the 33 Rd large internet company in Australia, I suppose that's close enough to 1st place.

Malcolm made a very canny investment that made him plenty of $$$, but as far as I can tell, he didn't actually do that much with the running of the business, and he had sold his stake by 1999, so to think he has much of an idea of broadband when his entire experience was during the good old dial up days is really stretching things.


----------



## Calliope

Rudd's decisions are always firmly based. What a ratbag!



> And so is the utter disregard for the facts, justifying the National Broadband Network on the basis that "a bunch of Chinese students in Brissy said to me 'what is it about your local broadband speeds Kevin?' ", despite Brisbane's broadband speeds being multiples of those in China.



 (Henry Ergas)

I always thought that there could not be a worse Communications minister than Conroy, but Rudd has picked one...Albo. Conroy at least has brains enough to recognize Rudd as certifiable.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Rudd's decisions are always firmly based. What a ratbag!
> 
> (Henry Ergas)
> 
> I always thought that there could not be a worse Communications minister than Conroy, but Rudd has picked one...Albo. Conroy at least has brains enough to recognize Rudd as certifiable.





Hmmm. Henry Ergas, well there's an objective commentator, with no ties to the Liberal party. 

And obviously with a thorough knowledge of the topic as well. Game over then.


http://www.smartcompany.com.au/info...na-to-have-ftth-connections-from-april-4.html


> 17 January, 2013
> The Chinese government has mandated that *all new homes in China must have fibre to the home* (FTTH) connections from April this year.





http://www.zdnet.com/chinas-ftth-an-inconvenient-nbn-truth-for-libs-7000008728/
12 December 2012


> The Coalition has been berating journalists for not looking at overseas plans for nationwide broadband networks ”” but now that *the world’s most populous country has committed to FttH*, what are we now to believe?
> ...
> By the time China's project is finished, nearly one in seven people on earth will be using FttH. This is hardly a minority opinion, and it's truly an inconvenient truth for those arguing that FttH is unviable as a universal last-mile strategy.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> Hmmm. Henry Ergas, well there's an objective commentator, with no ties to the Liberal party




Hmmm. NBNMYths, well there's an objective commentator, with no ties to the Labor Party.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Hmmm. NBNMYths, well there's an objective commentator, with no ties to the Labor Party.




While I don't claim to be objective (clearly I support the FTTP NBN), at least I base my opinion on cited factual information. Correct though that I don't have any ties to the Labor party. 

I notice you didn't comment on Mr Ergas's erroneous Chinese broadband claims. Just another example of conservative op-eds using demonstrably false or misleading information on which to base an entire article. Like a house of cards, once you take that piece of info away the article falls over. 

It's standard practice for Ergas, Bolt, Akerman, McCrann et al. The problem with this is that once their band of flying monkeys are let loose with the false information, they hold on to it in spite of the undeniable facts placed in front of them. Witness Bolt's article from last year about Obama's supposed decision to go with a wireless NBN. To this day, people quote Bolt's article as evidence. It matters not that it was a load of rubbish.

Nobody is saying they aren't entitled to oppose the NBN. That's their opinion. However, they aren't entitled to make up their own facts to support that opinion.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Hmmm. Henry Ergas, well there's an objective commentator, with no ties to the Liberal party.
> 
> And obviously with a thorough knowledge of the topic as well. Game over then.
> 
> 
> http://www.smartcompany.com.au/info...na-to-have-ftth-connections-from-april-4.html
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.zdnet.com/chinas-ftth-an-inconvenient-nbn-truth-for-libs-7000008728/
> 12 December 2012




Correct me if I'm wrong Myths, but aren't all *new* homes in Australia, being made fibre ready?

Hasn't our beef been about retrofitting?


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> Nobody is saying they aren't entitled to oppose the NBN. That's their opinion. However, they aren't entitled to make up their own facts to support that opinion.




There you go again Myths. You can't make up *facts.* You can make up *myths* which is your game, but you can't make up *facts.*

And if you are looking to Anthony Albanese for inspiration, I'm afraid you are going to be sorely disappointed. The mans an idiot.:headshake

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3793630.htm#


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Nobody is saying they aren't entitled to oppose the NBN. That's their opinion. However, they aren't entitled to make up their own facts to support that opinion.




In a broader context, that comment reminded me of this post of yours in this thread from June 22. 

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...21778&page=123&p=779794&viewfull=1#post779794


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> There you go again Myths. You can't make up *facts.* You can make up *myths* which is your game, but you can't make up *facts.*




True, you can't make up facts. You can however make up stuff and claim it is factual. Which is exactly my point, re Ergas's claims about Chinese broadband and Bolt's claims about the US wireless NBN, to cite just two examples.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong Myths, but aren't all *new* homes in Australia, being made fibre ready?
> 
> Hasn't our beef been about retrofitting?




Yes, and yes. However, Ergas's point was about broadband in general, not just new homes.

Also, China are retrofitting FTTP as well as mandating it for new homes. They have announced plans to spend US$254bn by 2015. e.g.: http://viewswire.eiu.com/index.asp?layout=ib3Article&article_id=1618888746&fs=true


----------



## Trembling Hand

NBNMyths said:


> They have announced plans to spend US$254bn by 2015. e.g.: http://viewswire.eiu.com/index.asp?layout=ib3Article&article_id=1618888746&fs=true




So thats $195 per person.

We are spending $1266 per person. Gee


----------



## sydboy007

Trembling Hand said:


> So thats $195 per person.
> 
> We are spending $1266 per person. Gee




If you don't mind earning the typical wage in China I'm sure we can reduce the rollout costs in Australia.

I'd also argue that a roll-out is cheaper in China simply due to the high density of the population.


----------



## NBNMyths

Trembling Hand said:


> So thats $195 per person.
> 
> We are spending $1266 per person. Gee






sydboy007 said:


> If you don't mind earning the typical wage in China I'm sure we can reduce the rollout costs in Australia.
> 
> I'd also argue that a roll-out is cheaper in China simply due to the high density of the population.




Yeah, no problem. Let's just put the Australian construction workers onto Chinese wages. That should reduce the cost here.

While we're at it, let's drop _all_ our wages to Chinese levels, starting with yours. Sound like a good idea?


----------



## Trembling Hand

sydboy007 said:


> If you don't mind earning the typical wage in China I'm sure we can reduce the rollout costs in Australia.
> 
> I'd also argue that a roll-out is cheaper in China simply due to the high density of the population.




It is still a relevant comparison because you have to get return off it.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Yeah, no problem. Let's just put the Australian construction workers onto Chinese wages. That should reduce the cost here.
> 
> While we're at it, let's drop _all_ our wages to Chinese levels, starting with yours. Sound like a good idea?




Well that would bring house prices down.lol But that's another thread.


----------



## DB008

Ars Technica article.

*$20 for 768Kbps Internet? AT&T “deal” shows sad state of US broadband*



> *$20 for 768Kbps Internet? AT&T “deal” shows sad state of US broadband
> And did I mention the fees?*
> 
> By Nate Anderson - July 2 2013, 9:10am EST
> THE WEB
> 122
> 
> 
> For many years, I was an AT&T DSL customer with a "top of the line" 6Mbps connection. Eventually, the company's inability to offer faster speeds in the Chicago area drove me into the waiting arms of Comcast, which was substantially more expensive but had the great virtue of at least offering speeds of 20+ Mbps.
> 
> Now, AT&T wants me back. Having finally brought its fiber-to-the-local-node U-Verse system to my town, AT&T sent me a letter this week offering "great low prices" and "a whole lot more." The low price turned out to be $19.95 a month. The "whole lot more" turned out to be:
> 
> A one-year term commitment
> Up to $180 in early termination fees
> $99 installation charge
> $6/month fee to rent a DSL modem/router, should I need one
> "Up to 768k" connection speeds
> Yes, you read that last point right. This incredible deal package provides Internet so slow that it is still measured in kilobits per second. (The upside? No real worries about burning through your 250GB/month data limit.)
> 
> Adding insult to this already significant injury, $19.95 is only the promotional price. After a year, the "standard rate applies unless canceled by customer." The letter doesn't bother to explain what the "standard rate" actually is.
> 
> Visiting AT&T's U-Verse website is, if anything, more amazing than reading this letter. The website says that, for my home, AT&T would prefer to bill me a shocking $28/month for 768kbps Internet, making the $19.95 a "discount" if certainly not a "deal." Of course, it's all a ploy. The real plan is to use the lowest possible price to get you to investigate U-Verse and then sign up for a higher priced tier. How else can you explain the fact that U-Verse offers me almost 25x the speed for twice the price (18Mbps for $56/month)?




*Link
http://arstechnica.com/business/2013/07/20-for-768kbps-internet-atdeal-shows-sad-state-of-us-broadband/


----------



## So_Cynical

Calliope said:


> Hmmm. NBNMYths, well there's an objective commentator, with no ties to the Labor Party.




At least he has credibility.


----------



## NBNMyths

Trembling Hand said:


> It is still a relevant comparison because you have to get return off it.




Only if you assume that the retail prices (and therefore revenue) in China will be the same as in Australia. Which is extremely unlikely.


----------



## Calliope

So_Cynical said:


> At least he has credibility.




Which is more than you have. As I have pointed out to you before, whenever anyone pushes the Labor line you shed your So-Cynical guise and become Sooo-Gullible...a real pussy-cat.


----------



## Trembling Hand

NBNMyths said:


> Only if you assume that the retail prices (and therefore revenue) in China will be the same as in Australia.




Is is going to be cheaper by a factor of 10

In your words,


NBNMyths said:


> extremely unlikely.


----------



## sydboy007

Trembling Hand said:


> Is is going to be cheaper by a factor of 10
> 
> In your words,




The other question is, what are the $$ benefits in Australia compared to China.

Already the Chinese Govt is slowly starting to realise that capital investments in the already _rich _areas has a far higher ROI than investment in the less developed interior.

In general terms capital invested into an economy that already has a highly skilled workforce will generate higher returns than capital into areas where people have low literacy standards and education levels.

Once again I'll ask, if the NBN plan costs you no more than your current ADSL plan, why are you against it?

If someone offered to give you a brand new car that would be able to have performance upgrade for the next 50 years at minimal costs ie it would be like getting a current model car every 5 to 10 years for maybe 10% of a new car, would you say no thanks?


----------



## Trembling Hand

sydboy007 said:


> Once again I'll ask, if the NBN plan costs you no more than your current ADSL plan, why are you against it?




Did i say I was against it?


----------



## sptrawler

Trembling Hand said:


> Did i say I was against it?




+1
I'M just against retrofitting it to people who don't want it, or don't care about it, or it isn't worth doing it.

Point in case. Kambalda a town of 6000 people.
Is a town 50 klm SE of Kalgoorlie, that the natural gas pipeline runs past.
Everyone has bottled gas and wanted the natural gas plumbed in, but it wasn't done? 
But they will get the NBN, WHY?

Their fuel and cost of living would have dropped markedly with LNG, but obviously the limited life expectancy of the town, precluded it.
Yet they will get the NBN, am I missing something, or are we being led by idiots.


----------



## drsmith

An update on the progress of the rollout from the AFR,

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_co_accused_of_creative_accounting_YVAv0cdvM68MGRttnT9clK


----------



## So_Cynical

sptrawler said:


> am I missing something, or are we being led by idiots.




Your missing something.

May i suggest that you don't seem to understand that some governments (political party's) think that its their job to provide an enabling environment for economic growth, and infrastructure for the economic and social well-being of its citizens...i imagine that reticulated gas for Kambalda is a much lower priority than NBN.

-----------------

I used to live in an isolated little country town (pop 2500) on the edge of the Snowy's, crazy cold, so when the Melb to Canberra gas pipeline came thru town it was a no brainer that the "right" thing to do was reticulated gas, NSW Labor Govt at the time.


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> Your missing something.
> 
> May i suggest that you don't seem to understand that some governments (political party's) think that its their job to provide an enabling environment for economic growth, and infrastructure for the economic and social well-being of its citizens...i imagine that reticulated gas for Kambalda is a much lower priority than NBN..




Well that's dumb, how would faster internet(which isn't slow allready). 
Be better than cutting their fuel costs by 50 - 60 % by changing over from lpg to lng. You have a weird take on what helps people.

-----------------


So_Cynical said:


> I used to live in an isolated little country town (pop 2500) on the edge of the Snowy's, crazy cold, so when the Melb to Canberra gas pipeline came thru town it was a no brainer that the "right" thing to do was reticulated gas, NSW Labor Govt at the time.




So why was it good to reticulate a country town of 2500 people in NSW and not reticulate atown of 6000 in W.A?


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> An update on the progress of the rollout from the AFR,
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_co_accused_of_creative_accounting_YVAv0cdvM68MGRttnT9clK



The twice downward revised rollout June 30 rollout target has been met, well, sort of.

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_statistics_reveal_many_passed_0VcMsUKNI0XGyZ5uoxt6xK


----------



## Calliope

drsmith said:


> The twice downward revised rollout June 30 rollout target has been met, well, sort of.
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_statistics_reveal_many_passed_0VcMsUKNI0XGyZ5uoxt6xK




Yes. The best way to meet targets is to revise them downwards until they match your capabilities, or your rhetoric.


----------



## DB008

*Europe and Japan Aiming to Build 100Gbps Fibre Optic Internet*



> The European Commission (EC) and Japan have announced the launch of six joint research projects, supported by £15.3m+ (â‚¬18m) in funding, that aim to build networks which are “5000 times faster than today’s average European broadband ISP speed (100Gbps compared to 19.7Mbps)“.
> 
> The telecoms experts among you will know that 100Gbps+ (Gigabits per second) fibre optic links are nothing new but most of these are major submarine or national cable links. The new effort appears to be looking further ahead, with a view to improving the efficiency of such networks and perhaps even bringing them closer to homes.
> 
> It’s frequently noted that demand for data is putting a growing strain on broadband connections (the EU expects data traffic to grow 12-fold by 2018), which is partly fuelled by ever faster fixed line ISP and mobile broadband connectivity. But technology is always evolving to keep pace.




http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2013/07/europe-and-japan-aiming-to-build-100gbps-fibre-optic-internet.html


----------



## sptrawler

DB008 said:


> *Europe and Japan Aiming to Build 100Gbps Fibre Optic Internet*
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2013/07/europe-and-japan-aiming-to-build-100gbps-fibre-optic-internet.html




Yes Danny did you note the article was talking about a fibre backbone e.g submarine  or national link cables. We already have a fibre backbone, all the exchanges are interconnected by fibre. Yet everyone is busy telling us how far we are behind the rest of the world.

The article said they were thinking of bringing it closer to the home, exactly what we are doing.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Yes Danny did you note the article was talking about a fibre backbone e.g submarine  or national link cables. We already have a fibre backbone, all the exchanges are interconnected by fibre. Yet everyone is busy telling us how far we are behind the rest of the world.
> 
> The article said they were thinking of bringing it closer to the home, exactly what we are doing.




There's nothing particularly radical in the article, or those linked from it. Just the standard constant improvements you'd expect to be taking place.

While our (and their) exchanges and submarine links are already fibre, they are not running at 100Gbps. Most are 10 or less currently, with a few international cables at 40 and one Australian cable (Southern Cross) currently being upgraded to 100.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> There's nothing particularly radical in the article, or those linked from it. Just the standard constant improvements you'd expect to be taking place.
> 
> While our (and their) exchanges and submarine links are already fibre, they are not running at 100Gbps. Most are 10 or less currently, with a few international cables at 40 and one Australian cable (Southern Cross) currently being upgraded to 100.




So it was a pretty balanced post. Magic

That would then indicate, we are on the same page as a lot of the rest.

When you cut through all the emotional crap.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> So it was a pretty balanced post. Magic
> 
> That would then indicate, we are on the same page as a lot of the rest.
> 
> When you cut through all the emotional crap.




For major links we are.

But for FTTP penetration and average broadband speeds, we are close to the bottom of the OECD.


----------



## drsmith

A segment from tonight's 730 program on the NBN rollout,

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3799533.htm

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/service_stream_flags_material_loss_DwNvsoHQwphAOULrNvBANK


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

I am a mate of one of the contractors who tore the cables out.

He reckons it is one of the most dodgy jobs he has ever worked on.

And he has worked in PNG and Indonesia.

He reckons at least there you could grease a palm to get the job done. 

Here they all go back to online pdf manuals on ipads, takes them a whole bloody day to find the page, he says.

Poor governance, late payments, lack of direction, no scoping, no plan, complete FUBAR all are characteristics of the NBN.

gg


----------



## drsmith

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I am a mate of one of the contractors who tore the cables out.



If true, it's extraordinary. With the ABC's example, I'm a little sceptical and I wonder whether a little journalistic imagination has been used in his own description. The ABC's example was also in Adelaide, so are you referring to a different example ?

The video footage showed a white pipe (possibly PVC) being ripped up with nothing in it. Pulling out if a contractor is not getting paid enough, but what are the relative gains/losses for the contractor of ripping up his own NBN work. It didn't sound like he's thrown in the towel altogether in relation to his business as a whole.

That being said, the overall segment does not paint a rosy picture of how the rollout is progressing.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

drsmith said:


> If true, it's extraordinary. With the ABC's example, I'm a little sceptical and I wonder whether a little journalistic imagination has been used in his own description. The ABC's example was also in Adelaide, so are you referring to a different example ?
> 
> The video footage showed a white pipe (possibly PVC) being ripped up with nothing in it. Pulling out if a contractor is not getting paid enough, but what are the relative gains/losses for the contractor of ripping up his own NBN work. It didn't sound like he's thrown in the towel altogether in relation to his business as a whole.
> 
> That being said, the overall segment does not paint a rosy picture of how the rollout is progressing.




lol

It cost him $145.

And he reckons it is the best he has ever spent.

The NBN meanwhile waste Billions. And they are from the top down, muppets, and anxious muppets at that unable to make decisions.

gg


----------



## sptrawler

Just heard on the news Quigley has pulled the pin. There must be something going on.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Just heard on the news Quigley has pulled the pin. There must be something going on.




H says he's just going back into retirement. He must be over 60 by now. They got him out of it for the job in the first place, and he's been there for 4 years of pretty severe pressure, including a period of disgusting, deplorable personal attacks from Turnbull, Birmingham and Robb.

There have been rumours that he doesn't see eye to eye with the new chairman (person?), but he's staying on until his replacement is appointed, so it couldn't be too bad.

Anyway, good luck to him. I wouldn't have lasted that long.


----------



## IFocus

NBNMyths said:


> H says he's just going back into retirement. He must be over 60 by now. They got him out of it for the job in the first place, and he's been there for 4 years of pretty severe pressure, including a period of disgusting, deplorable personal attacks from Turnbull, Birmingham and Robb.
> 
> There have been rumours that he doesn't see eye to eye with the new chairman (person?), but he's staying on until his replacement is appointed, so it couldn't be too bad.
> 
> Anyway, good luck to him. I wouldn't have lasted that long.





Listened to a communications analysis today on the ABC (German guy) he said Quigley was highly regarded world wide for what he has done for the NBN he went on to say the poison politics played by the Coalition about the project is viewed outside of Australia as a mystery. 
And now the arrogance from the Coalition calling for the delay of the appointment of the new CEO.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> H says he's just going back into retirement. He must be over 60 by now. They got him out of it for the job in the first place, and he's been there for 4 years of pretty severe pressure, including a period of disgusting, deplorable personal attacks from Turnbull, Birmingham and Robb.
> 
> There have been rumours that he doesn't see eye to eye with the new chairman (person?), but he's staying on until his replacement is appointed, so it couldn't be too bad.
> 
> Anyway, good luck to him. I wouldn't have lasted that long.




Fair enough, your right he took on an unenviable task.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> There have been rumours that he doesn't see eye to eye with the new chairman (person?), but he's staying on until his replacement is appointed, so it couldn't be too bad.



I can recall seeing recent articles to that extent.

http://www.afr.com/p/national/change_at_the_top_touted_for_nbn_hVRNZ5DnwnImEEiIS2CG8M
http://www.afr.com/p/national/albanese_backs_nbn_co_chief_quigley_7X6GNHsqnlfQLCr5j1ZklJ


----------



## So_Cynical

Internode founder and now major share holder of iinet Simon Hacket has delivered a very interesting presentation to the CommsDay Wholesale and Data Centre Summit in Sydney about the NBN called “The Ideal Wholesale NBN Market”..

FIbre on a Copper Budget is a presentation that makes a lot of sense, Hacket has to be one of the most respected Internet business personality's in the country, Internode was known as the Champagne provider often rated above Telstra for service and connection quality.
~
http://simonhackett.com/2013/07/17/nbn-fibre-on-a-copper-budget/#more-999

Why oh why he hasn't simply upped this to youtube ill never know...cant embed this so just click the link and press go on the video, well worth it even for the Nolalition supporters, Simon is not a great fan of the NBN as it is currently planned.


----------



## moXJO

So_Cynical said:


> Internode founder and now major share holder of iinet Simon Hacket has delivered a very interesting presentation to the CommsDay Wholesale and Data Centre Summit in Sydney about the NBN called “The Ideal Wholesale NBN Market”..
> 
> FIbre on a Copper Budget is a presentation that makes a lot of sense, Hacket has to be one of the most respected Internet business personality's in the country, Internode was known as the Champagne provider often rated above Telstra for service and connection quality.
> ~
> http://simonhackett.com/2013/07/17/nbn-fibre-on-a-copper-budget/#more-999
> 
> Why oh why he hasn't simply upped this to youtube ill never know...cant embed this so just click the link and press go on the video, well worth it even for the Nolalition supporters, Simon is not a great fan of the NBN as it is currently planned.




That's a good find and very interesting. 
Any NBN progress seems to have stopped where I am for the past 6 months.


----------



## So_Cynical

moXJO said:


> That's a good find and very interesting.
> Any NBN progress seems to have stopped where I am for the past 6 months.




What he said about all the boxes and equipment that NBN Co installs, makes a lot of sense to me to leave all that out and simply run the fibre cable to a wall socket and leave it at that...like he says the service providers can be left to supply a router or what ever, its all easy plug and play now anyway.

Installing a battery and all that other stuff so little old ladies can have a PSTN land line is crazy, VOIP is the new normal.


----------



## Smurf1976

drsmith said:


> The video footage showed a white pipe (possibly PVC) being ripped up with nothing in it. Pulling out if a contractor is not getting paid enough, but what are the relative gains/losses for the contractor of ripping up his own NBN work. It didn't sound like he's thrown in the towel altogether in relation to his business as a whole.
> 
> That being said, the overall segment does not paint a rosy picture of how the rollout is progressing.



Contractors in Tasmania are threatening to walk off the job due to non-payment.

http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2013/07/19/383770_todays-news.html


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths should bring us up to speed with what is happening.

- - - Updated - - -



So_Cynical said:


> What he said about all the boxes and equipment that NBN Co installs, makes a lot of sense to me to leave all that out and simply run the fibre cable to a wall socket and leave it at that...like he says the service providers can be left to supply a router or what ever, its all easy plug and play now anyway.
> 
> Installing a battery and all that other stuff so little old ladies can have a PSTN land line is crazy, VOIP is the new normal.




 From what I have read, iinet have always thought fibre to the premise, especialy in multi storey residential, is crazy.

Sounds like you are warming to fibre to the node SC, then just fibre or copper to the house. wow, must have been a flash of blinding light for you.


----------



## So_Cynical

sptrawler said:


> NBNMyths should bring us up to speed with what is happening.
> 
> - - - Updated - - -
> 
> 
> 
> From what I have read, iinet have always thought fibre to the premise, especialy in multi storey residential, is crazy.
> 
> Sounds like you are warming to fibre to the node SC, then just fibre or copper to the house. wow, must have been a flash of blinding light for you.




I encourage you you watch the video .. Hackett makes a lot of sense taking about taking the fibre to the home and leaving it at that, the ISP or home owner provides the rest of the equipment, in most cases a single, 4 port wireless modem/router with Voip...the fibre cable plugs straight into it.

Fibre to the node is half arsed and the current NBN battery and multi box set-up over kill...keep the wall outlet and get rid of everything else.
~


----------



## sydboy007

So_Cynical said:


> I encourage you you watch the video .. Hackett makes a lot of sense taking about taking the fibre to the home and leaving it at that, the ISP or home owner provides the rest of the equipment, in most cases a single, 4 port wireless modem/router with Voip...the fibre cable plugs straight into it.
> 
> Fibre to the node is half arsed and the current NBN battery and multi box set-up over kill...keep the wall outlet and get rid of everything else.
> ~




I like SH, but he does have his own agenda.

Part of me thinks the 4 data ports are over kill, but then there has always been the idea that some form of medical home monitoring could occur over an used port.

I'd also say for a share household the ability to cheaply and easily have separate internet services could be handy, but whether worthwhile to give to everyone??

I can see the extra ports being useful for business though.  I support a lot of customers who have a link for their internal data network and another for the internet.  It's quite expensive leasing multiple services.  NBN allows this to occur pretty cheaply.

Here's some interesting snippets from a recent delimeter article

While few households need 1Gbps today (the average internet connection speed in Australia is currently 4.2 Mbps) the historical demand for broadband network bandwidth has grown at about 30% – 40% per annum.

Using historical growth figures, and allowing for future generations of ultra-high definition television, multi-view services, together with multiple TV displays in a single household, in-home video conferencing and so on, it’s likely that domestic broadband domestic customers will be seeking bandwidths of more than 100 Mbps by 2020 and about 1 Gbps by 2035.

The cost of this to the individual could be in the region of A$1,000-A$5,000, depending on the distance of the node from the premises. Future upgrades of Labor’s FTTP to 10 Gbps and beyond will require simple exchange of the user terminal in the home, at a cost typically in the region of A$100-A$200.

The Coalition’s “fibre-on-demand” strategy raises the spectre of a digital divide between households, businesses and regions that can afford to pay for the upgrade and those that cannot.

To illustrate this, a graphic design business that uploads and downloads data to its customers, and happens to be located close to a node, will be in a much better business position that a competitor 500 metres down the road. This will arguably impede the economic benefits of the network as a whole, limiting the application of health, education and productivity-boosting applications.

But the increased electrical power consumption of the Coalition’s FTTN network will have a greenhouse impact approaching that of a city the size of Launceston in Tasmania.


----------



## Smurf1976

sydboy007 said:


> While few households need 1Gbps today (the average internet connection speed in Australia is currently 4.2 Mbps) the historical demand for broadband network bandwidth has grown at about 30% – 40% per annum.



At some point that will end however. The only real question is when and at what level?


----------



## sydboy007

Smurf1976 said:


> At some point that will end however. The only real question is when and at what level?




TBH, I don't see the growth ever ending.

Once we get IP6 out there, then the internet of all things begins.  Everything starts to have its own IP address, just about everything communicates data.  4K TV gets surpassed by 8K TV, which might then get replaced by holography.

Business wil further improve JIT manufacturing, and in 10-15 years we should have 3D print manufacturing of an increasing amount of products - no idea how big the files are, but assuming the more complex an item the exponentially bigger the file.

I used the top of the line Cico telepresence kit, and it literally is like having people in a different country in the same room as you.  It's pretty high bandwidth.  In an energy constrained future I can see this kind of set up allowing less travel, even allow people to work from home and feel like they are in the meeting with everyone else.

I would like some other tech writers out there to look at how long the 50Mbs minimum will actually server us, because I think the 2020 time frame is about right.  The FTTN network is also going to have a slight impact on property values, especially for business premises.  If you can advertise a property can get 80Mbs, and a property further away can only get 55 Mbs then I would think you could get slightly higher rent, or face less risk of not having a tenant.


----------



## sails

*NBN costs set to soar past $60bn*




> CONSTRUCTION contractors on the National Broadband Network are pushing to be paid up to 40 per cent more to do further work, fuelling fears of a cost blowout on Labor's flagship infrastructure project.
> 
> The Australian has been told that industry suppliers are looking for increases in the value of contracts of between 20 per cent and 40 per cent for further work and that high-level evaluations are circulating suggesting that the ultimate cost of the project could spiral out to between $60 billion and $70bn.





http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...o-soar-past-60bn/story-e6frgaif-1226684023561


----------



## Smurf1976

sails said:


> *NBN costs set to soar past $60bn*



As I've said before, the solution is an "in house" construction workforce working alongside, and competing against, the contractors.

That's the only way I know that keeps a lid on costs over the long term. Otherwise, the contractors gradually ramp up the prices to just under the critical pain point - they'll charge as much as they can. Been there, played this game and it's the inevitable consequence on such a project when the organisation running it doesn't have any experience of its' own - hence the need to get some and do so promptly.


----------



## NBNMyths

sails said:


> *NBN costs set to soar past $60bn*
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...o-soar-past-60bn/story-e6frgaif-1226684023561




Oh look, an article by Annabel Hepworth in the Australian. Ridiculed for her (their) inaccuracy in NBN reporting at the best of times.

But now we have quotes from a mysterious "industry source" and a dash of Henry Ergas, Ian Martin and Kevin Morgan as well. Seems all of the Australian's exclusive NBN-critic ducks have made an appearance! I wonder why no other publications (particularly industry publications) seem to give them any credence on the topic of the NBN, yet they are The Australian's go-to men for any NBN information? 


Anyway, let's look at some of the "arguments". 

First, the supposed cost blowout to $60-70bn, based on contractors wanting 20-40% increases.

The NBN capex is forecast to be $37bn. Of that $37bn, only about $22bn is the actual FTTP rollout. The rest is the transit network, the wireless portion, the satellite portion etc. And only a part of that $22bn is actual contractor costs. The rest is the costs of buying the hardware, fibre cable etc.

NBN argue that they are currently on (or under) budget: http://www.nbnco.com.au/assets/media-releases/2013/report-to-parliamentary-joint-committee.pdf


Anyway, a blowout to $60-70bn means that the FTTP construction cost would need to increase by 200-300% more than forecast by KPMG-McKinsey, NBN Co, and the cost of similar projects in similar countries overseas.

Yet, this "$60-70bn blowout" argument is based on the premise that contractors are asking for increases of 20-40%. Even if, for argument's sake, we accept that they want and will receive an increase of 40%, that would only increase the cost of the NBN to maybe $44bn (40% on the ~$15bn FTTP contracts).


Next, let's look at Ian Martin's claim that NBN Co's revenue would not meet expectations. He cites no evidence or reasoning to support this here, but has written elsewhere that the reason is because he doubts NBN Co's assumption that there will be sufficient takeup of higher NBN plans (eg 50-100Mbps). 

Yet NBN Co are already achieving a >30% breakdown on 100Mbps plans, which is not forecast to occur until 2020, and the overall takeup rate is "soaring". I cannot begin to fathom how he can assume NBN Co can't achieve by 2020 what they are already achieving, especially with the demand for speed constantly increasing, and volume showing no sign of deviating from the >50%pa growth trend.


----------



## sydboy007

from zdnet today

Last week, 2GB radio host and fierce critic of the Australian government's AU$37.4 billion National Broadband Network (NBN) Ray Hadley claimed to have discovered pictures of an exposed NBN cable on the Minnamurra Bridge on the South Coast of New South Wales ”” only it wasn't actually NBN Co's cable, but rather Telstra's temporary fix for a cable destroyed by rats.

Hadley put the now-removed pictures up on his website on Wednesday, and read out an email from a listener who claimed that it showed how NBN Co is "cutting corners" with the construction of the network.

"It is obviously the NBN cable," Hadley said.

NBN Co told ZDNet last week that the cable wasn't at all related to the NBN. Shortly after 2GB pulled down the photos, Telstra confirmed to ZDNet that it was a temporary cable installed after a rat chewed through fibre and spare dark fibres along the bridge.

"It turned out a rat chewed the cable that runs through the conduit ”” it's a pipe concreted into the bridge walls on the Minnamurra Bridge. The cable length from one site to the next is 1.9 kilometres. The cable feeds a mobile tower on the western side of the highway, which services thousands of customers," a Telstra spokesperson said.

"The rat unfortunately chewed through the working fibres and all the dark spare fibres. Given the number of customers affected, we made the call to run a temporary cable to restore service to the mobile tower."

The spokesperson said that the conduit that Telstra runs through the bridge is currently blocked, and the company sought permission from the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA), which owns the bridge, and Kiama Council to trench new cable under the bridge and under Minnamurra Creek.

"Work is scheduled to start this week, with the bore under the river starting first. Vermin-proof cable is already onsite today," the spokesperson said on Wednesday. "The work is expected to be completed in approximately three weeks."

-------------------

reminds me of my previous job supporting a bank network where an ATM ar market cicy in Sydney had gone down again.  We used to call it rat city since the atm had been taken of line 3 times before due to rats chewing thru the cable from the atm to the wall socket for the adsl connection.

For the 4th fault we updated the fault with info showing the cable had been chewed thru again and evidence of rat droppings.  The bank had their "tech" attend who said no fault found and then said we hadn't sent a tech out as he couldn't find any evidence of rat droppings.

Inside the ATM is a standard phone the guards can use if they need to call - quite often no mobile reception near the atms as deep inside a shopping centre.  IF he'd bothered to pick the phone up he'd have noticed he didn't have dial tone, hence no adsl connection either.

Our tech went back out, replaced the chewed thru cable.  We then posted the offending cable thru to the banks atm moniroting team and asked them to decide on the cause of the issue


----------



## medicowallet

Election in the Wind

Goodbye NBN,
Though I never had you at all,
You have the pace to download pr0n,
While my ADSL crawls,
As Rudd and Conroy's love child,
Between them have half of a brain,
They set you up for failure,
and NBNMyth's change of name?

And it seems to me copper end of life,
Is not just around the bend,
I just hope it does not drop out,
when the rain sets in,
And I would have loved to know you,
But I am not a kid,
The money ran out long ago,
Socialism never did.


----------



## Knobby22

I heard today that Murdoch is really worried and has sent one of his best men from the US to ensure that the papers do better to attack Labor to stop it. Found this article.

Allan is a man widely known inside News Corp as Col Pot, a play on the name of the Cambodian genocidal dictator. He is News Corp's most feared flamethrower in a company of flamethrowers. He has been sent to Australia by Rupert Murdoch himself.

The purpose of his mission has become clear in recent days.

One person who should rightly be disconcerted by Allan's sudden secondment to Australia is the head of News Corp, Kim Williams. Several other executives should also be leery. But they are not Allan's primary target.

His primary target is Kevin Rudd.

Why Murdoch wants Rudd to lose the coming federal election is not merely political, it is commercial. News Corp hates the government's national broadband network. The company has formed a view that it poses a threat to the business model of by far its most important asset in Australia, the Foxtel cable TV monopoly it jointly owns with Telstra.

Murdoch has declared war on Rudd by dispatching his most trusted field general, Allan, whose reputation is built on his closeness to Murdoch and his long history of producing pungent front-page splashes and pugnacious campaigns as editor-in-chief of The Daily Telegraph and, for the past 12 years, The New York Post.


Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/comment/mu...dd-over-nbn-20130803-2r6fk.html#ixzz2ayiYEtjU


----------



## sails

Knobby - I believe Col Pot is to counter Obama's spinmeisters who Rudd is importing to attack Abbott.  It seems Rudd started this media war so  now he needs to cop it on the chin, imo.


----------



## moXJO

Knobby22 said:


> I heard today that Murdoch is really worried and has sent one of his best men from the US to ensure that the papers do better to attack Labor to stop it. Found this article.
> 
> Allan is a man widely known inside News Corp as Col Pot, a play on the name of the Cambodian genocidal dictator. He is News Corp's most feared flamethrower in a company of flamethrowers. He has been sent to Australia by Rupert Murdoch himself.
> 
> The purpose of his mission has become clear in recent days.
> 
> One person who should rightly be disconcerted by Allan's sudden secondment to Australia is the head of News Corp, Kim Williams. Several other executives should also be leery. But they are not Allan's primary target.
> 
> His primary target is Kevin Rudd.
> 
> Why Murdoch wants Rudd to lose the coming federal election is not merely political, it is commercial. News Corp hates the government's national broadband network. The company has formed a view that it poses a threat to the business model of by far its most important asset in Australia, the Foxtel cable TV monopoly it jointly owns with Telstra.
> 
> Murdoch has declared war on Rudd by dispatching his most trusted field general, Allan, whose reputation is built on his closeness to Murdoch and his long history of producing pungent front-page splashes and pugnacious campaigns as editor-in-chief of The Daily Telegraph and, for the past 12 years, The New York Post.
> 
> 
> Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/comment/mu...dd-over-nbn-20130803-2r6fk.html#ixzz2ayiYEtjU




Having read some of the trash on fairfax I wouldn't put much credibility in that story. They are just as bad as news ltd when it comes to pushing political bs


----------



## NBNMyths

sails said:


> Knobby - I believe Col Pot is to counter Obama's spinmeisters who Rudd is importing to attack Abbott.  It seems Rudd started this media war so  now he needs to cop it on the chin, imo.




There's a difference between a political candidate employing a "spinmeister", and a news outlet doing so.

The media are supposed to objectively report the news. The Murdoch press abandoned that years ago, but the front page of the Tele today takes it to a whole new level. There's not even a pretence of objectivity any more! It's quite remarkable.

- - - Updated - - -



medicowallet said:


> Election in the Wind
> 
> Goodbye NBN,
> Though I never had you at all,
> You have the pace to download pr0n,
> While my ADSL crawls,
> As Rudd and Conroy's love child,
> Between them have half of a brain,
> They set you up for failure,
> and NBNMyth's change of name?
> 
> And it seems to me copper end of life,
> Is not just around the bend,
> I just hope it does not drop out,
> when the rain sets in,
> And I would have loved to know you,
> But I am not a kid,
> The money ran out long ago,
> Socialism never did.





Don't give up your day job!


----------



## Smurf1976

NBNMyths said:


> There's a difference between a political candidate employing a "spinmeister", and a news outlet doing so.
> 
> The media are supposed to objectively report the news.



On that point we can certainly agree. The standard of reporting we have today is outright rubbish and the reason I won't even consider paying for such "news".

Take the media release and simply print it word for word. I've seen it time and time again - that's basically free advertising rather than reporting.

Even worse when the media simply prints its' own biased propaganda as seems to be happening these days.


----------



## sydboy007

Smurf1976 said:


> On that point we can certainly agree. The standard of reporting we have today is outright rubbish and the reason I won't even consider paying for such "news".
> 
> Take the media release and simply print it word for word. I've seen it time and time again - that's basically free advertising rather than reporting.
> 
> Even worse when the media simply prints its' own biased propaganda as seems to be happening these days.




These days the various media entities have decided on their audience and pretty much report what their readers / listeners / viewers want.

Continually having your views affirmed is comforting.  Just ask Fox News


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> Continually having your views affirmed is comforting.  Just ask Fox News




Well you still have the ABC affirming your views. That's a comfort for you.


----------



## Macquack

NBNMyths said:


> The media are supposed to objectively report the news. The Murdoch press abandoned that years ago, but the front page of the Tele today takes it to a whole new level. There's not even a pretence of objectivity any more! It's quite remarkable.




Yes, Murdoch is a disgrace to the human race. What he got away with at the "News of the World" was blatantly criminal.

I will not be "told" by some merchant who has sold his sole to the devil.


----------



## moXJO

sydboy007 said:


> These days the various media entities have decided on their audience and pretty much report what their readers / listeners / viewers want.
> 
> Continually having your views affirmed is comforting.  Just ask Fox News




Agree with the above. Fairfax has been running anti lib stuff all day as well.
People also forget the back story with news and fairfax. A fairfax jorno wrote a book (killing fairfax) on the subject recently and fairfax canned the ad for the book and told her it ain't happening. 
Like I said I wouldnt judge either as the height of integrity.


----------



## sydboy007

moXJO said:


> Agree with the above. Fairfax has been running anti lib stuff all day as well.
> People also forget the back story with news and fairfax. A fairfax jorno wrote a book (killing fairfax) on the subject recently and fairfax canned the ad for the book and told her it ain't happening.
> Like I said I wouldnt judge either as the height of integrity.




It's partly why I've started moving away from the MSM and have been reading a lot more small and independent sources of information.  Dare I say Rupert is scared witless that reasonably fast broadband will allow the small players access to as big an audience as the major players now have.  Google has made the opening shots via youtube and revenue sharing of advertising.  Set up a successful channel on youtube and you can have a pretty decent revenue stream.  You can even broadcast in HD.


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> It's partly why I've started moving away from the MSM and have been reading a lot more small and independent sources of information.




Do you mean politically independent? Perhaps you could list for us some of these small and independent sources of information. It seems like an oxymoron to me.


----------



## sydboy007

Calliope said:


> Do you mean politically independent? Perhaps you could list for us some of these small and independent sources of information. It seems like an oxymoron to me.




macrobusiness and delimeter are two that come to mind.


----------



## sydboy007

Got to love the way Telstra abuses their market power.

My employer is waiting for Telstra to upgrade some links we have with them for the ADSL wholesale traffic we get from customers connecting via Telstra DSLAMs.  Currently the project is on hold indefinitely till Telstra are able to provide the right NTU (Network Terminating Unit).  One would think purchasing a new NTU shouldn't be a major issue for a company as large as Telstra.

On the one hand my company is offering to pay more for higher levels of bandwidth, but on the other hand forcing our customers to suffer increasing congestion must be a nice way to compete.

At least with the NBN it has a built in incentive to maximise revenues ie bandwidth upgrades are likely to occur as quickly as possible to get the increased revenue rolling in.

More and more of what I hear MT saying makes me fear he is going to do a quick and dirty with Telstra to build the FTTN and provide them with near total control of it.  No FTTN network has been built by the non dominant carrier anywhere else in the world.


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> macrobusiness and delimeter are two that come to mind.




Delimiter! Of course...they share your hatred of Murdoch, and the Coalition, and your love of the NBN Co.

http://delimiter2.com.au/lord-ruperts-not-at-war-with-the-nbn-its-democracy-he-has-a-problem-with/


----------



## sydboy007

Calliope said:


> Delimiter! Of course...they share your hatred of Murdoch, and the Coalition, and your love of the NBN Co.
> 
> http://delimiter2.com.au/lord-ruperts-not-at-war-with-the-nbn-its-democracy-he-has-a-problem-with/




You've obviously not really read much of Renais postings.

He's said a few times that he's voted Liberal more than Labor.

At least he's fairly objective about the NBN and has looked at it from a technical stand point.

For much of the last year he was still giving the Liberal FTTN a reasonable level of support, but as little new information has been released by the Coalition he's swung his support behind the current NBN.

If you bothered to read some of his articles you would see he's been quite critical of Labors handling of the NBN at times, but equally critical of the way the Coalition has behaved as well.


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> You've obviously not really read much of Renais postings.




Nor shall I if they are all as nasty as that article, full of gratuitous insults.



> …comment piece for the Age that Murdoch had sent a key executive, Col Allan (known as Col Pot after the Cambodian dictator) to Australia to take Kevin Rudd’s head and return it to the Great Lord in a little black carry bag. *Such an image would usually be accompanied by a little side shot of Opposition Leader Tony Abbott simpering ingratiatingly*.




Just spleen. Besides I can't see Rudd's boofhead fitting into a little black carry bag...a garbage bag would be more apt.


----------



## Knobby22

I don't mind seeing Rudds head being removed (figuratively) however I don't like Murdoch claiming it. 
He is no longer an Australian citizen. He should keep his nose out of our affairs. 

Did you know that in 1975 the reporters of the Australian went on strike because of what they saw as outrageously biased coverage of the election campaign? Wouldn't happen now.


----------



## Calliope

Knobby22 said:


> I don't mind seeing Rudds head being removed (figuratively) however I don't like Murdoch claiming it.
> He is no longer an Australian citizen. He should keep his nose out of our affairs.
> 
> Did you know that in 1975 the reporters of the Australian went on strike because of what they saw as outrageously biased coverage of the election campaign? Wouldn't happen now.




Yes I will never forgive The Murdoch press for favouring Rudd over Howard in 2007, but i guess it made you happy.

Jonathan Holmes writing for your favourite tabloid The Age, doesn't share your conspiracy theory:

Your theory:


> Why Murdoch wants Rudd to lose the coming federal election is not merely political, it is commercial. News Corp hates the government's national broadband network. The company has formed a view that it poses a threat to the business model of by far its most important asset in Australia, the Foxtel cable TV monopoly it jointly owns with Telstra



.

Holmes's opinion;


> But what’s in it for Rupert? What deals has he cut with Tony Abbott, in return for his newspapers’ support?
> 
> On the very day that Kevin Rudd called the election, Fairfax columnist Paul Sheehan ventured a suggestion in The Sunday Age. It’s all to do with Labor’s NBN, he told us. ‘’News Corp views this as a threat to the business models of its most important asset, Foxtel.’’…
> 
> In fact, [the Coalition’s] fibre-to-the-node system may be a more serious threat to Foxtel, because [it’s] promising to get it into our homes faster…
> 
> I reckon the attempt to identify an obvious quid pro quo is misconceived. In his 2011 book Rupert Murdoch: An Investigation of Political Power, David McKnight persuasively argued that the traditional view of him is wrong: he doesn’t just back winners, or play politics solely to benefit his commercial interests…
> 
> Murdoch, argues McKnight, plays politics from conviction… He’s always liked to think of himself as an anti-establishment radical.


----------



## orr

Calliope said:


> Yes I will never forgive The Murdoch press for favouring Rudd over Howard in 2007, but i guess it made you happy.
> 
> Jonathan Holmes writing for your favourite tabloid The Age, doesn't share your conspiracy theory:
> 
> Your theory:
> .
> 
> Holmes's opinion;




Anything else come to mind as unforgivable/criminal from Murdoch?

Capacity and speed , Calliope... Concepts tragically beyond the horizon of your understanding. But not beyond the future understanding of Murdoch's current costumer base... Did you buy into Netflix at any time in the past, by any chance? Or is it more likely when here the name 'Un-blockus', do you go straight to your box of 'Movicol'? .


----------



## db94

http://www.afr.com/p/business/companies/nbn_to_miss_target_for_rollout_XInJGPQsAGEsJxgEcAKrbP


----------



## Calliope

orr said:


> Anything else come to mind as unforgivable/criminal from Murdoch?
> 
> Capacity and speed , Calliope... Concepts tragically beyond the horizon of your understanding. But not beyond the future understanding of Murdoch's current costumer base... Did you buy into Netflix at any time in the past, by any chance? Or is it more likely when here the name 'Un-blockus', do you go straight to your box of 'Movicol'? .




What's this guy on about??? Apart from hating Murdoch he doesn't make much sense. Perhaps the Murdoch haters should start a new thread.


----------



## Knobby22

Calliope said:


> Holmes's opinion;
> 
> Murdoch, argues McKnight, plays politics from conviction… He’s always liked to think of himself as an anti-establishment radical.




He was once. Now he is the establishment. Sorry for thread drift.


----------



## drsmith

db94 said:


> http://www.afr.com/p/business/companies/nbn_to_miss_target_for_rollout_XInJGPQsAGEsJxgEcAKrbP



Labor would have been hoping future rollout skeletons stayed in the closet until after the election. For them, it's now a retreat to the next line of defence.



> Telstra recently stopped work at a number of NBN sites, after workers found asbestos in some of the company's pits. This had caused a "short-term delay", Mr Albanese said.




http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ays-says-anthony-albanese-20130808-2rhmq.html


----------



## Calliope

Knobby22 said:


> He was once. Now he is the establishment. Sorry for thread drift.






> Allan is a man widely known inside News Corp as Col Pot, a play on the name of the Cambodian genocidal dictator. He is News Corp's most feared flamethrower in a company of flamethrowers. He has been sent to Australia by Rupert Murdoch himself.




As a matter of interest, this guy you referred to is the same Col Allan who took an inebriated Rudd to Scores nightclub in Manhattan to watch naked dancers. That was when Rudd was hobnobbing with Murdoch.


----------



## Knobby22

Calliope said:


> As a matter of interest, this guy you referred to is the same Col Allan who took an inebriated Rudd to Scores nightclub in Manhattan to watch naked dancers. That was when Rudd was hobnobbing with Murdoch.




Doesn't surprise me. Yes. I bet he got pictures also. 
He went there to prostrate himself in front of his lord and master and was suitably betrayed. 
I wonder how many other politicians Murdoch has pictures of.


----------



## drsmith

The current Rupy rage from Kevin Rudd could well be a distraction from further rollout delays with the NBN as reported in today's Fairfax press.


----------



## drsmith

The great debate.

Anthony Albanese vs Malcolm Turnbull on Lateline.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2013/s3824057.htm


----------



## bellenuit

*bellenuit*



drsmith said:


> The great debate.
> 
> Anthony Albanese vs Malcolm Turnbull on Lateline.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2013/s3824057.htm




I was very disappointed by Alberici's lack of understanding of what was being discussed. She asked both parties to justify their quoted cost figures and additionally of Turnbull his costing of Labor's plan, but didn't seem to understand that they figures she was asking them to justify were NET Costs. She continually interrupted Turnbull when he tried to explain how his revenue calculation, a component of Net Costs, for Labor's NBN was substantially less than Labor estimated, saying almost insultingly that costs were a different thing to revenues. Costs are, but net costs, which are costs less revenue, aren't. 

She didn't come across to me as biased to either side, but purely as lacking in understanding of what she was asking.


----------



## Calliope

Rudd's three biggest ballzups; *Budget Boats Broadband*

*Broadband: what could there possibly be to hide?*



> IF NBN Co is being run by the book, an updated corporate plan would have been sitting on the Communications Minister's desk for six weeks.
> 
> If Anthony Albanese was telling the truth on the ABC's Lateline program on Monday, and this vital infrastructure program is going splendidly, he must be itching to release it and silence the scurrilous claim by the opposition that the NBN is running almost three times over budget and five years late. *Kevin Rudd would surely relish the chance to remind a grateful nation of his great futuristic legacy, this visionary nation-building scheme, this harbinger of the digital revolution, the backbone of the digital renaissance, driver of innovation, gateway to the information universe and liberator of dreams that was started on his watch.* Yet Mr Albanese tells us that the report will not see the light of day until after the election. Does anyone smell a rat?




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...sibly-be-to-hide/story-e6frg71x-1226696612564


----------



## sails

Calliope said:


> Rudd's three biggest ballzups; *Budget Boats Broadband*
> 
> *Broadband: what could there possibly be to hide?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IF NBN Co is being run by the book, an updated corporate plan would have been sitting on the Communications Minister's desk for six weeks.
> 
> If Anthony Albanese was telling the truth on the ABC's Lateline program on Monday, and this vital infrastructure program is going splendidly, he must be itching to release it and silence the scurrilous claim by the opposition that the NBN is running almost three times over budget and five years late. *Kevin Rudd would surely relish the chance to remind a grateful nation of his great futuristic legacy, this visionary nation-building scheme, this harbinger of the digital revolution, the backbone of the digital renaissance, driver of innovation, gateway to the information universe and liberator of dreams that was started on his watch*. Yet Mr Albanese tells us that the report will not see the light of day until after the election. Does anyone smell a rat?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...sibly-be-to-hide/story-e6frg71x-1226696612564
Click to expand...




does anything NOT smell like a rat with this labor mob?

Seems to be nothing but smoke and mirrors.  Fiscal disaster for 6 years and now they want us to believe they have a "new way".  Hiding documents until after the election is simply more of the devious old way, imo.


----------



## drsmith

*Re: bellenuit*



bellenuit said:


> I was very disappointed by Alberici's lack of understanding of what was being discussed.



Malcolm's Turnbull's frustration at the level at which she wanted to conduct the discussion was obvious. Being new to the portfolio, Anthony Albanese was clearly out of his depth. He knew it and I think was quiet happy just to add to Malcolm's frustrations.


----------



## sails

Turnbull explains about Rudd's Blackspot Bother


----------



## drsmith

Ken Morgan makes the same point Malcolm Turnbull has been making,



> Now Rudd's back telling us, as he repeatedly did on Sunday night, that his visionary NBN is going marvellously. Well if it is Rudd will have absolutely no problem in immediately releasing an update of NBN Co's corporate plan that is sitting on the desks of Penny Wong and Anthony Albanese, the two NBN shareholder ministers. To do otherwise would be a conspiracy and Rudd wouldn't want to be accused of that.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-hides-nbn-truth/story-e6frgd0x-1226696601734


----------



## drsmith

We've seen those images of some of Telstra's infrastructure. Below is an NBN trench, post construction.



> And this is post-remediation, post several weeks work how one of the NBN trenches looks after rain.




http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2013/08/one-block-in-minnamurra-street-kiama-with-its-nbn-story.html


----------



## medicowallet

If you look carefully down the hole, you can see NBNMyths' hopes and dreams


MW


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> We've seen those images of some of Telstra's infrastructure. Below is an NBN trench, post construction.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2013/08/one-block-in-minnamurra-street-kiama-with-its-nbn-story.html




Has it been proven to be NBN?

Just asking since an exposed "NBN" cable on the Minnamurra bridge turned out to be for a Telstra mobile base station run along the bridge in a temporary fashion due to rat damage.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Has it been proven to be NBN?



Readers can make their own judgement.

That's why I posted a link to the image.


----------



## Calliope

Poor ole Quigley. No wonder he looks worried. The job was always too big for him.



> Fact-checking website Politifact Australia also entered the debate yesterday, finding Mr Turnbull's estimate that Labor's NBN would cost $94bn was "possible but unverifiable".
> 
> Politifact rejected Mr Albanese's claims that a joint parliamentary committee and Mr Quigley had found the $94bn figure had "no basis in fact".
> 
> "The government says NBN Co's corporate plan has been 'independently verified by KPMG and Greenhill Caliburn', but the KPMG study wasn't independent -- NBN Co paid it for the task -- and it took place before construction began," Politifact said. It said the Greenhill Caliburn review was a paper exercise that did not examine actual performance.
> 
> "Senior telecommunications analysts . . . shared one or more of Mr Turnbull's doubts about the NBN Co's assumptions.
> 
> "Mr Turnbull has gone further and quantified those doubts. His estimate may be on the high side, it may be on the low side."







http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...d-to-5bn-blowout/story-fn59niix-1226698764054


----------



## sydboy007

Calliope said:


> Poor ole Quigley. No wonder he looks worried. The job was always too big for him.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 53884
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...d-to-5bn-blowout/story-fn59niix-1226698764054




I dare say if politifact did the same for Turnbulls policy they'd say it is very unlikely to be achieved for under $30B let alone providing EVERYONE with a minnimum of 25Mbs in download speeds by Dec 31 2016.  Unless MT has done some behind the scenes deals with vendors it will take probably 12 months to pick the right Nodes that can cope with the extreme weather for Australia - lots of floods and plenty of days where inside the larger nodes it will be a toasty 60+C, unless he's going to believe the bright glossy brochures.


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> I dare say if politifact did the same for Turnbulls policy they'd say it is very unlikely to be achieved for under $30B let alone providing EVERYONE with a minnimum of 25Mbs in download speeds by Dec 31 2016.  Unless MT has done some behind the scenes deals with vendors it will take probably 12 months to pick the right Nodes that can cope with the extreme weather for Australia - lots of floods and plenty of days where inside the larger nodes it will be a toasty 60+C, unless he's going to believe the bright glossy brochures.




Sorry Sydboy. The Turnbull version is the one you are going to get. The MT version offers me the better chance of getting improved speed broadband in my lifetime.


----------



## sydboy007

Calliope said:


> Sorry Sydboy. The Turnbull version is the one you are going to get. The MT version offers me the better chance of getting improved speed broadband in my lifetime.




You may be right, but at the moment I'd say the odds are quite long.

I'll console myself with yelling for Malcom to step down should he not meet his targets.  Afterall, by his criteria to not meet the target is purely due to incompetency.

Unless MT does a very VERY sweet deal with Teltra, I don't see how he can achieve his targets.  No other FTTN has been built by the non owner of the copper.  All the examples of FTTN MT has given are being rolled out by the copper owners, generally the incumbent carrier.  Even BTs ex-CEO says FTTN is not the way to go.

i say by Telstra shares now, because a Coalition victory = $$$ in Telstra's pockets.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I dare say if politifact did the same for Turnbulls policy they'd say it is very unlikely to be achieved for under $30B let alone providing EVERYONE with a minnimum of 25Mbs in download speeds by Dec 31 2016.  Unless MT has done some behind the scenes deals with vendors it will take probably 12 months to pick the right Nodes that can cope with the extreme weather for Australia - lots of floods and plenty of days where inside the larger nodes it will be a toasty 60+C, unless he's going to believe the bright glossy brochures.



Corner cutting with Labor's NBN to save on costs might also result in splitter boxes in the sun.



> According to a Fairfax Media report yesterday, NBN Co chief operating officer Ralph Steffens briefed senior executives on Thursday on the "$5bn hole in construction costs" and outlined plans to re-engineer and re-design the NBN that "could save that and more".
> 
> New alterations would include reducing the number of fibre-optic strands contained in the costly broadband cabling, and installing splitter-boxes above Telstra's existing underground pits, rather than widening or replacing them, NBN spokesman Andrew Sholl confirmed.
> 
> The changes are expected to speed up the NBN's roll-out and reduce tampering with underground pits, which have spread deadly asbestos fibres in communities in recent months.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...d-to-5bn-blowout/story-fn59niix-1226698764054


----------



## sails

How labor thought they could simply roll out the NBN without serious research first is mind boggling. And this expensive thought bubble was supposedly scratched on the back on an envelope in an aeroplane...


----------



## sydboy007

sails said:


> How labor thought they could simply roll out the NBN without serious research first is mind boggling. And this expensive thought bubble was supposedly scratched on the back on an envelope in an aeroplane...




The coalition have all of 54 pages on their well thought out and designed policy.  Pop over to Mals web page and you can get a copy of his broadband "policy".

The documents they've felt the public is worthy of access to raise more questions than answers - yes I've read them a number of times and found lots of promises without any detail on how they intend to achieve their gioals.

As yet MT has been too scared to release any metrics that could be used to see if his costings are even in the ball park.  Pretty pathetic really.  Maximum node to premises cable length is surely not a state secret.

So if you think Labor have gone in with little research, then by your reasoning the Liberals think sleeping on the text book is all the study you need.

I can just see Telstra in negotiations with MT.  Thoedy says, "Mal I'm thinking of a number, an eleven digit number.  You mightn't guess it now, but in a month, or two, you will get there.  Mal, you remember Telstra already has a contract with the Federal Government, we don't need a new deal, but Mal, you really need a deal with us, so just hurry up and guess that number."


----------



## drsmith

Fairfax Media's hangout with Malcolm Turnbull today,

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...rnbull-20130804-2r72y.html?rand=1376863813765

It's mostly on the NBN but a few questions are asked on other issues.


----------



## sydboy007

So anyone who wants to upgrade to fibre under the NoBN had better not listen to MTs pricing as he seems to be very much out of kilter with what his beloved BT Openreach is charging

-----------------------------

Let’s take the maximum distance-based quoted by BT Openreach of £3500. Add the standard connection charge (‘fixed installation fee’) of £500 (flat, for all FttP OD installations), making £4000.
(We can’t overlook this extra £500 – it’s clearly stated on the same page).

Now convert it to $AU. This will result in an underestimate because UK wages are lower than ours, but we’ll stick with this fiction for now.

So we are up to $6940

BT quotes figures excluding VAT, but we will be expected to pay GST on our installation.
Now the maximum connection price is up to $7634 inc GST.

Using a conversion rate of £1 buys $1.735, and including the £500 fixed installation fee and GST, I have calculated what it may cost us at the quoted BT distance-based price points.

£ BT $ inc GST
200……..1335
1000……2862
1072……3000
1400……3626
2000……4771
2120……5000
3500……7634

So MT’s figure of $3000 correlates to a UK distance-based cost of £1072, or roughly what someone 200m from the node may pay, not 500m away.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> So anyone who wants to upgrade to fibre under the NoBN had better not listen to MTs pricing as he seems to be very much out of kilter with what his beloved BT Openreach is charging.



I wonder where that leaves the true cost of rolling out FTTH.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> I wonder where that leaves the true cost of rolling out FTTH.




The current NBN benefits from economies of scale.

I think most would agree that one off fibre installations would be more expensive per premises than the cost of doing the whole street (or most of the country)


----------



## drsmith

Syd,

Did you see my post from the 17th ?

Those economies of scale are looking even less likely to be sufficient to keep Labor's project within budget.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Syd,
> 
> Did you see my post from the 17th ?
> 
> Those economies of scale are looking even less likely to be sufficient to keep Labor's project within budget.




You might be right, but with the mining construction boom ending I'd say there will be a fair amount of competitive pressure to keep construction costs down.  Similar issues will bedevil MT as well.

The below starts to make it look like MT is going to need thousands of extra nodes to meet his minimum speed targets.  I dare say that's going to cause a pretty big blow out in his budget.

NZ and Britain use 0.5mm copper (24 AWG) the majority of ours is 0.4mm (26 AWG) taking into account the skin effect of signal transmission through this medium and gains per join, attenuation could be as much as 40% higher in our own implementation of FTTN.

Higher attenuation (signal degradation) will mean Malcolm Nodes will have to be placed much closer to the premises than he's budgeted for.  More nodes = higher CAPEX and OPEX.

Now MT has gone on about the new copper standards.  Vectoring only has an effect over the 1st 400m (provided the copper is in good nick to begin with ie great in the lab, not so great in the real world of 30+ year old copper), g.fast uses even higher frequencies so it's only viable over the 1st 200m and attenuates even faster.  So either these new standards are not relevant to the NoBN, or if they are then 60K worth of nodes is not going to be nearly enough to have maximum cable distances of somewhere between 200M and 400M.  Combined that with the lower quality copper used in Australia than other countries and it's easy to see how the NoBN is going to blow it's budget very quickly.

Then there's the Telstra elephant in the room and what kind of hard bargain they will drive, though I think MT let the cat out of the bag when he said he'd have given Telstra a lot more of the construction work for the NBN, so he might use sweet contracts on the construction side to get Telstra to hand over the copper for less than a kidney and liver.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> You might be right, but with the mining construction boom ending I'd say there will be a fair amount of competitive pressure to keep construction costs down.  Similar issues will bedevil MT as well.



If a slowdown in mining helps construction costs with Labor's project, it will help with the Opposition's as well and may result in them being able to roll out a greater proportion of FTTP, an outcome I'm sure you would welcome.

That being said, the evidence continues to grow that Labor's project is slipping even further behind schedule and over budget.


----------



## Smurf1976

Had an interesting conversation with an "A Class" licensed asbestos removalist today. This is an independent contractor, not employed to work on the NBN but they have looked at what is involved with doing this work "strictly following all the rules" as directed by Workplace Standards and also some specific Telstra requirements. 

Let's just say you could buy a perfectly decent second hand car for the cost of removing one pit this way. Suffice to say his words were to the effect of "Australia will go broke if this becomes the norm". He doesn't think it necessary to go to such lengths (going too far), although he doesn't think the way it was being done before was acceptable either (unsafe). If the safety regulators do take the hard line then we're looking at $ billions. Exactly how many billion is anyone's guess, but a lot of money that's for sure. 

I'm also told that there have been a huge number of people doing "asbestos awareness" courses in recent weeks with regard to NBN work. This is an awareness course, not a removalist course as such, but they can manage to end up with a B Class license to remove the stuff (this being a lower level license than an "A Class" license). How this fits with the apparently hard line being taken by safety regulators is anyone's guess at this stage - but the process of "strictly following all the rules" as described to me is a pretty full on job even to remove one pit. 

At the very least, all the fuss seems to have created some issues in the asbestos removal industry generally, especially when it's in a public place. What was a simple job (and safe) now seems to require all sorts of things which greatly increase the cost (and I've checked with another contractor just to be sure - they said exactly the same thing).


----------



## sydboy007

Smurf1976 said:


> At the very least, all the fuss seems to have created some issues in the asbestos removal industry generally, especially when it's in a public place. What was a simple job (and safe) now seems to require all sorts of things which greatly increase the cost (and I've checked with another contractor just to be sure - they said exactly the same thing).




At least it will be Telstra that is up for the bill, though NBN will wear the costs of the slowed rollout.

Asbestos, the gift that keeps on giving decades later :bad:


----------



## sydboy007

Not sure I fully agree with their tactics, but it ws interesting to see the reception Abbott Interneet received around the world

http://abbottsinternet.com.au/


----------



## drsmith

In the dying days of the current Labor administration, Fairfax now asks what-if ?



> As things stand, even some of the NBN's most passionate advocates are starting to doubt that NBN Co can pull off the job at hand and there have been suggestions that even the likes of Ed Husic – the Prime Minister's parliamentary secretary for broadband – would like to see Telstra brought into the project.
> 
> As for Telstra itself, well, an on-schedule rollout would have meant the company netting plenty of cash from NBN Co as subscribers were shifted from copper to fibre, but would also have pretty much sealed its fate as solely a retail service provider rather than network operator in the fixed-broadband market.
> 
> As things currently stand Telstra's future remains unclear, there is every chance that under a Coalition government that it might not only play a significant role as a builder – not operator – of the NBN and might also get to keep its HFC (pay TV) network operational for broadband services.




http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/government-it/what-if-the-nbn-had-stayed-on-track-20130825-hv1hq.html


----------



## Smurf1976

sydboy007 said:


> Not sure I fully agree with their tactics, but it ws interesting to see the reception Abbott Interneet received around the world



The rest of the world would think if somewhat crazy if a country sold its' natural resources overseas for  song, borrowed heaps of money to buy the same houses it already had and then couldn't afford decent internet.

Australia's political "leaders" are a joke. All of them.


----------



## sydboy007

Smurf1976 said:


> The rest of the world would think if somewhat crazy if a country sold its' natural resources overseas for  song, borrowed heaps of money to buy the same houses it already had and then couldn't afford decent internet.
> 
> Australia's political "leaders" are a joke. All of them.






Add in we have have actively designed the tax system to reward speculation over hard work ie NG housing in the hope of capital gains being enough to offset the income loss.  Bat poo crazy


----------



## sydboy007

In an interview on Sky News yesterday, Turnbull was asked about the issue. “I want to ask what sort of deal Telstra can expect here, what are you willing to pay Telstra for access to that copper link?” host David Speers asked Turnbull. The full video transcript - http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/media/sky-news-interview-26-august-2013#.Uh2p2RtkPIx

It will be interesting to see if Thoedy responds to this.


----------



## drsmith

> MALCOLM Turnbull's fibre-copper hybrid internet solution has achieved 100 megabits per second download speeds in an enormous inner-Sydney apartment block, in what he sees as a vindication of Coalition policy.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/aus...-with-nbn-speeds/story-fn4iyzsr-1226709390846

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/aus...ments-bypass-nbn/story-e6frganx-1226709304941

The following, IIRC has been touched on already in this thread.



Something along the lines of ultimately withdrawing the digital FTA spectrum so the only option for TV is the internet ?


----------



## sydboy007

Now Tony wants to filter all internet content.

I wonder what happened to his working group that was supposed to report back to him by mid 2012 on the Labor internet filter.  He was so opposed to it back then.  Seems now it's no long ALP policy it's a good thing.

Sheer bastardy to release a policy like this just 2 days before the election.


----------



## bellenuit

sydboy007 said:


> Now Tony wants to filter all internet content.
> 
> I wonder what happened to his working group that was supposed to report back to him by mid 2012 on the Labor internet filter.  He was so opposed to it back then.  Seems now it's no long ALP policy it's a good thing.
> 
> Sheer bastardy to release a policy like this just 2 days before the election.




Get real.  It is an opt out system designed for parents to help them control what their kids view. They do have that right currently you know, except they don't have the means to do effectively do it. At best this will help parents in this task and at worst it will be ineffective, meaning we are exactly where we are today.

2 Days before the election is a lot better than 2 days after.


----------



## sydboy007

bellenuit said:


> Get real.  It is an opt out system designed for parents to help them control what their kids view. They do have that right currently you know, except they don't have the means to do effectively do it. At best this will help parents in this task and at worst it will be ineffective, meaning we are exactly where we are today.
> 
> 2 Days before the election is a lot better than 2 days after.




Except that we will ALL be paying for an ineffective product.  Every ISp is goign to have to fund some form of filtering.  It's not cheap technology.

I dare say most teenagers will be able to do a bit of googling to bypass any filtering.

As for protecting young children, if a parent is letting them use the internet unsupervised then it's more about lack of parenting skills than dangers on the internet.


----------



## Chris45

sydboy007 said:


> I dare say most teenagers will be able to do a bit of googling to bypass any filtering.
> 
> As for protecting young children, if a parent is letting them use the internet unsupervised then it's more about lack of parenting skills than dangers on the internet.




Nothing will stop teenagers. They already create most of the pr0n they view.

Lack of parenting skills is the norm these days and that is the problem. How does responsible society protect kids from the incompetence of their parents?


----------



## bellenuit

sydboy007 said:


> As for protecting young children, if a parent is letting them use the internet unsupervised then it's more about lack of parenting skills than dangers on the internet.




That might have been the case before the mobile revolution, but it would be impossible to expect constant supervision nowadays. This in a way extends that supervision to when the kid is not with the parent. 

My main fear, as someone on another thread said, is that it puts in place a piece of technology that future governments may extend for political censorship.


----------



## Julia

sydboy007 said:


> *Now Tony wants to filter all internet content.*



And you constantly criticise politicians and others for spouting lies and inaccuracies.

Bellenuit has appropriately corrected your above ridiculously alarmist statement.


----------



## medicowallet

bellenuit said:


> Get real.  It is an opt out system designed for parents to help them control what their kids view. They do have that right currently you know, except they don't have the means to do effectively do it. At best this will help parents in this task and at worst it will be ineffective, meaning we are exactly where we are today.
> 
> 2 Days before the election is a lot better than 2 days after.




I was saying this exact thing to a bunch of medical students I was talking with today.

I guess it doesn't matter, as I have a lot of confidence that when they grow up, they will leave most of their socialism behind, like it seems a lot of older people do.

MW


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> Sheer bastardy to release a policy like this just 2 days before the election.




It would be sheer stupidity rather than sheer bastardy. But it's a non-event. Nice try. Time's running out.


----------



## drsmith

More problems ?



> The Australian can reveal that as of last week, connections to as many as 21,000 - one in eight - of the 163,500 existing homes and businesses passed by the fibre network were considered to contain defects in the network construction. Up to 7000 have major defects, which according to NBN Co documents, are those at risk of service degradation, outages or health and safety hazards.
> 
> The defects mean that network connections to thousands of homes and businesses, which have been classified as "ready for service", may require repairs before users can access the internet on the new network.
> 
> NBN Co last night disputed the figures, admitting there were significant defects but insisting the total number was lower than the figures obtained by The Australian.
> 
> Internal documents reveal NBN Co, which is building the $37.4bn network, was warned that a relaxation of its testing requirements when accepting completed work from its major construction partners was resulting in an increase in defects.
> 
> The documents warn that unless the NBN Co acts on recommendations to improve its construction processes and increase oversight of its delivery partners, it would be accepting a "sub-standard network into operation".




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...s-hit-rushed-nbn/story-e6frgaif-1226712731555


----------



## sydboy007

bellenuit said:


> That might have been the case before the mobile revolution, but it would be impossible to expect constant supervision nowadays. This in a way extends that supervision to when the kid is not with the parent.
> 
> My main fear, as someone on another thread said, is that it puts in place a piece of technology that future governments may extend for political censorship.




Considering how easy it is to load apps on a mobile device I dare say they will be the easiest devices to bypass any form of filtering that parents wish apply.

I'm sure within days there'll be an _app for that_.

Hopefully the backlash has been enough to turn the coalition from enforcing this.  I'm sure if there was demand for this service an ISP would already be offering it, but considering the low level of people willing to pay for spam filtering I doubt many parents will be willing to pay for content filtering either.  I don't see why ALL customers should have to wear the cost of content filtering.

A simple way for content filtering is to use opendns.com and then set your home router to use their DNS IPs.  You can then implement content filtering for FREE.

A simple google search will provide parents this information, so obviously those who want can / should already have it are eitehr not interested or ignoring it.


----------



## medicowallet

I think in 6-7 hours, some prominent posters in this thread will be feeling a little sore.

Oh well, time then to change focus (partially rightly so) to bashing the coalition's policy as opposed to defending the poorly developed and delivered Greens/Labor policy.

 MW


----------



## Calliope

medicowallet said:


> I think in 6-7 hours, some prominent posters in this thread will be feeling a little sore.
> 
> Oh well, time then to change focus (partially rightly so) to bashing the coalition's policy as opposed to defending the poorly developed and delivered Greens/Labor policy.
> 
> MW




I'm a little sore too, considering the godawful expensive shambles that NBN Co are bequeathing to Abbott and Turnbull to sort out. Like all Labor stuff-ups (e.g. PNG solution) it's going to be a long and costly process to salvage the usable bits.


----------



## sptrawler

Well I can give some hands on feedback.
The NBN have been mucking about outside the front of our place for weeks.
I asked one of the workers if I could get a connection, he said no, we are only connecting next door.
I nearly pissed myself laughing, what a joke.
This is obviously going to be the biggest stuff up since the 'pink batts' lol


----------



## So_Cynical

medicowallet said:


> I think in 6-7 hours, some prominent posters in this thread will be feeling a little sore.
> 
> Oh well, time then to change focus (partially rightly so) to bashing the coalition's policy as opposed to defending the poorly developed and delivered Greens/Labor policy.
> 
> MW




Coalition broad band policy has gone from about 1 billion (no fibre) a decade ago to 6.25 Billion (Fibre backhaul) in 2010 to $29.5 Billion (Full Fibre backbone) in 2013...id say this is a clear policy win for Labor.

http://www.computerworld.com.au/art...ches_6_25_billion_alternative_broadband_plan/

From 1 to 30 Billion in ten years is a hell of a policy reversal.


----------



## sydboy007

So lets start the countdown for Malcolm

target Date: Dec 31 2016
target installed nodes: 40000 (i think it will need to be closer to 45000 but will be conservative) 
Currently installed: 0
Required monthly avg install rate: 1025


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

wayneL said:


> I want a Ferrari too, but don't want't to pay for it. Hence I don't have one.




Thanks wayneL,

It looks as if those of us who were mocked for predicting the scrapping of the NBN were correct and a more affordable, workable, Turnbull service will be rolled out to all.

It will be done quickly and fairly, and not just to high income Range Rover voting ALP suburbs such as Mundingburra in Townsville.

gg


----------



## medicowallet

So_Cynical said:


> Coalition broad band policy has gone from about 1 billion (no fibre) a decade ago to 6.25 Billion (Fibre backhaul) in 2010 to $29.5 Billion (Full Fibre backbone) in 2013...id say this is a clear policy win for Labor.
> 
> http://www.computerworld.com.au/art...ches_6_25_billion_alternative_broadband_plan/
> 
> From 1 to 30 Billion in ten years is a hell of a policy reversal.




Well yes that is 30 times increase,

Still a 3x decrease on Labor's $90 billion elephant.

I am quite happy with my ADSL2.   For all I care, they can scrap the rollout to more than 50% of people for no difference over the next decade.

(insert left wing nutter argument about how much greater need there is for hi def pr0n and pirated movie download requirements)

I see Armidale in NSW has become a tech monstrosity in this country with its NBN speeds allowing it to compete with China, Korea and America.   What a great investment!!

MW


----------



## Chris45

medicowallet said:


> I am quite happy with my ADSL2.




I agree and I would suggest that 15-24 Mbps ADSL2+ is quite adequate for most people.

A problem many (myself included) are currently experiencing is network congestion during peak times (~5pm to ~9pm). Line speeds plummet to 25% or less of what they should be because there are simply too many people doing too much downloading for the network of routers and servers that make up the internet to handle. This is a worldwide problem and has nothing to do with the copper wire technology, and a shiny new blue fiber optic cable won't fix this, in fact the NBN will probably exacerbate the problem unless all of the exchanges are massively upgraded to accommodate the increased demand. I wonder if upgrading all of the exchanges was factored in to the NBN plan?

I also wonder how well the critical fiber optic connections in the underground pits will stand up to our storms and deluges over time.


----------



## So_Cynical

Chris45 said:


> in fact the NBN will probably exacerbate the problem unless all of *the exchanges are massively upgraded* to accommodate the increased demand. I wonder if upgrading all of the exchanges was factored in to the NBN plan?




What has the exchanges got to do with the NBN?


----------



## sydboy007

Chris45 said:


> I agree and I would suggest that 15-24 Mbps ADSL2+ is quite adequate for most people.
> 
> A problem many (myself included) are currently experiencing is network congestion during peak times (~5pm to ~9pm). Line speeds plummet to 25% or less of what they should be because there are simply too many people doing too much downloading for the network of routers and servers that make up the internet to handle. This is a worldwide problem and has nothing to do with the copper wire technology, and a shiny new blue fiber optic cable won't fix this, in fact the NBN will probably exacerbate the problem unless all of the exchanges are massively upgraded to accommodate the increased demand. I wonder if upgrading all of the exchanges was factored in to the NBN plan?
> 
> I also wonder how well the critical fiber optic connections in the underground pits will stand up to our storms and deluges over time.




Every exchange has fibre into them.

The issue you are highlighting is one that is similar to the electricity network.  The advantage with the internet is you can allow congestion to occur, where with the electricity network you have to pump the power through or suffer brownouts or even blackouts if things run too hot, rather than spend the money to have the capacity to meet the infrequent peak demand that would then cause access prices to be far higher than they are.  It's one of the reasons why some ISPs have off peak quota because basically the network isn't particularly used from around 2am till 10am and this encourages people to do their downloads out of peak hours.  At work when looking at the bandwidth graphs of the core links you always see a 10-15% spike in traffic at 2am that then settles back down after an hour or 2.

I'd say change ISPs so you go with one that has a lower contention ratio and your slow peak speeds should improve quite a bit.  If you're in a more reginal area then possibly Telstra hasn't provided enough bandwidth into the exchange, and there's no alternative fibre.

The issue you have highlighted is FAR more likely to occur within an FTTN network as a single node is far more likely to experience congestion than a FAN (Fiber Access Node).

Why?  I'm glad you asked.

With a node you'll be stuck using a single link speed - hopefully 10Gbps but I'm expecting they might only have 1Gps backhaul, or maybe 2*1Gbps for redundancy.  With a FAN you can afford to install WDM (Wave Division Multiplexing) which allows multiple light frequencies to be sent over the same fibre.  This equipment is expensive so it works well when you can share the cost over a large subscriber base.  A node would not be economical for this.  Current Dense WDM offers up to 800 Gps via 80 * 10Gbps wavelengths.

The NBN has been built so a FAN can support up to 152PB of data / month.  I'm sure you know what a GB (Gigabyte) is as most hard drives use this to measure their size.  1 PB (Petabyte) is a million gigabytes / thousand terabytes.  There would have been 714 FANS around the country connecting back to 195 Service area POIs (Point of Interconnect) which then connected back to 14 Aggregation POIs.  This will no be partially replaced with thousands of exchanges and 50-60 thousand of nodes.  I know which network will be easier and cheaper to support - hint it's the network with the least amount of hardware that can fail.

The other advantage of the Fiber NBN is that because you are aggregating quite a few users over the FAN they connect to, the law of averages works in your favour.  The NBN FAN is designed to support over 76000 customers.  On a single node you only need a few heavy users to start clogging up the backhaul for the entire node.

As for fibre resiliency, well it survives thousands of KMs under the oceans, and spanning 10s of thousands of kilometres around the country.  Generally it takes a backhoe to take out a fibre cable, or a subsea quake / fishing trawler anchor, at least in my experience in supporting networks than run on it.

Note that it is under the FTTN that exchange backhaul is more of an issue - did MTs plan take into account the requirement for this?

A final note.  Because the NBN is based on xPON and is a loop style network, you can have a cable cut and things still work.  You would need 2 cuts to the GPON loop for a total outage.  Not knowing what MT will use to backhaul his nodes I don't know if his network will have near as much resiliency.

Do you know if MT has factored in the building of a new small power station to cope with the increased electricity demand his network will cause?


----------



## Chris45

Thanks Sydboy. With your IT background you obviously have a much deeper understanding of all this than I do. OK, I accept that fibre will probably be resilient so, PROVIDING it's all connected up properly, the NBN may be more reliable than the current copper network. But if we spend these $zillions on the NBN, and when the fibre eventually reaches my home in several years time I find that the congestion problem persists, I'm going to feel a bit cheated!

Anyway, we're under new management now so whether we like it or not, a new plan is underway.

When I first got ADSL2+ a couple of years ago, it worked perfectly and a $30/m, 15Mbps, 10GB plan satisfied all of my needs, so when it works properly it's perfect for ordinary users and I'd like to see the money spent on getting the ADSL2+ back to what it should be asap.



sydboy007 said:


> On a single node you only need a few heavy users to start clogging up the backhaul for the entire node.




This would explain why speed slows dramatically at certain times, usually after hours and at weekends. From reading posts on Whirlpool, it seems that people with other ISPs are having similar problems ... even those with Optus, so churning to another ISP may not help.

How do I find out the contention ratios of alternative ISPs?

I'd like to know what speeds others get around 6-7pm. Perhaps some could visit   http://www.ozspeedtest.com/bandwidth-test/   and report back here.

I'm currently with Eftel who, as I understand it, resells bandwidth from Dodo who uses the BigPond network. Eftel arranged for a Telstra guy to come out one day and he spent the afternoon testing all of the cables etc. He tried everything including giving me a new port at the exchange, new wire pair from the exchange to my Telstra pit outside, and then running a new temporary cable from the pit into my house to connect to HIS modem and HIS laptop, thus bypassing all of my cables and equipment. The lines all tested OK, but the interesting thing was that using HIS modem and laptop and HIS BigPond account, his speed was actually WORSE than mine. This suggests to me that the problem is not with my ISP but, as you suggested, maybe to do with insufficient bandwidth into the exchange. Telstra have scheduled some maintenance at my exchange for Wednesday so hopefully there might be an improvement afterwards.


----------



## sydboy007

Chris45 said:


> the NBN may be more reliable than the current copper network. But if we spend these $zillions on the NBN, and when the fibre eventually reaches my home in several years time I find that the congestion problem persists, I'm going to feel a bit cheated!
> 
> When I first got ADSL2+ a couple of years ago, it worked perfectly and a $30/m, 15Mbps, 10GB plan satisfied all of my needs, so when it works properly it's perfect for ordinary users and I'd like to see the money spent on getting the ADSL2+ back to what it should be asap.
> 
> This would explain why speed slows dramatically at certain times, usually after hours and at weekends. From reading posts on Whirlpool, it seems that people with other ISPs are having similar problems ... even those with Optus, so churning to another ISP may not help.
> 
> How do I find out the contention ratios of alternative ISPs?
> 
> I'd like to know what speeds others get around 6-7pm. Perhaps some could visit   http://www.ozspeedtest.com/bandwidth-test/   and report back here.
> 
> I'm currently with Eftel who, as I understand it, resells bandwidth from Dodo who uses the BigPond network. Eftel arranged for a Telstra guy to come out one day and he spent the afternoon testing all of the cables etc. He tried everything including giving me a new port at the exchange, new wire pair from the exchange to my Telstra pit outside, and then running a new temporary cable from the pit into my house to connect to HIS modem and HIS laptop, thus bypassing all of my cables and equipment. The lines all tested OK, but the interesting thing was that using HIS modem and laptop and HIS BigPond account, his speed was actually WORSE than mine. This suggests to me that the problem is not with my ISP but, as you suggested, maybe to do with insufficient bandwidth into the exchange. Telstra have scheduled some maintenance at my exchange for Wednesday so hopefully there might be an improvement afterwards.




Chris

Your 15Mbs sync speed puts you in prob the top 20% of ADSl connections.  I have a sync of around 12Mbs when it's dry.  My colleges mostly live in the burbs and they're lucky to get 4Mbs, with lots of issues.  1 of the senior managers lives in Manly and has copper that is exposes in places, but Telstra have yet to fix the issue so he continues to have regular loss of his internet.

If you're not in a capital city area then I dare say there's no alternative backhaul to Telstra.  It's a major issue as Telstra charge an arm and a leg for it.  In the cities fibre can be generally quite cheap to rent.

Generally you can tell from the ISP pricing what their contention ratio will be like.  Exetel and Dodo are likely to be quite high, TPG as well on their unlimited plans, where as internode or iinet have a far better ratio.  To a degree you get what you pay for and the ISPs with the cheap high download plans tend to attract the torrent leachers that clog up the network, though most companies these days run hardware that can slow down torrent traffic so that your standard web traffic takes priority.

Don't expect a bandwidth upgrade that quickly by Telstra.  My company is pretty big in terms of services we have with Telstra and prob once or twice a month we will face having a customer on a congested Telstra DSLAM and there's little we can do.  Telstra offers no compensation for it, yet we wear the brand damage for it.

I honestly see the FTTN being a waste of money, but as you say we have new management.  I dare say doing some sweetheart deals with Telstra on the construction of the fibre NBN may have moved things along a bit faster, and if we had focused more on the cities to increase the number of customers connected and revenue flowing, perceptions might be vastly different too.  Malcolm is going to face a whole new unknown issues as he gets his rollout started.  I don't envy him his job.  It will be interesting to see if the Coalition are forced to have a rural bias in their rollout schedule as well.  If not then the Nationals really have turned into a useless party for country areas.

As a Telstra shareholder I will be expecting a very high extra payment from the Government to gain permanent access to the copper network now that it retains a very high economic value.  It will be interesting to see what this value comes to, as the current leasing of access to the ducts is still required by the NBN.  Current ULL monthly rental (think copper line for naked DSL) is from $16.21 in metro areas and higher in non metro and rural areas (which is why you don't see anyone installing their own DSLAMs outside the capital cities and major secondary cities).  I'd expect  some similar kind of rental income from the new NBN - slightly less since less of the service is Telstra copper, but certainly a monthly rental of $8 per service wouldn't be too unreasonable.


----------



## overhang

Hi sydboy007, just wondering if you could answer something I've been wondering about the coalition NBN.  Home owners have the option to upgrade to FTTH at the cost of upwards of $5000.  My understanding is that there is not enough room for both the fibre and the copper in the same duct.  What I'm wondering is if someone wants to pay the $5000 then is this going to impede the other copper users in the same duct?  Also given the age and degradation of the copper is this process of inserting fibre down the duct likely to further hinder those homes still using the copper?


----------



## Chris45

sydboy007 said:


> I have a sync of around 12Mbs when it's dry.  My colleges mostly live in the burbs and they're lucky to get 4Mbs, with lots of issues.  1 of the senior managers lives in Manly and has copper that is exposes in places, but Telstra have yet to fix the issue so he continues to have regular loss of his internet.



Sydboy, thanks for the info. I'm in central Gold Coast, so suburban capital city more or less. I'm 1.651 cable km from my Ashmore exchange and my estimated maximum speed is 16.666Mbps.

During the day I currently get ~10Mbps, so 2/3 of what it used to be, but it's acceptable and it sounds like I'm doing reasonably well given that I'm on a budget plan.

However, in the evenings I'm lucky to get 4Mbps, also with lots of issues, so I usually just give up and try again later. If this is what everyone else is getting when they get home from work then I can understand the frustration because it really is quite hopeless sometimes.

According to nbnco, the NBN rollout is supposed to commence in my area "within one year", but they said that a year ago so I guess it's probably not going to happen now. If MT's plan can can get us back to ~15Mbps evening speeds in the near future, then a lot of people, myself included, would be happy enough with that.

I don't know the technical or expense details but wouldn't it be better to build FTTN first to get everyone up to speed asap, and then progressively rollout the FTTH when the budget allows?


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> So lets start the countdown for Malcolm
> 
> target Date: Dec 31 2016
> target installed nodes: 40000 (i think it will need to be closer to 45000 but will be conservative)
> Currently installed: 0
> Required monthly avg install rate: 1025



With a new government, question number one will be the actual state of the current rollout.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> With a new government, question number one will be the actual state of the current rollout.




I would say fairly irrelevant since:

* Current 3 year rollout will be completed as contracts are to be honoured - so MT says

* Current NBN rollout schedule has been known long before the Coalition Broadband Policy was released so the FTTN build would be for all other areas.

Remember, this is a no excuses Government.  Either MT has the appropriate project management skills or he doesn't.  I'd say this time next year we'll be to close to answering that question.


----------



## sydboy007

Chris45 said:


> Sydboy, thanks for the info. I'm in central Gold Coast, so suburban capital city more or less. I'm 1.651 cable km from my Ashmore exchange and my estimated maximum speed is 16.666Mbps.
> 
> During the day I currently get ~10Mbps, so 2/3 of what it used to be, but it's acceptable and it sounds like I'm doing reasonably well given that I'm on a budget plan.
> 
> However, in the evenings I'm lucky to get 4Mbps, also with lots of issues, so I usually just give up and try again later. If this is what everyone else is getting when they get home from work then I can understand the frustration because it really is quite hopeless sometimes.
> 
> According to nbnco, the NBN rollout is supposed to commence in my area "within one year", but they said that a year ago so I guess it's probably not going to happen now. If MT's plan can can get us back to ~15Mbps evening speeds in the near future, then a lot of people, myself included, would be happy enough with that.
> 
> I don't know the technical or expense details but wouldn't it be better to build FTTN first to get everyone up to speed asap, and then progressively rollout the FTTH when the budget allows?




Chris

This site might give u the option to move to Optus - http://www.yourbroadband.com.au/exchanges.php?Exchange=ASHM - seems they have their own DSLAM in your exchange so will most likely have separate backhaul to your current Telstra Wholesale ISP.  www.whirlpool.net can help if you jin up and let people know you're thinking of moving to Optus off the Ashmore exchange, hopefully someone can give you an idea of their current experience.

I do think NBN bit off more than they could chew in terms of beign the managers of the NBN rollout.  Possibly teaming up with Telstra could have allowed some of the isues to be handled better.  I also feel that the rolout was allowed to occur in the most efficient manner with the focus (generally rightly) on rural areas and those with poor internet speeds, though this was never acknowledged by the opposition.

Labour is the single biggest expense for both networks.  The FTTN network saves most of its CAPEX via being less labour intensive, though I have my doubts as to how big the savings will be as probably the single biggest issue faced will be the fact that there is no up to date records for the pair mapping of the main cable to the pillar and from pillar to premises.  When a pillar to node cutover is to occur it will be a very time consuming process to map the correct premises to the correct node port so your internet and phone continue to work.  So yes we save some money now, but in 10-15 years when the households receiving the lowest minimum speeds are finding it inadequate we will be faced with a pretty expensive upgrade process, most likely involving the junking of the node and moving to a complete xPON as the current NBN is based on.

They say in the USA currently Netflix represents over 50% of total usage.  When they finally make it to Australia I wont be surprised to see them represent a similar level of traffic.  They've even started to make their own content as that is what sells.  Looking at my households consumption tastes, there is some overlap, but aroudn 50% is only watched by 1 of 3.  Imagine in 5 years trying to keep up with watching 2 or 3 different tv shows online at the same time.  Some will say it's TV and not important, but to my way of thinking entertainment is just as important as anything else in life.  Nothing more annoying than a bored human being .

I blame Labor for combining Telecom and OTC many years ago.  Would have been better to have had OTC going head to head with Telstra, preferably with a Telecom infrastructure wholesale company.  Howard made things many times worse by selling a vertically integrated monopoly that had a legal obligation to use it resources to maximise profits for shareholders, even if this wasn't the best thign for the economy.

All FTTN rollouts have occurred by the incumbent carrier (owner of the copper) doing the work.  I have a suspicion this is what MT intends to do by giving some high profit construction contracts to Telstra to get his rollout done ASAP.


----------



## sydboy007

overhang said:


> Hi sydboy007, just wondering if you could answer something I've been wondering about the coalition NBN.  Home owners have the option to upgrade to FTTH at the cost of upwards of $5000.  My understanding is that there is not enough room for both the fibre and the copper in the same duct.  What I'm wondering is if someone wants to pay the $5000 then is this going to impede the other copper users in the same duct?  Also given the age and degradation of the copper is this process of inserting fibre down the duct likely to further hinder those homes still using the copper?




No one knows what the fibre upgrade option will cost.  Not even MT has an idea.  We also don't know if it will be an option for every node, and if it is I dare say it will be limited as you will have to install a special card to allow this, so the number of ports will be limited.

So far there is no information on the upgrade process.  If it happens as requests come in then you will find it quite expensive as there will be a lot of repeat labour costs.  Will they make you wait awhile to see if someone else wants an upgrade so the unit labour costs are lower?  No one knows.  I suspect MT doesn't either as his attitude seems to be it wont be that popular.

How much room will be available in the ducts, well that's probably a question you wont have an answer to till they go to run the fiber through.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I would say fairly irrelevant since:
> 
> * Current 3 year rollout will be completed as contracts are to be honoured - so MT says
> 
> * Current NBN rollout schedule has been known long before the Coalition Broadband Policy was released so the FTTN build would be for all other areas.
> 
> Remember, this is a no excuses Government.  Either MT has the appropriate project management skills or he doesn't.  I'd say this time next year we'll be to close to answering that question.



Have all the contracts been signed for the current three year rollout schedule ?

Also, isn't there an update on the progress (or lack of ??) of the current rollout that Labor chose not to release before the election ?


----------



## ufo8mydog

Chris45 said:


> I don't know the technical or expense details but wouldn't it be better to build FTTN first to get everyone up to speed asap, and then progressively rollout the FTTH when the budget allows?




You have to remember that FTTH/N is 'off-budget'. It is initially funded with T-bonds raised by the government and is therefore capital in nature. The interest on the bonds will be paid off by the subscribers. All indicators point to the average revenue per customer being higher than anticipated as people opt for the larger plans.

As the networks are topologically different you can't  just 'roll-out' to the FTTH, it is a complete redesign and you would be doubling up on labour costs (and of course, future labour is more expensive than labour consumed today).


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Have all the contracts been signed for the current three year rollout schedule ?
> 
> Also, isn't there an update on the progress (or lack of ??) of the current rollout that Labor chose not to release before the election ?




Once again irrelevant.

MT and the Coalition have been saying the current NBN will take 30 years to complete, so if they have not been setting their own policy around that, then what were they doing the last 3 years in opposition?

They can't have it both ways.  Either they were lying when they said the NBN rollout was going far to slowly, or they have not bothered planning around the fact that it has been slower than planned.

MT has said all current contracts will be honoured.  My understanding is pretty much all the contracts for the initial 3 year rollout have been signed.  if someone has info to show otherwise then I suppose it will depend on MT as to what happens with those areas.

All these issues are known unknows.  The coalition may have not know the specifics, but they did know they would have these grey areas to deal with on assuming power, so they're in no way an excuse for the FTTN rollout to not meet its targets.

MT has set the criteria.  The ONLY benchmark that is relevant is that ALL Australians have access to a minimum of 25Mbs by the end of 2016.  Anything less is failure to implement their policy, which should see at a minimum MT stepping down as communications minister.  Excuses will not be accepted as they were not for the previous Government.  Any delays in doing a deal with Telstra will not be accepted.  MT saw how long it took Labor to come up with the initial deal with Telstra.

A second criteria is that FTTN plans will be no more expensive than current ADSL plans, as current Fiber NBN plans are.  Should we see an increase in broadband pricing, then the Coalition will have to answer why their cheaper policy has not been implemented correctly.

Am I biased against MT and his FTTN.  For sure.  Am I using objective criteria supplied by MT to rate his performance.  For sure.

This will be one area of Coalition policy that will be very easily monitored for meeting the policy objectives.  No excuses.


----------



## Chris45

sydboy007 said:


> Chris
> This site might give u the option to move to Optus - http://www.yourbroadband.com.au/exchanges.php?Exchange=ASHM - seems they have their own DSLAM in your exchange so will most likely have separate backhaul to your current Telstra Wholesale ISP.  www.whirlpool.net can help if you jin up and let people know you're thinking of moving to Optus off the Ashmore exchange, hopefully someone can give you an idea of their current experience.




Sydboy, thanks for your comprehensive and helpful replies. I checked with my sister who lives a few suburbs away and is with Optus and her speed is also down 30-50%, so no simple solutions at present, it seems.

If current NBN contracts are going to be honoured by the new govt, then the NBN may eventually make it to my street and if I can get a 12Mbps, 5GB plan for $30 (eg SkyMesh) I'd probably be happy with that.

I shudder to think what will happen if/when that Netflix starts up here. I get more than enough TV down my antenna and via iView etc. so I certainly won't be subscribing. Can't help feeling that we'd all be MUCH better off spending less time sitting staring at screens and more time moving around and interacting with each other (works for me), but that's "progress" in C21 I guess. How on earth did the kids of 50yrs ago manage to entertain themselves without all of this technological wizardry??? Dunno ... but we did!

Ufo, thanks, so much for that idea then.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> They can't have it both ways.  Either they were lying when they said the NBN rollout was going far to slowly, or they have not bothered planning around the fact that it has been slower than planned.
> 
> MT has said all current contracts will be honoured.  My understanding is pretty much all the contracts for the initial 3 year rollout have been signed.  if someone has info to show otherwise then I suppose it will depend on MT as to what happens with those areas.



IIRC, the Coalition were assuming 565,000 premises in established areas by June 30 2014. This is somewhat less than the NBN's schedule to that date.

When you say pretty much all the contracts for the initial 3 year rollout have been signed, what specifically do you mean be initially or to put it another way, 3 years to when ?

Also, what is the basis of this understanding ?

It would also be interesting to know when the most recent contracts were signed.


----------



## Calliope

At last, a professional may head the NBN Co.

http://www.news.com.au/breaking-new...itkowski-for-nbn/story-e6frfku9-1226715836171


----------



## sydboy007

Chris45 said:


> Sydboy, thanks for your comprehensive and helpful replies. I checked with my sister who lives a few suburbs away and is with Optus and her speed is also down 30-50%, so no simple solutions at present, it seems.
> 
> If current NBN contracts are going to be honoured by the new govt, then the NBN may eventually make it to my street and if I can get a 12Mbps, 5GB plan for $30 (eg SkyMesh) I'd probably be happy with that.
> 
> I shudder to think what will happen if/when that Netflix starts up here. I get more than enough TV down my antenna and via iView etc. so I certainly won't be subscribing. Can't help feeling that we'd all be MUCH better off spending less time sitting staring at screens and more time moving around and interacting with each other (works for me), but that's "progress" in C21 I guess. How on earth did the kids of 50yrs ago manage to entertain themselves without all of this technological wizardry??? Dunno ... but we did!
> 
> Ufo, thanks, so much for that idea then.




My Dad is with exetel on the 12/1 plan and uses their free VOIP account - cost him $30 to transfer his old landline number.  He gets 10c untimed local / std calls.  He's been quite happy with the performance.  Certainly a big jump for him from the 1.5Mbs connection he was on.  Unfortunately the plan he's on is no longer offered by them - $35 for 20GB a month.  It was certainly a good plan for someone who watches a bit of video and emailing / skype.

http://bc.whirlpool.net.au/  lets you see what's available in your area.  Possibly IINET or TPG have their own DSLAM in your exchange.

I dare say if you are on the current 3 year rollout map you will get fibre.

I can understand you frustration.  I'm with MNF who use Optus DSLAMs and noticed quite crappy speeds some nights.  Was advised there is congestion at the exchange but Optus do not plan to upgrade the backhaul till March 2014.  They said i could leave without penalty or take a $10/month price cut.  I took the price cut as the slow speeds at night prob only annoy me 1 or 2 nights a week.  Probably 1 of the benefits of being a shift worker .

I'd like the Govt to step in and stop the infrastructure owner from signing up any new customers UNELSS they are transparent and let the customer know they are experiencing congestion and when they expect the backhaul to be upgraded.  Should get the ISPs upgrading things a lot faster.

Have you made a complaint to EFTEL?  If you can get them to admit there is congestion then you can try your luck with getting some form of price reduction like I did.

I wonder how we didn't kill each other off during the long euro winters when we were cave dwellers.  Months on end with nothing to do.  I think each generation looks back and wonders about the current one.  I certainly think I was lucky to grow up without mobile phones and tablets being the norm.  It's hard being poor these days.  it's certainly a lot more obvious as the poor kids don't have all the tech toys.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> IIRC, the Coalition were assuming 565,000 premises in established areas by June 30 2014. This is somewhat less than the NBN's schedule to that date.
> 
> When you say pretty much all the contracts for the initial 3 year rollout have been signed, what specifically do you mean be initially or to put it another way, 3 years to when ?
> 
> Also, what is the basis of this understanding ?
> 
> It would also be interesting to know when the most recent contracts were signed.




I suppose at the end of the day it's all irrelevant, from my perspective anyways.

The coalition went to the election and supposedly got a mandate to change from a FTTP to FTTN rollout with the promise of a minimum 25Mbs by December 2016, with a lower cost to the public.

The only things relevant to me is:

* Do 100% of premises have access to a minimum of 25 Mbs by December 2016

* Is the cost of broadband access no more expensive than current ADSL / Fiber NBN plans.

Any issues are for the Coalition to overcome, and to be honest I don't really feel the Coalition should be talking about them as it will sound like an excuse.

So I hope within a few months MT has the complete rollout schedule for all the punters to access.  I'd certainly like to know when my speed upgrade is going to occur.

At present we have little to benchmark their performance, except for the above to criteria which is a tad over 3 years away, but a rollout schedule should help with gaining an understanding of how on target they are.

It will certainly be interesting to see if MT took into account the lower copper quality here compared to the UK (0.4mm to 0.6mm) and how much closer the nodes will need to be to premises to achieve the minimum 25 / 50 Mbs target.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I suppose at the end of the day it's all irrelevant, from my perspective anyways.
> 
> The coalition went to the election and supposedly got a mandate to change from a FTTP to FTTN rollout with the promise of a minimum 25Mbs by December 2016, with a lower cost to the public.



Regardless of your perspective, if the current state of the rollout and future contracts signed renders that date unachievable with the Coalition rollout, that's not their fault.

Some reporting on rollout numbers to June 30 2014 are appearing in the media,



> Leaked internal forecasts seen by The Australian Financial Review indicate NBN Co now expects to have 855,935 existing homes and businesses ready to connect to the fibre network by June 2014. This is 273,065 fewer than the company forecast it would reach in the latest corporate plan, released in August last year.




http://www.brw.com.au/p/tech-gadgets/disconnect_nbn_to_miss_rollout_target_AiWA74uQ0wHwovDpNRLUiO

In relation to recently signed contracts, the above article also had this,



> The shortfall comes despite a last-minute rush by NBN Co to sign new contracts worth $580 million with Leighton Holdings-owned Silcar, and Downer EDI before the government business enterprise went into caretaker mode on Monday in the lead-up to the federal election on *September 7.
> 
> The NBN is one of the key election policy battlegrounds between Labor and the Coalition, which has promised to deliver a cheaper but slower alternative.
> 
> The latest construction deals will not affect NBN Co’s ability to reach the June 2014 targets because it takes 12 months on average to make premises ready for the NBN.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Regardless of your perspective, if the current state of the rollout and future contracts signed renders that date unachievable with the Coalition rollout, that's not their fault.
> 
> Some reporting on rollout numbers to June 30 2014 are appearing in the media,
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.brw.com.au/p/tech-gadgets/disconnect_nbn_to_miss_rollout_target_AiWA74uQ0wHwovDpNRLUiO
> 
> In relation to recently signed contracts, the above article also had this,




Considering what the Coalition said during the election campaign, and the fact they have over 3 years to complete the fibre contracts, I don't see that they have any valid excuses for not meeting the targets they say they have a mandate for.  It's a key promise of the election.  They did not many seeing anythign that would stop them meeting their targets.  You can't tell the public you can achieve something by a particular date, then turn around and say but but but.  labor was rightly voted out of office for doing this.  I expect the samer criteria to be applied to the Abbott Govt.  Results, no excuses.  That's the Abbott promise.


----------



## Chris45

sydboy007 said:


> I think each generation looks back and wonders about the current one.  I certainly think I was lucky to grow up without mobile phones and tablets being the norm.  It's hard being poor these days.  it's certainly a lot more obvious as the poor kids don't have all the tech toys.



Sydboy, I DEFINITELY agree with that. 

I reckon my life would have been quite miserable if I'd had to put up with the cyber-bullying at school that the kids of today do. The frequency of stabbings at schools these days is a telling indicator! Being a bit aspergery, I probably wouldn't have lasted the distance.

That Exetel 12/1 plan now costs $50 but with 50GB data. I'd be pushing to use that in a YEAR!

I checked Whirlpool and there are several $30 plans I could switch to, but I suspect they probably all have high contention ratios like the aaNet/Eftel plan I'm on now (also no longer offered). As you said, we probably get what we pay for.

Yes, I complained to Eftel and their Filipino techies phoned me and we went through their checklist of testing my equipment. They then escalated it to Telstra who sent a guy out to check the lines. He found some "foreign voltage" on my line and gave me a new line as I mentioned earlier. Given that they no longer offer a $30/mth plan, I doubt they'd be interested in giving me a rebate and they probably wouldn't be too sad if I churned to someone else.

However, I see SkyMesh have a "NBN-WA15" wireless plan that sounds quite interesting ... 12/1Mbps, 5+10GB data, $30/mth incl VOIP.

What are your thoughts on NBN wireless? Cheers C45.


----------



## sydboy007

Chris45 said:


> Sydboy, I DEFINITELY agree with that.
> 
> I reckon my life would have been quite miserable if I'd had to put up with the cyber-bullying at school that the kids of today do. The frequency of stabbings at schools these days is a telling indicator! Being a bit aspergery, I probably wouldn't have lasted the distance.
> 
> That Exetel 12/1 plan now costs $50 but with 50GB data. I'd be pushing to use that in a YEAR!
> 
> I checked Whirlpool and there are several $30 plans I could switch to, but I suspect they probably all have high contention ratios like the aaNet/Eftel plan I'm on now (also no longer offered). As you said, we probably get what we pay for.
> 
> Yes, I complained to Eftel and their Filipino techies phoned me and we went through their checklist of testing my equipment. They then escalated it to Telstra who sent a guy out to check the lines. He found some "foreign voltage" on my line and gave me a new line as I mentioned earlier. Given that they no longer offer a $30/mth plan, I doubt they'd be interested in giving me a rebate and they probably wouldn't be too sad if I churned to someone else.
> 
> However, I see SkyMesh have a "NBN-WA15" wireless plan that sounds quite interesting ... 12/1Mbps, 5+10GB data, $30/mth incl VOIP.
> 
> What are your thoughts on NBN wireless? Cheers C45.




Chris

not sure if you will be able to get NBN wireless.  It is being setup in more rural areas where fibre was too cost prohibitive.

From what I've read on whirlpool people talking about the NBN wireless experience they've been pretty positive.

Note than the NBN wireless is very different to 3G/4G you get with the phone companies.  NBN wireless is fixed, and they know how many premises the base station will support and are able to provision the service so you can either get 12/1 or 25/5

- - - Updated - - -

Turnbull has now said it may take up to a year to transition away from the FTTP rollout to FTTN.

No info on how this will actually impact the start of the FTTN rollout, but if he means it could take a year before nodes are being installed then he's in big trouble.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Turnbull has now said it may take up to a year to transition away from the FTTP rollout to FTTN.



That's not new.


----------



## DB008

Ziggy might be in the hot seat.


----------



## drsmith

An interesting piece in the AFR today,

http://www.afr.com/p/national/telstra_shareholders_can_take_hope_VUkkBoiuHB6x62JKRxAL4I


----------



## Chris45

drsmith said:


> An interesting piece in the AFR today,
> http://www.afr.com/p/national/telstra_shareholders_can_take_hope_VUkkBoiuHB6x62JKRxAL4I



Only available to subscribers unfortunately, unless you know of a hack and would like to share it. 

Was the article similar to this by any chance?
http://www.smh.com.au/business/telstra-in-box-seat-with-turnbull-broadband-plan-20110804-1idhe.html



> In the cities, NBN network assets and hybrid fibre that Telstra and Optus built during their pay-TV rollout more than a decade ago would be the broadband backbone.



Most people probably already have a cable running past their house so surely it would make sense to use it rather than bypassing it with an entirely new network.

A Foxtel cable runs past my house. Next door has it and gets 20Mbps. I'd certainly be happy with that if MT could reach an agreement with TLS and the price was right.


----------



## sails

Chris45 said:


> ...A Foxtel cable runs past my house. Next door has it and gets 20Mbps. I'd certainly be happy with that if MT could reach an agreement with TLS and the price was right.




We are on bigpond cable (no NBN) - download speeds are great but upload is pathetic! Can't see why we need NBN when we can get these download speeds.


----------



## Trembling Hand

sails said:


> We are on bigpond cable (no NBN) - download speeds are great but upload is pathetic! Can't see why we need NBN when we can get these download speeds.




Same here, This is actually the slowest I've seen it during biz hours for mine in a long time, Mostly i get around 100 meg download,




What is wrong with 1 mg upload sails?

- - - Updated - - -

Actually here is the history over the last 3-4 months,


----------



## sydboy007

sails said:


> We are on bigpond cable (no NBN) - download speeds are great but upload is pathetic! Can't see why we need NBN when we can get these download speeds.




YAY for you.  What about the ~70% of the population that is unable to get cable?

But don't worry, MT has basicaly said you wont be getting an upgrade untill everyone else.  Better hope Telstra keeps maintaining their cable network for internet performance.

From what I've read Optus doesn't even sell new cable internet connections anymore.

Just for perspective, avg internet speeds in Australia is around the 4Mbs mark.


----------



## drsmith

Chris45 said:


> Only available to subscribers unfortunately, unless you know of a hack and would like to share it.



This is one of those occasions when I wish I'd quoted some of it here. It was openly available earlier today, but it's obviously behind the pay wall now.

One particular bit that stood out to me was that cost blowouts with the current NBN were stated as a given.

- - - Updated - - -



sydboy007 said:


> YAY for you.  What about the ~70% of the population that is unable to get cable?
> 
> But don't worry, MT has basicaly said you wont be getting an upgrade untill everyone else.  Better hope Telstra keeps maintaining their cable network for internet performance.
> 
> From what I've read Optus doesn't even sell new cable internet connections anymore.
> 
> Just for perspective, avg internet speeds in Australia is around the 4Mbs mark.



You're in for a very long 9 years if you just want to bag this Coalition government from the outset.

Something else that comes to mind is where's Myths ?


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> You're in for a very long 9 years if you just want to bag this Coalition government from the outset.
> 
> Something else that comes to mind is where's Myths ?




Not bagging.  Just stating the policy.

But then with internet speeds like that I'd not be pining for the NBN either.

But considering Telstra have a dual use of the cable it will be interesting to see if they favour Foxtel or Internet speeds.  Every extra HD channel eats into available bandwidth.


----------



## bellenuit

sydboy007 said:


> Every extra HD channel eats into available bandwidth.




I've never thought of that aspect. I had assumed my cable speed was, among other things, dependent on not just the number of other internet users on that piece of cable, but also the number of TV viewers. But the latter doesn't make sense when I think about it. Every cable channel has to be transmitted on the cable irrespective of how many are watching them or not. 

I don't know if HEVC (MPEG-H/H.265) can be used in a cable environment, but if it could, it would allow halving of the bandwidth required for the same resolution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Efficiency_Video_Coding


----------



## sydboy007

bellenuit said:


> I've never thought of that aspect. I had assumed my cable speed was, among other things, dependent on not just the number of other internet users on that piece of cable, but also the number of TV viewers. But the latter doesn't make sense when I think about it. Every cable channel has to be transmitted on the cable irrespective of how many are watching them or not.
> 
> I don't know if HEVC (MPEG-H/H.265) can be used in a cable environment, but if it could, it would allow halving of the bandwidth required for the same resolution.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Efficiency_Video_Coding




Better CODECs can help with bandwidth, but all depends if the current foxtel boxes can be upgraded via firmware or not.  Possibly the current equipment out there doesn't have the "grunt" to do a s/w upgrade and they would have to rollout new hardware.  Whether the economics stack up in a world where netflix has moved into the market and other IPTV services are available is to be seen.


----------



## Calliope

drsmith said:


> You're in for a very long 9 years if you just want to bag this Coalition government from the outset.
> 
> Something else that comes to mind is where's Myths ?




Yes, I was wondering about that. It seems that when Sydboy took over the advocacy of the Rudd/Conroy version of NBN, Myths dropped out. Coincidence? I guess Myths just gave up on a lost cause.


----------



## sydboy007

Calliope said:


> Yes, I was wondering about that. It seems that when Sydboy took over the advocacy of the Rudd/Conroy version of NBN, Myths dropped out. Coincidence? I guess Myths just gave up on a lost cause.




Don't count your nodes before they're installed and fully operational.

Might be a year before we see any new connections on the new NBN besides what's occuring under the old NBN.  

Now if that's not irony - the old NBN using pretty much future proof fiber against the new NBN reusing rotting copper  in the ground.

All I plan to do is keep MT and the Abbott Govt honest to their promise.  Anything less is just incompetency.  No excuses Government.


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> Don't count your nodes before they're installed and fully operational.
> 
> Might be a year before we see any new connections on the new NBN besides what's occuring under the old NBN



.
It won't worry me. ADSL 2 does all I ask.



> Now if that's not irony - the old NBN using pretty much future proof fiber against the new NBN reusing rotting copper  in the ground.




Actually it's not irony.



> All I plan to do is keep MT and the Abbott Govt honest to their promise.  Anything less is just incompetency.  No excuses Government.




Keep up the good work. You obviously enjoy your mission. You certainly didn't worry about incompetency with the previous government though. That's irony. However don't let me distract you from nailing your bÃªte noire MT.


----------



## sydboy007

Ah Caliope

don't worry.  We'll fall further and further behind the countries we compete with in terms of the infrastructure we have.

I just plan to keep the Coalition to the promises they were elected on.  Abbott was the guy that never shut up over Government waste and mismanagement .  The standards he applied in opposition shall be applied while he's in Government.  There are no set backs, no issues to be overcome, just incompetence if you don't achieve 100%.

But we all know how simple and fast an FTTN will be to rollout so I know you have 100% faith in the Abbott Government meeting their initial broadband policy objective by late 2016, as well as ALL their other policy commitments.


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> Ah Caliope
> 
> don't worry....
> 
> ...I just plan to keep the Coalition to the promises they were elected on.




I am not worried. I am just interested in how you plan to do this. It certainly can't be achieved on this forum. Can it?


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I just plan to keep the Coalition to the promises they were elected on.  Abbott was the guy that never shut up over Government waste and mismanagement .  The standards he applied in opposition shall be applied while he's in Government.  There are no set backs, no issues to be overcome, just incompetence if you don't achieve 100%.



You seem to want to apply far higher standards to the Coalition in government than Labor managed while they were in office. In one sense I can understand that. Labor in government did set the bar very low.

Will Labor from opposition be as critical of a Coalition government as the Coalition was when Labor was in government ?  

They'll have to stop talking about themselves first.


----------



## 13ugs13unny

drsmith said:


> You seem to want to apply far higher standards to the Coalition in government than Labor managed while they were in office. In one sense I can understand that. Labor in government did set the bar very low.
> 
> Will Labor from opposition be as critical of a Coalition government as the Coalition was when Labor was in government ?
> 
> They'll have to stop talking about themselves first.




Seems like labor will have enough seats left to make some noise, Dont forget the senate will give Tony a hard time.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> You seem to want to apply far higher standards to the Coalition in government than Labor managed while they were in office. In one sense I can understand that. Labor in government did set the bar very low.
> 
> Will Labor from opposition be as critical of a Coalition government as the Coalition was when Labor was in government ?
> 
> They'll have to stop talking about themselves first.




I say just applying the same standards the Coalition kept calling for.

The Abbott govt has set the policy benchmarks themselves.  I don't seem to remember any caveats in their election pitch - Faster and Cheaper.  Anything less is a policy failure.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I say just applying the same standards the Coalition kept calling for.
> 
> The Abbott govt has set the policy benchmarks themselves.  I don't seem to remember any caveats in their election pitch - Faster and Cheaper.  Anything less is a policy failure.



Ultimately, it's a question of whether they achieve their policy benchmarks better than Labor did with theirs.

That's shouldn't be difficult, but I hoping they do much better than Labor.


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> I say just applying the same standards the Coalition kept calling for.
> 
> The Abbott govt has set the policy benchmarks themselves.  I don't seem to remember any caveats in their election pitch - Faster and Cheaper.  Anything less is a policy failure.




Sydboy, you have said "*I just plan to keep the Coalition to the promises they were elected on*." I am intrigued as to how you can make a promise to do this singlehandledly. After all, the Coalition with more resources than you, failed to keep the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd government honest for six years.

You say you have a plan. What is it?


----------



## So_Cynical

Just anecdotally, a crew of Fibre cable layers (not NBN) have started work in the large inner Sydney industrial/office complex where i work..laying fibre to all the units and offices in the complex, 6 private contractors laying fibre to businesses (that according to Medico and a few other deniers) that don't need fibre.

Private money getting invested, private sector work being created as a direct result of something Labor inspired and that we don't need unless faster pr0n is a business requirement.


----------



## Smurf1976

drsmith said:


> You seem to want to apply far higher standards to the Coalition in government than Labor managed while they were in office.



To pick a random analogy, if XYZ supermarkets says their food is locally grown and always fresh then that's exactly what I would expect if I shop there. That competitors are selling poor quality frozen goods from overseas is irrelevant - if XYZ is promising local and fresh then that's what consumers will expect them to be selling.

Likewise with politics. Regardless of what Labor may or may not have done, the Coalition has a key policy of doing something specific with the NBN. It is therefore reasonable to expect them to deliver on that promise - whether or not Labor / Greens / PUP would have done any better is irrelevant in that context. The Coalition did not promise to simply do better than Labor, they promised something far more specific than that.


----------



## drsmith

Smurf1976 said:


> To pick a random analogy, if XYZ supermarkets says their food is locally grown and always fresh then that's exactly what I would expect if I shop there. That competitors are selling poor quality frozen goods from overseas is irrelevant - if XYZ is promising local and fresh then that's what consumers will expect them to be selling.



Where though would you shop if XYZ doesn't provide exactly what you expect but is still better than the competitors ?


----------



## Calliope

Smurf1976 said:


> It is therefore reasonable to expect them to deliver on that promise - whether or not Labor / Greens / PUP would have done any better is irrelevant in that context. The Coalition did not promise to simply do better than Labor, they promised something far more specific than that.




It is only natural that you and Sydboy have expectations that on NBN rollout, Turnbull will outperform the Conroy version in cost, quality and delivery. That's why we elected them.

But I think you are both aiming a little too high in expecting perfection. After all I doubt if either of you achieve this in  your own lines of work, which apparently allow you time to pursue your political agendas.

However I will follow with interest your campaign to keep them on the ball. But I think it will have to be more than carping and nit picking,   or random analogies.


----------



## sydboy007

Calliope said:


> It is only natural that you and Sydboy have expectations that on NBN rollout, Turnbull will outperform the Conroy version in cost, quality and delivery. That's why we elected them.
> 
> But I think you are both aiming a little too high in expecting perfection. After all I doubt if either of you achieve this in  your own lines of work, which apparently allow you time to pursue your political agendas.
> 
> However I will follow with interest your campaign to keep them on the ball. But I think it will have to be more than carping and nit picking,   or random analogies.




No carping

Just performance benchmarking against what they said they will do.

NBN was one of the secondary issues that garnered votes tot he Coalition.  All the fear mongering they did with Labors NBN they at least need to deliver the minimum 25Mbs by late 2016 and NBN plans under the coalition should not cost more than current plans.  Pretty simple KPIs.  Tony and MT both said they can do it, and never once did they highlight any issues they thought they might face that could impede them meeting their targets.

As for my expectations, actually I dont believe MT can acheive the NBN rollout on schedule, or that much cheaper (unless Telstra really does rollover and give him the copper for free), and definitely not quality (not even MT argues copper is better than fibre), but we'll know in 18-24 months who's correct.  If MT is right that it will take a year till they start the FTTN rollout, that means ~40000 nodes to be rolloed out in 27 months, which will be a very difficult target to meet.

- - - Updated - - -



drsmith said:


> Where though would you shop if XYZ doesn't provide exactly what you expect but is still better than the competitors ?




Should xyz be allowed to falsely advertise with no consequences?  Abbott did say the election was about integrity, so shouldn't he have to deliver what he's promised?


----------



## drsmith

On integrity, I'll dare to forecast the Coalition in this term of government will emerge with more than Labor did from the last.


----------



## Smurf1976

drsmith said:


> Where though would you shop if XYZ doesn't provide exactly what you expect but is still better than the competitors ?



Quite possibly I would, but I'd have a legal right to demand a refund if I found out that the goods I had already purchased were misleadingly stated as being different to what they actually are.

So using that logic, if the Coalition isn't going to deliver on its' promises then we need to re-run the election, with the actual policy being clearly stated. People will then be making a choice based on the facts.


----------



## sydboy007

Smurf1976 said:


> Quite possibly I would, but I'd have a legal right to demand a refund if I found out that the goods I had already purchased were misleadingly stated as being different to what they actually are.
> 
> So using that logic, if the Coalition isn't going to deliver on its' promises then we need to re-run the election, with the actual policy being clearly stated. People will then be making a choice based on the facts.






It's time we forced our Dear Political leaders to keep their promises.

Labor was voted out in part for lots of gunna talk and not enough delivery.

The coalition has said they'll deliver a minimum of 25Mbs to all Australian households by late 2016 with no increase in broadband costs.  It was one of their major policies, and some would argue they have a mandate to do it, though with most polls showing pretty strong support for the fibre NBN I'm not sure they do have a mandate to push on with the FTTN.  But if you argue they have the mandate to do an FTTN, then you should be arguing they HAVE to deliver.

Abbott has said his broadband policy is Bulletproof.  How someone can have the hubris to say that on a project of such a massive scale is beyond me.  There will be plenty of unknown unknows that plague the FTTN rollout, just as the current NBN has faced.

I helped with the migrations of a banks network away from the company I worked for in my previous job.  The Telco that had scored the contract had told the bank they expected to have the migration done within 6 months.  18 months later and the new company was paying a few of us to remain back as they were a bit too scared to take over some of the legacy equipment.  It took them nearly 2 years to fully move all the banks services over to their network.  That bank network would have been 3-4% of the complexity of designing a FTTN, and Australian bank networks are some of the largest private networks in the world based on geography.

- - - Updated - - -



drsmith said:


> On integrity, I'll dare to forecast the Coalition in this term of government will emerge with more than Labor did from the last.




And i say one of the best ways for the Coalition to achieve that is by delivering on their election promises.


----------



## sydboy007

Just reading quite an interesting post on the potential blowout for the FTTN.

In the Coalition policy document they state they will need ~50000 nodes.

Either they're incompetent, or decided to try and deceive the public as:

The most basic constructural element of the existing copper network is the “DA” or the “Distribution Area”

Trunk cabling runs from the exchange to each of these posts – (many have been replaced by cabinets, and RIMs and other similar structures) – and the copper running to your home wends it way to the post at the centre of the DA you are in.

Presuming that the same DA layouts are followed – (and NBN Co have predominantly done so up until now, because following that means you don’t have to dig any new ducts – they are already there with the copper running through it) – each node would be roughly analogous to the existing DA posts.

The NBN – (in whatever form it takes) – is meant to cover about 12,700,000 premises – with about 900,000 covered by wireless and satellite.

So, the 93% that remains – (about 11,800,000 premises) – would need to be split into chunks of approximately 300 premises on average, to save the construction of new ducting.

In rough terms, this is about 39,370 nodes. Sounds like a relatively small number, but it’s not that simple.

Malcolm wants everyone to be close enough to a node to get to 25Mbps minimum, and not everyone in the 300-premise DA is going to be close enough to the existing DA post to get that speed, presuming the node is dropped at that location.

My hunch is that each DA will certainly need 2, and maybe 3 nodes to get everyone in the 25Mbps “range” from the node they are connected to. Shall we be generous and say on average each existing DA will need 2.3 nodes.
That’s about 90,000 nodes, and in the ball park of most expert predictions.

Remember, the tender response submitted by Optus for the original NBN tender was for 75,224 nodes, with 75% coverage at 12Mbps with ADSL2.

So 90,000 has a reasonably accurate feel to it for minimum 25Mbps minimum with VDSL.

That’s stage one. The second stage of Malcolm’s plan is get everyone to 50Mbps, which means putting more nodes out there to get everyone close enough to a node to get to 50Mbps. Malcolm has already called these “mini nodes”.

So, I’m pretty confident with the answer of “beyond 90,000 nodes”.

And lets remember, the moment a DA has more than one node in it, you’re changing the wiring layout of the area, and committing to at least some re-trenching/re-ducting to get it all connected together.

FTTN might well be quicker to roll out, but you create more work, simply because there is a distance vs speed boundary with copper that you don’t have with fibre.

This is where Malcolm is going to find it a lot harder than he thinks, or at least says publicly.

Now lets see how many people will be OK with the below out front of their house - this is what an AT&T node looks like.


----------



## drsmith

Smurf1976 said:


> Quite possibly I would, but I'd have a legal right to demand a refund if I found out that the goods I had already purchased were misleadingly stated as being different to what they actually are.
> 
> So using that logic, if the Coalition isn't going to deliver on its' promises then we need to re-run the election, with the actual policy being clearly stated. People will then be making a choice based on the facts.



Didn't you purchase your goods from the shop that the majority of the electorate deemed to be of lower quality than that of the opposition ?

The problem with your analogy is that the ultimate authority in this case is not consumer law, it's the ballot box and there it's a question of relativities.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Just reading quite an interesting post on the potential blowout for the FTTN.




Myths might be able to further the discussion on the more technical aspects of your post, but a couple of quick questions do come to mind.



sydboy007 said:


> The NBN – (in whatever form it takes) – is meant to cover about 12,700,000 premises – with about 900,000 covered by wireless and satellite.
> 
> So, the 93% that remains – (about 11,800,000 premises) – would need to be split into chunks of approximately 300 premises on average, to save the construction of new ducting.




What proportion of the fixed line component is planned to be FTTP under the Coalition's plan ?



sydboy007 said:


> Remember, the tender response submitted by Optus for the original NBN tender was for 75,224 nodes, with 75% coverage at 12Mbps with ADSL2.




How long ago was that tender ?


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> Just reading quite an interesting post on the potential blowout for the FTTN.




How about a link to this "interesting post".  It always helps to know the origin, and thus the bias, of an "interesting post".


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> We've seen those images of some of Telstra's infrastructure. Below is an NBN trench, post construction.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2013/08/one-block-in-minnamurra-street-kiama-with-its-nbn-story.html




Hmm. A few comments are warranted here...

The first pic on that blog is a Telstra trench, as indicated by the Telstra pit cover (as opposed to an NBN pit cover). It may or may not be related to the NBN, but even if it is, so what? The NBN has been past 300,000-odd premises, and he's found one dodgy (and perhaps not NBN anyway) trench? 

Oh dear, the sky is falling. Never before in the history of the World, and never again in the future, with a footpath be dug up to install infrastructure.

I wonder what he'll be saying when there's one of these on the footpath every few hundred metres?



Clearly the people of Kiama are furious, given the huge*** number of complaints in the real media, not to mention the abysmal takeup rate down that way. Oh, wait....

The rest of it is typical of his ranting, false blog posts ever since he got the **** for defaming Julia Gillard, and hasn't quite been able to work out he deserved it yet.

I must admit that reading the comments on his posts is quite funny. It's like reading Bolt comments, but with extra loon. 


I notice he's still going on about 4G wireless being an alternative network, despite the laws of physics (not to mention the practical World, including the Coalition). Even assuming wireless could cope, if the average Australian broadband connection was instead delivered over Telstra 4G wireless, it would cost about $400 per month. Like physics, it's a fact the clueless wireless advocates apparently fail to grasp.

_*For the purpose of this post, "huge" = "<10"_


----------



## sptrawler

I watched 8 NBN workers, replacing the copper with fibre, to a group of six two bedroom free standing single story units.
They took nearly two days and as they were fairly straight forward installs would be a fairly typical timetable. So one can assume it will take quite a while to do 12,000,000 dwellings, with the FTTP.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Hmm. A few comments are warranted here...



Welcome back Myths. I can't do much for the persistent heartburn but yes, as of last weekend the nation elected a new government and the sun is still rising every morning.

With the new government about to be sworn in, the first question will be the actual state of the current rollout. There's been a few bits and pieces in your absence including one media article about a shortfall in the June 2014 target.

As you are going through this thread, I'm sure you'll find it.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> I wonder what he'll be saying when there's one of these on the footpath every few hundred metres?
> View attachment 54389




It certainly ruins the look of that well-manicured carefully maintained "footpath".


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Myths might be able to further the discussion on the more technical aspects of your post, but a couple of quick questions do come to mind.
> 
> What proportion of the fixed line component is planned to be FTTP under the Coalition's plan ?
> 
> How long ago was that tender ?




I don't think the coalition has actually specified a %.  Don't seem to remember one in their "policy" document.

The Optus tender was when the ALP was looking to deliver an FTTN and Telstra under Sol decided to put in a late bid - so around 2008-2009

xDSL speed is inverse to cable length, so if Optus thought they'd need over 78000 nodes to do just 12Mbs, the number to get say 75% of households  (7% wireless / satellite with 22% FTTP) to a minimum of 25Mbs is going to be a LOT more than 50000 which is all MT is budgeting for.  Once you want to bump the speed up to 50Mbs, well 90K worth of nodes is probably on the low side of what will be required.  I eagerly await the NoBN business plan and the details hidden within.

Anyone who thinks the new xDSL standards have somehow magically extended the reach need to take Darryl Kerrigan to heart because they're dreaming.  The higher the frequency the faster the signal degrades.  Those wonderful 100Mbs+ speeds MT was talking about are viable over <200M of copper.

- - - Updated - - -



Calliope said:


> How about a link to this "interesting post".  It always helps to know the origin, and thus the bias, of an "interesting post".




If you think the information I posted is false / wrong you're welcome to do your own research and refute it.


----------



## drsmith

Calliope said:


> How about a link to this "interesting post".  It always helps to know the origin, and thus the bias, of an "interesting post".



It's from this bloke.

http://delimiter.com.au/2013/09/12/...p-petitioners-youve-democracy/#comment-623825

http://michaelwyres.com/


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> At last, a professional may head the NBN Co.
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/breaking-new...itkowski-for-nbn/story-e6frfku9-1226715836171




http://delimiter.com.au/2013/09/12/ziggy-switkowski-shouldnt-appointed-run-nbn-co/

- - - Updated - - -



sails said:


> We are on bigpond cable (no NBN) - download speeds are great but upload is pathetic! Can't see why we need NBN when we can get these download speeds.




Three reasons:

1. Only about 20% of the country can get cable.

2. Cable is a shared medium, so if everyone in the area were on it (instead of being shared between Telstra HFC, Optus HFC and ADSL2), then speeds would plummet.

3. Cable upload speeds are pathetic (as you said), compared to fibre.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> The NBN – (in whatever form it takes) – is meant to cover about 12,700,000 premises – with about 900,000 covered by wireless and satellite.
> 
> So, the 93% that remains – (about 11,800,000 premises) – would need to be split into chunks of approximately 300 premises on average, to save the construction of new ducting.
> 
> In rough terms, this is about 39,370 nodes. Sounds like a relatively small number, but it’s not that simple.






drsmith said:


> What proportion of the fixed line component is planned to be FTTP under the Coalition's plan ?






sydboy007 said:


> I don't think the coalition has actually specified a %.  Don't seem to remember one in their "policy" document.




http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/assets/Coalition_NBN_policy_-_Background_Paper.pdf

Page 30,



> THE COALITION NBN AT FINISH OF ROLLOUT IN 2019
> Fibre to the Premises (FTTP):  2,802,000  22%
> Fibre to the Node (FTTN):  8,968,000  71%
> Fixed Wireless:  572,000  4%
> Satellite:  372,000  3%
> TOTAL PREMISES  12,712,000:  100%


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> I think in 6-7 hours, some prominent posters in this thread will be feeling a little sore.
> 
> Oh well, time then to change focus (partially rightly so) to bashing the coalition's policy as opposed to defending the poorly developed and delivered Greens/Labor policy.
> 
> MW




Indeed. The online petition asking the Libs to retain FTTP in lieu of obsolete FTTN has already become the largest online petition in Australia's history. By a very large margin. After less than a week, it's doubled the previous best and is on its way to becoming the largest petition (of any kind) ever seen in Australia.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2013/09/11/12/08/one-name-every-3-5-sec-on-nbn-petition


Of course, despite promoting several online petitions himself, Turnbull is complaining that this one is "undemocratic"!

http://www.sortius-is-a-geek.com/hypocrisy-thy-name-mal/


----------



## Calliope

drsmith said:


> It's from this bloke.
> 
> http://delimiter.com.au/2013/09/12/...p-petitioners-youve-democracy/#comment-623825
> 
> http://michaelwyres.com/




Ah. It's not surprising that Sydboy was reluctant to supply a link to such a biased source. Myths has no such compunctions however.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Ah. It's not surprising that Sydboy was reluctant to supply a link to such a biased source. Myths has no such compunctions however.




Ummm. Michael Wyres is the commenter, not delimiter.

Renai LeMay writes delimiter, and (as has been pointed out to you before) has criticised and praised both the Labor and Coalition versions of the NBN, and Turnbull and Conroy (and Albo) personally at various times.

Michael Wyres is an IT professional. You know, those pesky people who are the experts on IT/Comms technology, and almost unanimously support an FTTP NBN.

It must be somewhat difficult to support a policy which has such a small support base amongst people who actually have some expertise on the topic at hand. But I guess as coalition supporters, you're used to being in that position....


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Michael Wyres is an IT professional.



What about his numbers ?


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> It must be somewhat difficult to support a policy which has such a small support base amongst people who actually have some expertise on the topic at hand. But I guess as coalition supporters, you're used to being in that position....




More of your sarcasm.:shake: As I've told you before, unlike you, I have no vested interest in this debate. I get some amusement however, out of people like you who are still in denial over the election result, continually harping over what might have been; even though every indication is that it is a complete stuff-up. Another expensive mess for the Abbott government to clean up. To use one of sydboy's quaint phrases you will just have to "suck it up".



> Michael Wyres is an IT professional. You know, those pesky people who are the experts on IT/Comms technology, and almost unanimously support an FTTP NBN.




Yeah, I know ...like you and syd.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

As I alluded to the NBN at the beginning of this thread.

It is gorne.

Too expensive.

Too rolled out to the elites.

Too capable of being superceded by new technology.

Unaffordable

It is gorne.

gg


----------



## drsmith

The reality and the dream,



> NBN Co warned the Labor government of a $1.6 billion increase in the funding needed to build the national broadband network in the weeks leading to the election, after construction delays and weaker-than-expected revenue forecasts hit the project.
> 
> But in the final forecasts from the company before Labor lost the election on September 7, NBN Co maintained it would finish the network as expected in 2021, at the same capital expenditure budget of $37.4 billion.




http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_warns_it_needs_another_bn_EUi3gqMalLyYXmUMP06MVL


----------



## sydboy007

Garpal Gumnut said:


> As I alluded to the NBN at the beginning of this thread.
> 
> It is gorne.
> 
> Too expensive.
> 
> Too rolled out to the elites.
> 
> Too capable of being superceded by new technology.
> 
> Unaffordable
> 
> It is gorne.
> 
> gg




Just to humour me, what new technology will economically replace fibre in the future, and when?

Considering the current NBN will easily support 1Gbs and long before the rollout is complete it will be able to achieve 10Gbs with a small outlay of CAPEX (that can be done as demand required), it seems the next 20+ years of demand increases are easily catered for.

By 2019 it is likely Australians will be downloading around 8 times the amount of content as they currently do, and I dare say the growth in uploads would be just as high due to the ever increasing levels of content creation, and hopefully people finally starting to backup their digital treasures online.

As for being rolled out to the elites, if Tasmania, Kiama, Wilunga, Armidale and the rest are Elites in this country, then what does that make Toorak, Double Bay, New Farm, North Adelaide, Peppermint Grove?


----------



## sydboy007

Calliope said:


> Ah. It's not surprising that Sydboy was reluctant to supply a link to such a biased source. Myths has no such compunctions however.




The beauty of most of the arguments about the NBN is they are based on the laws of physics.  The entire wireless spectrum doesn't even have the same capacity as a single strand of fibre.  Wireless is really handy for low speed distributed services, but that's about it.

There's no point me posting misinformation because it's easily refuted.

So if you think the _biased _information I've provided is wrong, then please show an alternative information source that shows I'm incorrect.

Just because I don't agree with your view doesn't make me wrong.

The Optus bid was public knowledge years ago.  I wish I'd been aware of the node figures before the election as it would have made a great attack on the Coalition policy.  Show's how pathetically managed the ALP election team was run when they missed this information.

So the question remains, how MT thinks he's going to be able to use only 2/3 the number of nodes that Optus felt would be required, yet he expects to be able to eventually provide over 4 times the speed.

--------------------

another biased source that shows the Coalition FTTN is going to experience some cost blowouts.

http://stevej-on-nbn.blogspot.com.au/2013/04/nbn-black-holes-in-coalition-fttn-plan.html

Maybe Tony will apply the same limits on the FTTN as he has with DA.  IF the money budgeted wont achieve the target, then the target is reduced.  Who are the lucky ones to miss out on a broadband upgrade under that scenario>>


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> More of your sarcasm.:shake: As I've told you before, unlike you, I have no vested interest in this debate. I get some amusement however, out of people like you who are still in denial over the election result, continually harping over what might have been; even though every indication is that it is a complete stuff-up. Another expensive mess for the Abbott government to clean up. To use one of sydboy's quaint phrases you will just have to "suck it up".
> 
> 
> Yeah, I know ...like you and syd.




The only vested interest I have in the NBN is the future of the country and my children. Selfish, I know.

Yes, I am annoyed by "what might have been". But I can also almost guarantee that it will still happen one day. We, as a country, will miss an opportunity now that will hurt us for generations to come.

My only comfort is that (unlike the embarrassing conservative arguments surrounding the old copper network, the Snowy Scheme, the Sydney Opera House and assorted social reforms), when it comes to the NBN I'm confident I won't be looked back on by future generations as a backward imbecile, thanks to the NLA Trove archiving my blog.


----------



## Knobby22

My bet is that the NBN will still be effectively rolled out but only in newer suburbs where the conduiting and cabling is new and in rich inner suburbs where people will willingly pay for it.


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> As I alluded to the NBN at the beginning of this thread.
> 
> It is gorne.



You're hilarious gg.

You "alluded" that the ALP was going to cancel the NBN, not a change in Government. I hardly think you can claim you were correct, given that the Coalition have opposed the NBN since day 1!



> Too expensive.
> 
> Unaffordable




Not as expensive as it will be to do obsolete FTTN now, then rip it all out and do it right in 10 years' time.



> Too rolled out to the elites.



Rolled out to the elites?? What a bizarre comment. 

Yep, plenty of elites living in Blacktown, Riverstone, Willunga etc etc. It's been rolled out to every demographic, from every political persuasion.



> Too capable of being superceded by new technology.



Now I know you're off your tree.

You're criticising potential obsolescence of optical fibre, which can (right now) manage speeds of 1000Mbps to the home, and will easily do 10,000 in 5 years and 100,000 in 15 years, with very minor electronics upgrades.

...while applauding the Coalition's barely-cheaper alternative, which will do maybe 25Mbps now, and maybe 100Mbps in a few years, if the research pans out and the copper is good enough.

Seriously?




> It is gorne.




Yes, it probably is. Until of course the tech generation outnumber the old farts at the polling booth.

- - - Updated - - -



drsmith said:


> The reality and the dream,
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_warns_it_needs_another_bn_EUi3gqMalLyYXmUMP06MVL




Without seeing the document, it's impossible to know whether the $1.6bn could be contained within the contingency fund, or is in addition to it.

Either way, it's a far cry from the Coalition's forecast of a peak of $94bn.


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> There's no point me posting misinformation because it's easily refuted.




Then why refuse to post a link?



> So if you think the _biased _information I've provided is wrong, then please show an alternative information source that shows I'm incorrect.




I know it is difficult to be objective while in denial.



> Just because I don't agree with your view doesn't make me wrong.




I think the only view I have expressed is that I trust Turnbull, while you still trust the superior broadband expertise of Rudd/Conroy. It's a political thing rather than an objective view.

Knobby says;



> My bet is that the NBN will still be effectively rolled out but only in newer suburbs where the conduiting and cabling is new and in rich inner suburbs where people will willingly pay for it.




You are right. It's a bit like whether you buy a BMW or a Corolla. Most people get along fine with their Corolla.


----------



## sydboy007

Calliope said:


> Then why refuse to post a link?
> 
> I know it is difficult to be objective while in denial.
> 
> I think the only view I have expressed is that I trust Turnbull, while you still trust the superior broadband expertise of Rudd/Conroy. It's a political thing rather than an objective view.
> 
> Knobby says;
> 
> You are right. It's a bit like whether you buy a BMW or a Corolla. Most people get along fine with their Corolla.




Just for interest sake,  in 3 years time, what would you consider to be a successful rollout of the FTTN by MT.

What benchmarks / KPIs do you consider to be the measure of success?

For me there's pretty much just 2:

* All premises able to access a minimum of 25Mbs (hopefully MT will not fudge this by arguing that anyone in a cable serviced area already has this as it's not available to those in MDUs so over half the residents in those areas DON'T have access to the minimum speed)

* Broadband costs are no more than current plans since current NBN plans are comparable to the cost of ADSL2+ plans

Secondary to this will be:

* Current CAPEX against the full $29.4B rollout forecast and how that is mapping to being within the overall budget.

* Current OPEX of the FTTN and how that compares to the OPEX of the FTTP - this will be VERY interesting as it will give us an idea of how fast the (forecast) CAPEX will be eaten up by the higher OPEX.


----------



## NBNMyths

And the FTTN shambles begins:
http://www.theage.com.au/technology...ate-of-wiring-for-the-nbn-20130915-2tswo.html

Turnbull wants 'his' department to provide a cost to change to a technology based on an old network they know nothing about, and have no right to ask, within 60 days.

He also wants an accurate audit of the condition and speed available over 10 _million_ copper lines of a network they don't own, have no right to access, and have no facility to test, within 90 days.


Tell 'im he's dreamin'.


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> Just for interest sake,  in 3 years time, what would you consider to be a successful rollout of the FTTN by MT.
> What benchmarks / KPIs do you consider to be the measure of success?




It's not something I lose any sleep over...I am not in denial.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> It's not something I lose any sleep over...I am not in denial.




Just so I'm clear.... You're concerned if the ALP don't meet KPIs on a project they're running, but if the Coalition miss KPIs on the same project, you won't be concerned?


----------



## sydboy007

NBNMyths said:


> Just so I'm clear.... You're concerned if the ALP don't meet KPIs on a project they're running, but if the Coalition miss KPIs on the same project, you won't be concerned?




Oh, I think Caliope means we're in denail of the fact we're now in a Coalition universe where wireless spectrum has infinite capacity, where signal atenuation over copper occurs at a tenth of the rate in the Labor universe (hence they wotn need that many nodes to do their network), and huge complex network rollouts are bullet proot simply becuase of the poltical party in charge.

Wait till his denail meets reality in a year or two and we'll see how he's feeling then.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

sydboy007 said:


> Just to humour me, what new technology will economically replace fibre in the future, and when?




Just as transistors were quickly overtaken by microchips, within one generation, I would predict that biological methods will be the next frontier, and all the bloody cable will be redundant.

gg


----------



## sydboy007

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Just as transistors were quickly overtaken by microchips, within one generation, I would predict that biological methods will be the next frontier, and all the bloody cable will be redundant.
> 
> gg




Sounds like you've been talking to a guy I used to work with.  You don't know a Barry in Sydney?

He was a firm believer in various types of aliens and used to tell us he was close to a zero propogation form of communication based on how plants communicate with each other.  They even do interstellar chats since the way they communciate has the same signal propogation whether you are in the same room or in a different galaxy.

I dare say the Christian right will be against using biological systems.  They can't even get their heads around GM crops or stem cell research, so no way will they see a biological comms system as acceptable.


----------



## Chris45

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Just as transistors were quickly overtaken by microchips, within one generation, I would predict that biological methods will be the next frontier, and all the bloody cable will be redundant.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Laugh away.

I predicted Tony Abbott would be PM.

As we speak the transmission of data by biological means is being investigated and will eventually replace 




gg


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> Oh, I think *Caliope *means we're in *denail* of the fact we're now in a Coalition universe where wireless spectrum has infinite capacity, where signal *atenuation* over copper occurs at a tenth of the rate in the Labor universe (hence they *wotn *need that many nodes to do their network), and huge complex network rollouts are bullet *proot *simply *becuase *of the *poltical* party in charge.
> 
> Wait till his *denail* meets reality in a year or two and we'll see how he's feeling then.




What a load of nonsense. Two "denails!!! You are getting very careless.  I guess it's denial syndrome. And don't worry about how i'll feel in in year or two. Why should I worry?  I have no interest in fibre to nodes *or* premises, but I'd love to see a *denail* meeting reality.:22_yikes:

And as for Myths;


> Just so I'm clear.... You're concerned if the ALP don't meet KPIs on a project they're running, but if the Coalition miss KPIs on the same project, you won't be concerned?




Wrong again. I am concerned about *neither.*


----------



## sydboy007

Calliope said:


> What a load of nonsense. Two "denails!!! You are getting very careless.  I guess it's denial syndrome. And don't worry about how i'll feel in in year or two. Why should I worry?  I have no interest in fibre to nodes *or* premises, but I'd love to see a *denail* meeting reality.:22_yikes:




Then why are you such an active poster in a thread who's topic you have no interest in?


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> Then why are you such an active poster in a thread who's topic you have no interest in?




Just for laughs.


----------



## sydboy007

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Laugh away.
> 
> I predicted Tony Abbott would be PM.
> 
> As we speak the transmission of data by biological means is being investigated and will eventually replace
> 
> View attachment 54403
> 
> 
> gg




Biological transmission may be viable over short distances, but nothing beats the speed of light.  There's no (theoretical) limit to the amount of data that can be transmitted over a single fibre strand.  The only limitation is the frequencies we can use, and our ability to measure the slight wavelength differences so that wave division multiplexing can be used.  Those limits have and continue to be increased - 100Gbs per wavelength is being rolled out now.

I'm confident in saying a FTTP has a far longer economic life than FTTN.

Lets see how the auditing of the 70% of ~ 40 million copper pairs goes - in the Coalition universe this will be achieved in 90 days.  Just a tad over 300000 pairs to audit each day.  Should be a piece of cake.

Considering I was told by Telstra at work today that to get a line tech with the appropriate skills to fix a main cable issue could take up to a week, I have full confidence that MT will work the miracle.

- - - Updated - - -



Calliope said:


> Just for laughs.




:topic


----------



## So_Cynical

Guys, wasting your time talking sense to the hard core ASF right...they really are not interested in anything new, just winding back the clock and nothingness.



sydboy007 said:


> Then why are you such an active poster in a thread who's topic you have no interest in?




Most of the ASF right just post in the general threads and are 100% politically motivated, no sense, logic or wisdom is sort, just politically biased opinion is offered up....much like the Alan Jones radio show.


----------



## bellenuit

sydboy007 said:


> There's no (theoretical) limit to the amount of data that can be transmitted over a single fibre strand.




Although I would agree that fibre is the best medium available today, I certainly would have issue with that statement. It's plainly illogical. The speed of light is finite, as are the possible attributes of a light stream that can be used, both now and in the future, to encode information, so that creates an upper limit to the amount of data that  can be transferred in a given time. That will always be the theoretical limit, irrespective of the transmission/detection capabilities.


----------



## NBNMyths

sydboy007 said:


> There's no (theoretical) limit to the amount of data that can be transmitted over a single fibre strand.  The only limitation is the frequencies we can use, and our ability to measure the slight wavelength differences so that wave division multiplexing can be used.  Those limits have and continue to be increased - 100Gbs per wavelength is being rolled out now.






bellenuit said:


> Although I would agree that fibre is the best medium available today, I certainly would have issue with that statement. It's plainly illogical. The speed of light is finite, as are the possible attributes of a light stream that can be used, both now and in the future, to encode information, so that creates an upper limit to the amount of data that  can be transferred in a given time. That will always be the theoretical limit, irrespective of the transmission/detection capabilities.




Sydboy is essentially correct, in that there is no known _theoretical_ limit. There is (for all intents) an infinite number of light wavelengths in the light spectrum. An optical fibre can carry multiple light streams at any one time, split into different wavelengths (colours). It's called WDM.

There will always be a practical limit though. It comes from the ability of the electronics to detect smaller and smaller differences in colour, but as technology improves, so does that ability. 40 years ago, we were limited to 1 wavelength. 20 years ago maybe 20 wavelengths. Today 128 wavelength systems are common, and more are being tested in the lab. There's no theoretical reason why we couldn't be using 20000 different wavelengths in the future.

In addition to a growing number of wavelengths per strand, the capacity of each wavelength also continues to increase. From 10Gbps to 40Gbps and now 100Gbps per wavelength being used for major links.

'Lab' tests already have 69,000Gbps travelling on a single fibre, over thousands of kilometres. It is unlikely that the practical capacity of a single strand of fibre to each home will ever be overwhelmed, and impossibly unlikely to occur within the next several generations.


----------



## Shaker

Yep Nbn And Syd

So damn obvious that FTTP is far superior to FTTN. I honestly cant see how they will save $$$ with the FTTN model considering their power needs alone.

I hope MT goes quite on the issue and the NBN will just roll on.

Cost is not the issue here. The issue is just about politics which is sad

Shaker


----------



## waza1960

> Yep Nbn And Syd
> 
> So damn obvious that FTTP is far superior to FTTN. I honestly cant see how they will save $$$ with the FTTN model considering their power needs alone.




 Very few argue that FTTP is not superior to FTTN of course it is. 
  The real question is should the unknown cost of the NBN take precedence over Health, Education and real infrastructure (roads, ports, rail)



> Cost is not the issue here.



       Of course it's the issue if the Labor government's NBN was on schedule and budget then it would be easier to accept. 
   The NBN to date is a joke you guys (NBNMyths/Syd) amaze me you carry on about the NBN as if it was viable.
   Your defending something that is smoke and mirrors. Labor's NBN was never going to be built relying on Labor's thought bubble calculations and hopeless policy delivery.
  Perhaps a better question for Syd and Myths would be at what extreme of price and delivery would you still justify the NBN . 
  Don't forget the NBN progress report that was sitting on Albanese's desk is sure to be released by the government shortly

   I'm quite positive for the future on the NBN 
      I think the Australian political cycle is working quite well in this regard.
   Firstly the Howard government were culpable in not addressing the issue.
   Then the Labor government did what they usually do which is come up with an expensive unrealistic solution
   but at least they started the process.
   Now finally the Coalition will modify it to meet realistic goals and we will have an outcome which 95% of the
  population will be happy with.


----------



## sydboy007

Shaker said:


> Yep Nbn And Syd
> 
> So damn obvious that FTTP is far superior to FTTN. I honestly cant see how they will save $$$ with the FTTN model considering their power needs alone.
> 
> I hope MT goes quite on the issue and the NBN will just roll on.
> 
> Cost is not the issue here. The issue is just about politics which is sad
> 
> Shaker




I think what needed to happen was for some of the Coalition members to actually have the NBN at home and see what a difference it makes.  I'm amazed at how much my parents use of the internet has changed since they got hooked up to the NBN nearly 2 years ago.  They're both in their 60s and making use of the increase in speed and reliability, while saving around $40 / month in telco charges (mainly not requiring a landline anymore).

The level of competition that is occurring for them is amazing too.  There was no facilities based competition.  All the ISPs there pre NBN were telstra resellers so the cost of an ADSL plan above 1.5Mbs was quite expensive.  After the NBN was installed the cost of internet access dropped or at worst stayed the same, and the download quota was increased by up to a factor of 4.

_<sarcasm alert>_

It's just sad that the take up rate in Kiama has been so poor.  No one wants it you know.  People in Kiama have migrated to the NBN faster than comparable FTTP rollouts around the world, but you can tell what a white elephant this infrastructure is going to be just by the way it saves people so much money and provides a faster and more reliable service.  Absolute waste of taxpayer funds.


----------



## Shaker

Hi Waza

I guess the point is FTTP would of saved costs to Health ultimately and also individuals Health costs. The same will be for most of the major family issues.

On FTTN. I live in a relatively new suburb in WA, less than 20 years old. Our copper network is stuffed. Our cable TV network is also stuffed. The cost base for maintaining the copper network will be massive.

When the details of the copper network is revealed i reckon a rethink will happen. If they don't speak about it then we will get what we deserve not what we should have.

Shaker


----------



## waza1960

> I think what needed to happen was for some of the Coalition members to actually have the NBN at home and see what a difference it makes. I'm amazed at how much my parents use of the internet has changed since they got hooked up to the NBN nearly 2 years ago. They're both in their 60s and making use of the increase in speed and reliability, while saving around $40 / month in telco charges (mainly not requiring a landline anymore).
> 
> The level of competition that is occurring for them is amazing too. There was no facilities based competition. All the ISPs there pre NBN were telstra resellers so the cost of an ADSL plan above 1.5Mbs was quite expensive. After the NBN was installed the cost of internet access dropped or at worst stayed the same, and the download quota was increased by up to a factor of 4.



 Some good points there Syd .............if all our pollies were internet/ computer savvy then we wouldn't be having this conversation. 
 Here's my personal scenario....I have always gone for the Highest speed plan currently ADSL1 1.5-8 mbps
  but I live in a rural area I doubt if the NBN as it is would have reached me in my lifetime.
  I would love more speed but am reasonably happy with what I have. I download a heap of content (200g plan )and trade consistently for long hours .I do Skype calls and share screens through Skype and Team Viewer.
 As well as that the copper line to my place is degraded and Attenuation reading is way above normal parameters
 but still my internet experience is quite good and over the years the price has come down.

  If in the future the NBN speeds are available for a cost of a few grand to hook up then I'll be first in line and hopefully it will be sooner rather than later


----------



## waza1960

> I guess the point is FTTP would of saved costs to Health ultimately and also individuals Health costs. The same will be for most of the major family issues.




  No doubt there will be savings to Health with the NBN but I think this is exaggerated plus who's to say that most
 hospitals won't get FTTP anyway . Also at what speed do you save money?
 Perhaps the 25mbps will save 95% of what 100mbps will save.



> If they don't speak about it then we will get what we deserve not what we should have.



  We should also have a decent health/ hospital system do we have it? No 
  Do we have properly funded aged care and protective services for children? No
  Do we have proper funding for Science and Technology? No
  There are plenty of things we *should *have but don't get. We must have priorities.
  We deserve better internet speeds and we will get them


----------



## NBNMyths

waza1960 said:


> Very few argue that FTTP is not superior to FTTN of course it is.
> The real question is should the unknown cost of the NBN take precedence over Health, Education and real infrastructure (roads, ports, rail)




You demonstrate a lack of understanding of the cost and funding for the NBN.

*Cost:*
Firstly, the cost is not "unknown". It was first estimated at $43bn by KPMG, which was assessed by Greenhill-Caliburn and being found to be reasonable. The capex forecast was then reduced to $37bn, and later back up slightly after some rollout changes that resulted from the Opts and Telstra deals being signed off.

Since then, the actual cost of the rollout has begun coming in, and is broadly on budget. The AFR reported last week from a leaked draft report that peak funding required had increased slightly (by $1.6bn or ~5%), although that is not public so the accuracy is unknown, and there was no mention of a capex increase.

*Funding:*
The NBN is funded as an asset on the budget, from the issue of bonds. The bonds are to be repaid from user revenue, not tax/consolidated revenue. So spending on the NBN has absolutely no effect on the spending for the other things you mentioned.

That aside, the NBN will be a benefit to health and education, with many identified uses and huge support amongst the healthcare and education communities.

And, for argument's sake, even if you assume that the NBN was an expense to the budget, it pales into insignificance alongside the health and education budgets. Over the 10-year build of the $40bn NBN, the Govt will spend $1.2 _trillion_ on health, and $500bn on education.



> Of course it's the issue if the Labor government's NBN was on schedule and budget then it would be easier to accept.
> The NBN to date is a joke you guys (NBNMyths/Syd) amaze me you carry on about the NBN as if it was viable.
> Your defending something that is smoke and mirrors. Labor's NBN was never going to be built relying on Labor's thought bubble calculations and hopeless policy delivery.
> Perhaps a better question for Syd and Myths would be at what extreme of price and delivery would you still justify the NBN .
> Don't forget the NBN progress report that was sitting on Albanese's desk is sure to be released by the government shortly
> 
> I'm quite positive for the future on the NBN
> I think the Australian political cycle is working quite well in this regard.
> Firstly the Howard government were culpable in not addressing the issue.
> Then the Labor government did what they usually do which is come up with an expensive unrealistic solution
> but at least they started the process.
> Now finally the Coalition will modify it to meet realistic goals and we will have an outcome which 95% of the
> population will be happy with.




Most of the delay in the NBN came from the time it took to do the Telstra deal, for access to infrastructure. This was necessary before the build could start, otherwise the cost and disruption would have been huge due to the need to lay ducts across the nation.

As noted above, the AFR has already seen the report, and the best they could come up with was a $1.6bn peak funding increase due to the delay in revenue caused by the rollout delay, but no increase in capex.


Also don't forget that the biggest reason the FTTP plan came about was because Telstra (with the 3 amigos in charge) refused to play ball with FTTN back in 2007. It was not possible for the ALP to do FTTN (which was their policy), because to build FTTN you need access to the copper. Telstra were proposing to charge $20bn for it, making FTTN just as expensive as FTTP.

It's yet to be seen how much Telstra will charge for their copper now in order for the Coalition's plan to go ahead.


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> It's yet to be seen how much Telstra will charge for their copper now in order for the Coalition's plan to go ahead.




I hope it is prohibitive, so that they just continue with the NBN as it stood.

I prefer a cheaper option, but to change it now would be difficult.

MW


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> You demonstrate a lack of understanding of the cost and funding for the NBN.



A hot Milo and a lie down might help with the bile.



NBNMyths said:


> *Cost:*
> Firstly, the cost is not "unknown". It was first estimated at $43bn by KPMG, which was assessed by Greenhill-Caliburn and being found to be reasonable. The capex forecast was then reduced to $37bn, and later back up slightly after some rollout changes that resulted from the Opts and Telstra deals being signed off.
> 
> Since then, the actual cost of the rollout has begun coming in, and is broadly on budget. The AFR reported last week from a leaked draft report that peak funding required had increased slightly (by $1.6bn or ~5%), although that is not public so the accuracy is unknown, and there was no mention of a capex increase.
> .



On the substance of updates, each and every setback with the rollout simply makes the final targets more fanciful.



NBNMyths said:


> *Funding:*
> The NBN is funded as an asset on the budget, from the issue of bonds. The bonds are to be repaid from user revenue, not tax/consolidated revenue. So spending on the NBN has absolutely no effect on the spending for the other things you mentioned.
> 
> That aside, the NBN will be a benefit to health and education, with many identified uses and huge support amongst the healthcare and education communities.
> 
> And, for argument's sake, even if you assume that the NBN was an expense to the budget, it pales into insignificance alongside the health and education budgets. Over the 10-year build of the $40bn NBN, the Govt will spend $1.2 _trillion_ on health, and $500bn on education.



It doesn't matter how the money is sourced or the spend relative to other areas. It's fundamentally a question of the most productive use of that money.



NBNMyths said:


> It's yet to be seen how much Telstra will charge for their copper now in order for the Coalition's plan to go ahead.



One of the advantages of the Coalition plan is the underlying flexibility in relation to the copper network.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> A hot Milo and a lie down might help with the bile.
> 
> On the substance of updates, each and every setback with the rollout simply makes the final targets more fanciful.




Since the Telstra deal was done, the delays in the rollout have become much, much smaller. They met their last target. Now while that was a revised-down target, it was still met.



> It doesn't matter how the money is sourced or the spend relative to other areas. It's fundamentally a question of the most productive use of that money.




I disagree. That money is only being borrowed to build the NBN, and the NBN will earn revenue to pay it back. If you instead borrowed the money to build a hospital or a school, how would it be repaid? Unless you started charging people to use the hospital or the school, then the repayments would have to come out of the budget. Completely different to the NBN.




> One of the advantages of the Coalition plan is the underlying flexibility in relation to the copper network.




I don't know where you get that statement from. If Telstra play hard-ball like they did in 2007, there's no flexibility to be had. They'll have to bite the bullet and go with FTTP, or do nothing. That's not flexibility, it's a complete change in policy either way.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Since the Telstra deal was done, the delays in the rollout have become much, much smaller. They met their last target. Now while that was a revised-down target, it was still met.



That was ultimately a very short range twice downward revised target in the context of an imminent election.

What about the June 2014 target ?



NBNMyths said:


> I disagree. That money is only being borrowed to build the NBN, and the NBN will earn revenue to pay it back.



If all goes well which it is not.



NBNMyths said:


> I don't know where you get that statement from. If Telstra play hard-ball like they did in 2007, there's no flexibility to be had. They'll have to bite the bullet and go with FTTP, or do nothing. That's not flexibility, it's a complete change in policy either way.



With the current NBN, the setbacks aren't ifs, their facts and it will be interesting to see what else comes to light with a new government.

My point though was in relation to the copper under the Coalition's plan where it can't effectively be remediated.


----------



## drsmith

waza1960 said:


> There are plenty of things we *should *have but don't get. We must have priorities. We deserve better internet speeds and we will get them



From this point forward, it may well be a combination Labor's vision and the Coalition's priorities in government that delivers a practical outcome.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> From this point forward, it may well be a combination Labor's vision and the Coalition's priorities in government that delivers a practical outcome.




The major issue I have with changing to an FTTN is the fact that you throw hundreds of thousands of man hours down the drain because you have to do a massive investment in designing a new network.

You can see all the little issues that add up to bigger issues and lost time for the rollout.

Now the Coalition want to wipe out most of what has been learned over the current rollout and pretty much start the learning process again because there wont be too much cross over due to the vastly different kind of rollout.

The hubris of the Coalition is going to cost them dearly at the next election.  Whether FTTP / FTTN the NBN is one of the largest projects undertaken in the world.  To think they can do a full network redesign, Telstra renegotiation along with ACCC stamp of approval and Telstra shareholder vote while getting 35-40K worth of nodes installed, though from most of what I've read even 50K worth of nodes may not acheive their inital 25Mbs target, talk about pressure.  It wont surprise me to see key NBN staff leave due to the workload and unrealistic targets.  When that kindof high level knowledge walks out the door it's very hard to recover.

But it has the Tony Bullet proof money back guarantee


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> It wont surprise me to see key NBN staff leave due to the workload and unrealistic targets.



If the Coalition can deliver something better than a DÃ©jÃ  vu of Labor's rollout, it will help them at the next election, not hinder them.

The thrust of the points you and Myths go back to have been argued somewhat to death already in this thread, regardless of whether it includes analysis from Michael Wyres dodgy numbers or not.

What I'll be most interested in is more actual detail on the current rollout once the new government assumes office and of course, their response.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> That was ultimately a very short range twice downward revised target in the context of an imminent election.
> 
> What about the June 2014 target ?
> 
> 
> If all goes well which it is not.
> 
> With the current NBN, the setbacks aren't ifs, their facts and it will be interesting to see what else comes to light with a new government.
> 
> My point though was in relation to the copper under the Coalition's plan where it can't effectively be remediated.




We'll know about the June 2014 target in June 2014, but I seriously doubt it will be met now. If you were SIlcar et al, would you be ramping up your staff and training them in FTTP rollouts knowing that it's coming to an end (as opposed to the ramp-up phase of a 10-year build)? I wouldn't.

Even if it doesn't "go well", it will still earn income. It's already earning income, with takeup higher than forecast and ARPU higher than forecast. The worst that can happen is a delay in revenue, leading to an increase in peak funding required and a delay in providing the return. But the return will still occur.

It will be interesting to see what happens if the Coalition find that bigs parts of the copper is in worse condition than they expect. Now that will be a budget blowout to be seen.....at least if their claims about the 'rea' cost of the NBN are true.

On the upside (for me at least), I was chatting to a Telstra tech the other day as he fixed my neighbour's line. He told me that the most likely spot for a node in my street is the pillar located almost across the road from me. Perhaps only 40m copper loop, and my copper is only a few years old to boot. I'll be very interested to see what speed I can get over FTTN, given that it doesn't get much better than that. On the downside, my neighbour won't be happy about the "fridge" in his front garden.


----------



## moXJO

NBNMyths said:


> We'll know about the June 2014 target in June 2014, but I seriously doubt it will be met now. If you were SIlcar et al, would you be ramping up your staff and training them in FTTP rollouts knowing that it's coming to an end (as opposed to the ramp-up phase of a 10-year build)? I wouldn't.
> 
> Even if it doesn't "go well", it will still earn income. It's already earning income, with takeup higher than forecast and ARPU higher than forecast. The worst that can happen is a delay in revenue, leading to an increase in peak funding required and a delay in providing the return. But the return will still occur.
> 
> It will be interesting to see what happens if the Coalition find that bigs parts of the copper is in worse condition than they expect. Now that will be a budget blowout to be seen.....at least if their claims about the 'rea' cost of the NBN are true.
> 
> On the upside (for me at least), I was chatting to a Telstra tech the other day as he fixed my neighbour's line. He told me that the most likely spot for a node in my street is the pillar located almost across the road from me. Perhaps only 40m copper loop, and my copper is only a few years old to boot. I'll be very interested to see what speed I can get over FTTN, given that it doesn't get much better than that. On the downside, my neighbour won't be happy about the "fridge" in his front garden.



So you wouldnt pay the 5k to get it hooked up?
Whats the story with tpg rolling out fiber?


----------



## PinguPingu

If anyone's wondering: TPG plans to expand their own Fibre to the building service: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-1...-lifts/4962454

A concern here is that ISP/Telco's may now be in a race to effectively 'lock in' apartments or flats to their service, meaning they could potentially build local monopolies depending on how/where they lay out their Fibre. It's all really up in the air at the moment. Hopefully some government regulation should prevent uncompetitive monopolies, but a positive is that it shows ISPs know fibre is the future and are willing to lay it down, but on the negative does not seem to bode well for those in unprofitable non-population dense rural areas.


----------



## sydboy007

moXJO said:


> So you wouldnt pay the 5k to get it hooked up?
> Whats the story with tpg rolling out fiber?




They're not rolling out fibre.  The fibre is already there.

What they are proposing to do is connect that fibre to some of their own equipment in the basement of an apartment building then use the internal copper to connect to each apartment.

The main problems of this will be they wont want to provide open access so if MT allows this to go ahead I can see the situation where:

* Telcos cherry pick the profitable areas to connect MDUs

* You will likely only have the option of 1 service provider in the apartment block

* The massive loss of revenue to the NBN will mean they have to service the least profitable areas so it will require a constant tax payer subsidy for them to run.

I suppose it does fit within the Liberal National philosophy of privatising the profits and soacialising the loses.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> We'll know about the June 2014 target in June 2014, but I seriously doubt it will be met now. If you were SIlcar et al, would you be ramping up your staff and training them in FTTP rollouts knowing that it's coming to an end (as opposed to the ramp-up phase of a 10-year build)? I wouldn't.



Regarding ramp-up, Syd to some extent at least appears to contradict that view,



sydboy007 said:


> My understanding is pretty much all the contracts for the initial 3 year rollout have been signed.




https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...21778&page=134&p=793488&viewfull=1#post793488



NBNMyths said:


> Even if it doesn't "go well", it will still earn income. It's already earning income, with takeup higher than forecast and ARPU higher than forecast. The worst that can happen is a delay in revenue, leading to an increase in peak funding required and a delay in providing the return. But the return will still occur.



Is that expectation still based on completing the rollout on due date in 2021 ?
NBN Co has so far has demonstrated that it can't keep to rollout targets on a year to year basis let alone over the life of the rollout.

Depending on the level of delay and consequent cost blowouts, revenue may never recover the cost of the project.

Let me put it this way. If a project with the same history was seeking $1.6bn in private equity for the same reasons, would you invest ? 



NBNMyths said:


> It will be interesting to see what happens if the Coalition find that bigs parts of the copper is in worse condition than they expect. Now that will be a budget blowout to be seen.....at least if their claims about the 'rea' cost of the NBN are true.



If FTTP costs as much as the Coalition says, it costs that much regardless of who is in office. 



NBNMyths said:


> On the upside (for me at least), I was chatting to a Telstra tech the other day as he fixed my neighbour's line. He told me that the most likely spot for a node in my street is the pillar located almost across the road from me. Perhaps only 40m copper loop, and my copper is only a few years old to boot. I'll be very interested to see what speed I can get over FTTN, given that it doesn't get much better than that. On the downside, my neighbour won't be happy about the "fridge" in his front garden.



Where are you and your neighbour on the current rollout schedule and how confident are you of it being done in accordance with that schedule ?

You might me one of the many that gets faster fixed line broadband sooner under the Coalition.

On another aspect, I'm curious as to how the rollout going into MDU's and whether NBN Co has switched from fibre to the premise to fibre to the basement.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Regarding ramp-up, Syd to some extent at least appears to contradict that view,
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...21778&page=134&p=793488&viewfull=1#post793488




I think it's fairly obvious that myths means that there is no growth over what the current rollout contracts require.

I'd say over the next 12 months there will be a wind down in the rate of FTTP connections simply because a lot of those workers will have to be retasked to FTTN - the Coalition will probably dishonestly try to use the slower rate as further proof that FTTP is not the right way to go.  They are physically different locations so there's no way to avoid this.  There's not a limitless workforce out there, and the skill sets required will be a bit different as well.  How much overlap I'm not too sure.  Telstra has enough issues doing repair work in a timely manner, so I can't see them being able to help too much with the rollout unless we see an increase in repair times.

Since MT has already admitted it will take a year to start the FTTN rollout, I'd argue that at least for the next 18-24 months the number of people who get an upgrade would be lower than if the current rollout was allowed to continue at full speed.  Beyond that, it all depends on MTs ability to meet his 25Mbs minimum target by late 2016.

TPG and other companies looking to cherry pick MDUs in the capital cities next to fibre cables will further complicate MTs task.  MT might be starting to rethink his opposition to the anti cherry picking laws introduced by the ALP.  How good these FTTB setups is another question.  I've already read some pots from people who say they are living at the Sydney Park Village and they are already seeing a fall in speeds, so it sounds like backhaul contention is going to be a big issue.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I think it's fairly obvious that myths means that there is no growth over what the current rollout contracts require.



Perhaps you could clarify the specific period you refer to when you say pretty much all the contracts for the initial 3 year rollout have been signed.

Myths was referring to the rollout to the end of 2014 which is now less than 12-months away.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Regarding ramp-up, Syd to some extent at least appears to contradict that view,
> 
> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...21778&page=134&p=793488&viewfull=1#post793488
> 
> Is that expectation still based on completing the rollout on due date in 2021 ?
> NBN Co has so far has demonstrated that it can't keep to rollout targets on a year to year basis let alone over the life of the rollout.
> 
> Depending on the level of delay and consequent cost blowouts, revenue may never recover the cost of the project.
> 
> Let me put it this way. If a project with the same history was seeking $1.6bn in private equity for the same reasons, would you invest ?
> 
> 
> If FTTP costs as much as the Coalition says, it costs that much regardless of who is in office.
> 
> 
> Where are you and your neighbour on the current rollout schedule and how confident are you of it being done in accordance with that schedule ?
> 
> You might me one of the many that gets faster fixed line broadband sooner under the Coalition.
> 
> On another aspect, I'm curious as to how the rollout going into MDU's and whether NBN Co has switched from fibre to the premise to fibre to the basement.




I think you're mis-interpreting. Yes, the contracts for the next 3 years are signed (with options to extend). But the contractors are still ramping up their workforce and will be until 2015 (according to the corp plan). While there is some risk of there not being a renewal, if you were a contractor you would be considering that it's likely that rollout contracts will continue for ~10 years, not just the 3 you are currently contracted for. You would therefore be more willing to wear the expense of training a workforce for that 10 years. However if you KNOW that the work will end in three, then you'll train up the minimum possible number of people for the next 3 years, and perhaps even wear a penalty for being late, or use the excuse that it was too hard to recruit people etc etc.

Yes, I would invest in the NBN personally, if it were guaranteed by both sides of politics to continue on the current technology/regulatory basis.

FTTP would be substantially more expensive under the coalition's policy than under the ALPs due to economies of scale in design, equipment and construction.

My area is on the NBN 3-year rollout schedule, scheduled to commence in 2015. That means I'm not covered by the current FTTP rollout contracts. I would be covered by a 12-month extension of them though. I'm also in a liberal-held marginal seat, so I'm pretty confident of being done soon-ish either way.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> I think you're mis-interpreting. Yes, the contracts for the next 3 years are signed (with options to extend). But the contractors are still ramping up their workforce and will be until 2015 (according to the corp plan). While there is some risk of there not being a renewal, if you were a contractor you would be considering that it's likely that rollout contracts will continue for ~10 years, not just the 3 you are currently contracted for. You would therefore be more willing to wear the expense of training a workforce for that 10 years. However if you KNOW that the work will end in three, then you'll train up the minimum possible number of people for the next 3 years, and perhaps even wear a penalty for being late, or use the excuse that it was too hard to recruit people etc etc.



How then does this impact negatively on the rollout schedule to June 30 2014 and if it does, why wouldn't that be reflected in NBN Co's rollout forecasts bearing in mind our 3-year electoral cycle ?

That appeared to be the context of your statement.



NBNMyths said:


> Yes, I would invest in the NBN personally, if it were guaranteed by both sides of politics to continue on the current technology/regulatory basis.



I know it's very much a hypothetical question, but would you personally invest specifically on Labor's plan from where it currently stands, rollout delays and all ?


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> I know it's very much a hypothetical question, but would you personally invest specifically on Labor's plan from where it currently stands, rollout delays and all ?




I would be tempted to invest because:

* Having worked wth large projects I know the learning curve is step at the begining, but once you hit full speed things happen pretty quickly.

* The current migration by choice to the NBN is running at far higher rates than forecast

* ARPU is higher than forecast because it seems peole want the speed - already the majority of subscribers are on speeds FTTN will not be providing till 2017+

I'm very much looking forward to the copper audit and seeing what the estimate of how much will need to be replaced.  With a minimum 10M copper pairs to be resued for the FTTN I wonder what they will consider as a representative sample size?  Will they audit every FTTN area?  Surely they have to with such variability of copper age and climatic conditions.  IIRC MT has budged for 10% replacement.  Not sure what that turns out to be in $, but I'd say the real rate will be ~20% based on my experience at work with the amount of line faults that turn out to be from the pillar to premises, and generally we are talking about lower speed use so the cut off mark for dud copper is going to be a lot higher than presently seen.

I'm also looking forward to the outcry of Fridge Nodes appearing out front of people's homes and how likely local councils are to play ball with granting permits for the work that is required.  Will councils try to get some form of "rent" for use of public land?  The 6.30pm trash news shows will have a field day with property owners loosing thousands of dollars in value due to the unsightly Fridge Node out front.


----------



## Smurf1976

sydboy007 said:


> I'm also looking forward to the outcry of Fridge Nodes appearing out front of people's homes and how likely local councils are to play ball with granting permits for the work that is required.  Will councils try to get some form of "rent" for use of public land?  The 6.30pm trash news shows will have a field day with property owners loosing thousands of dollars in value due to the unsightly Fridge Node out front.




I can also see "NBN fibre connected" becoming a common feature of property sales and rental advertisements in much the same way as a garage, air-conditioning or a modern kitchen are considered features of a property likely to attract buyers / renters.

In my opinion, a house with fibre connected will in the future be worth more than one that doesn't have it. Once people wake up to this situation, that will shift the debate somewhat I'd expect.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I would be tempted to invest because: ........



I'm relieved you're only tempted. 

With regard to any learning curve, that should be factored into forecasts and not used as an excuse to justify chronic shortfalls. 

With regard to the copper network, if 20% needs to be replaced then the flipside is that 80% is still serviceable.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> How then does this impact negatively on the rollout schedule to June 30 2014 and if it does, why wouldn't that be reflected in NBN Co's rollout forecasts bearing in mind our 3-year electoral cycle ?
> 
> That appeared to be the context of your statement.
> 
> 
> I know it's very much a hypothetical question, but would you personally invest specifically on Labor's plan from where it currently stands, rollout delays and all ?




Perhaps I need to clarify...

NBN Co have contracted a certain amount of work over a 3 year period.

...Under the Labor policy....
The contractors have taken those contracts, but would work under the assumption that the NBN is a 10 year project, and there will likely be additional contracts following on from the current ones (particularly as there are already options to renew). Thus, those contractors would be comfortable continuing to ramp their workforce and training based on the assumption that the size of their workforce will need to continue increasing for the next few years as the rollout hits target volume.

...But now...
The contractors have taken those contracts, but *know* that they will not be renewed. They know that the FTTP rollout will end at the completion of the current contract. Thus, they will employ and train the absolute minimum number of people to fulfill their obligations. Depending on the penalties written into the contract, they may even be happy to deliberately fail to meet targets rather than spend money empoying and training people for a job that's about to finish. They will also likely want to tender for FTTN, which they may divert parts of their workforce into before completing their FTTP obligations.

As sydboy wrote, I also agree that Turnbull will point at the missed targets and blame FTTP, when the reality will be that the contractors saw the end coming, and wound down accordingly.


Yes, I'd be happy to invest currently, but only if the current tech and regulatory regime were guaranteed to continue until completion.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> ...But now...
> The contractors have taken those contracts, but *know* that they will not be renewed. They know that the FTTP rollout will end at the completion of the current contract. Thus, they will employ and train the absolute minimum number of people to fulfill their obligations. Depending on the penalties written into the contract, they may even be happy to deliberately fail to meet targets rather than spend money empoying and training people for a job that's about to finish. They will also likely want to tender for FTTN, which they may divert parts of their workforce into before completing their FTTP obligations.
> 
> As sydboy wrote, I also agree that Turnbull will point at the missed targets and blame FTTP, when the reality will be that the contractors saw the end coming, and wound down accordingly.



That to some extent may be true there but there's perhaps also an element of attempting to brace Labor's legacy in that argument against the news to come. 

The downgrades we've seen so far have been while Labor has been in office and that includes the recent media account of a downgrade to the June 2014 rollout target.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> I'm relieved you're only tempted.
> 
> With regard to any learning curve, that should be factored into forecasts and not used as an excuse to justify chronic shortfalls.
> 
> With regard to the copper network, if 20% needs to be replaced then the flipside is that 80% is still serviceable.




Liek to speculate on what an extra 10% copper remediation will do to the FTTN budget?



Smurf1976 said:


> In my opinion, a house with fibre connected will in the future be worth more than one that doesn't have it. Once people wake up to this situation, that will shift the debate somewhat I'd expect.




Especialy when compared to the house with a Node Fridge plopped out front.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

I still reckon someone will be able to use an amoeba to give us biological transmission of data which will be far superior to the NBN.

NBN is a waste of money, an ALP thought bubble.

gg


----------



## So_Cynical

MT's blog post about the online petition isn't very encouraging.



			
				 malcolmturnbull.com.au/ said:
			
		

> Our NBN Policy
> 
> 12th September 2013  |  899 comments  |  Blog
> 
> 
> The campaigning website change.org has been hosting an onine petition calling on the Coalition to abandon its NBN policy and complete the National Broadband Network on the same design as that set out by Labor - fibre to the premises to 93% of the population.
> 
> Last Saturday there was a general election at which the NBN was one of the most prominent issues. The Coalition's NBN Policy - which can be read here  had been published in April - five months ahead of the election. The Coalition won the election.
> 
> The promoters of this petition apparently believe that we should ignore the lengthy public debate on the NBN that preceded the election and also ignore the election result. We should within days of the election walk away from one of *our most well debated, well understood *and prominent policies. Democracy? I don't think so.
> 
> For those who don't have time to read our policy (but time to sign an online petition) there are a few important points to bear in mind.
> 
> We do not regard technology as an ideological issue. We are technologically agnostic. We want to ensure that all Australians have very fast broadband as soon, as cheaply and as affordably as possible. The NBN project at present is running over budget and way behind schedule. At the current rate of progress it will take decades to complete and close to $100 billion.
> 
> The Labor Government has not been honest with the public about the NBN. They never conducted a cost benefit analysis, they have sought at every turn to conceal the fact that the project has been failing to meet its targets.
> 
> We will bring the public into our confidence. We will open the books of the NBN. There will be a strategic review conducted within the next 60 days which will show how long it will take and how much it will cost to complete the NBN on the current specifications and what that means both to the taxpayer and to the consumers. We will also set out what our options are to complete the project sooner and more cost effectively and again what that means in terms of affordability and of course in service levels. Many of the FTTP supporters on twitter and elsewhere say that they don't care what it costs or how long it takes - they want fibre to the home regardless. That point of view is reckless in the extreme. Every public infrastructure project has to be carefully and honestly analysed so that governments, and citizens, can weigh up the costs and benefits.
> 
> This study is vital for the public to be fully informed and our redesign of the project will be informed by the result of those studies.
> 
> The NBN debate is not over - but I am determined to ensure that from now on it is at least fully informed.




"well debated, well understood"  That's a stretch.

http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/media/our-nbn-policy#.UjmDuNISb7Y


----------



## sydboy007

So_Cynical said:


> MT's blog post about the online petition isn't very encouraging.
> 
> 
> 
> "well debated, well understood"  That's a stretch.
> 
> http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/media/our-nbn-policy#.UjmDuNISb7Y




I love this from MT _"The NBN debate is not over - but I am determined to ensure that from now on it is at least fully informed."_

When he wouldn't release any of the financial assumptions he had made to determine the cost of his FTTN policy.

MT wont be able to hide this for much longer though.

I am so looking forward to seeing what he assumed would be the maximum cable length to deliver 25 Mbs - I'm pretty sure it will match the lab conditions charts rather than what is being ahieved in the world.


----------



## overhang

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I still reckon someone will be able to use an amoeba to give us biological transmission of data which will be far superior to the NBN.
> 
> NBN is a waste of money, an ALP thought bubble.
> 
> gg




It really frustrates me why you conservatives settle for inferior policies just because its not the ALP.  Why aren't you lobbying the government about the complete waste of money that is the FTTN NBN?  Why aren't you lobbying the government about their Direct Action plan that wastes 3.2 billion dollars of tax payer money?

I would understand if the coalitions stance was to cancel the NBN all together and repeal the ETS but they insist on inept policies just to have an alternative to the governments.  This is not a conservative government, a conservative government that has continually told us about the dire economic times yet comes out with the most generous paid parental leave scheme that is essentially a tax on the public through indirect methods (the same way the ETS worked).  The worst part is I feel that the media will not hold this Abbott government to the same accountability they held the ALP to but I hope to be proven wrong.


----------



## sydboy007

overhang said:


> It really frustrates me why you conservatives settle for inferior policies just because its not the ALP.  Why aren't you lobbying the government about the complete waste of money that is the FTTN NBN?  Why aren't you lobbying the government about their Direct Action plan that wastes 3.2 billion dollars of tax payer money?




+1 

I've already seen the goal posts being moved in this forum.

It's not about the Abbott Government doing what they said they will do, it's just if they do it better than Labor, whatever that means.

MT benchmark is all households will have a minimum 25Mbs and to do it cheaper than the current NBN.

Lets see what his "transparent" review tells us.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> It's not about the Abbott Government doing what they said they will do, it's just if they do it better than Labor, whatever that means.



The distinction is one between the ideal and political reality.

Any reasonable person would like to see the ideal, but the political reality of finite choice makes that unrealistic. It might be that our underlying political processes ultimately requires non-partisan reform if political reality slips too far from sound national management.

As for moving goal posts, those representing the NBN rollout schedule floated down the river long ago.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> It really frustrates me why you conservatives settle for inferior policies just because its not the ALP.  Why aren't you lobbying the government about the complete waste of money that is the FTTN NBN?  Why aren't you lobbying the government about their Direct Action plan that wastes 3.2 billion dollars of tax payer money?
> 
> I would understand if the coalitions stance was to cancel the NBN all together and repeal the ETS but they insist on inept policies just to have an alternative to the governments.  This is not a conservative government, a conservative government that has continually told us about the dire economic times yet comes out with the most generous paid parental leave scheme that is essentially a tax on the public through indirect methods (the same way the ETS worked).  The worst part is I feel that the media will not hold this Abbott government to the same accountability they held the ALP to but I hope to be proven wrong.



While I won't go into the specifics of what I feel the Coalition's underlying positions are on specific policies in response to the above comments, Labor won the 2007 election essentially on the back of a me too and John Howard Lite campaign.

Both major parties are guilty in this regard.


----------



## sydboy007

http://www.abc.net.au/technology/articles/2013/09/19/3851924.htm

A senior technician who is currently rolling out the NBN but performed an audit of Telstra's copper network some years ago - when Telstra itself was considering a FTTN rollout - told us that over 30 per cent of the records were wrong. He said that the only way to tell which copper line went from the turret to each house was to have teams of engineers (one at the turret and one at each address) test each line individually to check that it went to the right place.

He said this made the process of performing a "one-to-one translation" of lines from the current pillars to FTTN cabinets, completely impractical; pointing out that Telstra has some 65,000 pillars around Australia with many handling communications for around 200 premises.

---------------

The advantage of the current NBN is your ADSL and phone continue to work till you're NBN connection is up and running.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Liek to speculate on what an extra 10% copper remediation will do to the FTTN budget?



I feel we're going around in circles to some extent here, but in quickly responding, I'll replace an extra 10% with an extra x% with x being a variable.

The rollout overall will clearly cost more and the project take longer, but a greater proportion will be FTTP. In making the determination between retaining the copper and going to FTTP for a specific area, the NBN's current numbers though cannot be relied upon for the basis of any such decisions because of the continual rollout setbacks the current project is suffering.


----------



## pixel

sydboy007 said:


> A senior technician who is currently rolling out the NBN but performed an audit of Telstra's copper network some years ago - when Telstra itself was considering a FTTN rollout - told us that *over 30 per cent of the records were wrong.* He said that the only way to tell which copper line went from the turret to each house was to have teams of engineers (one at the turret and one at each address) test each line individually to check that it went to the right place.
> 
> He said this made the process of performing a "one-to-one translation" of lines from the current pillars to FTTN cabinets, completely impractical; pointing out that Telstra has some 65,000 pillars around Australia with many handling communications for around 200 premises.




From own experience, I can believe that.
And a lot of the old copper lines are so badly corroded that ADSL speeds drop back to old dial-up rates.
I've had a total of 8 technicians attend over the course of a year; neither could find a workable pair of wires, although each visit found a "bad connection" somewhere between pillars and home. The honest ones even admitted that the ducts were frequently flooded and unless they were rewired, which Telstra wouldn't do any more, my dropouts would continue.
I ended up switching to wireless; luckily, there is an Optus/ Vivid tower nearby that gives me 8Mbps.


----------



## Shaker

I believe the copper is in a bad state as well

I am an ex Telstra technician and I left in 1997. The copper network in WA was in a bad state then. I doubt seriously that it has improved at all.

MT should save us all the time and expense. Get with the future and get on with FTTP.

Shaker


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> While I won't go into the specifics of what I feel the Coalition's underlying positions are on specific policies in response to the above comments, Labor won the 2007 election essentially on the back of a me too and John Howard Lite campaign.
> 
> Both major parties are guilty in this regard.




I don't recall this as the case, my memory is a bit scratchy of the 2007 election but weren't Labors two major polices to scrap work choices and the NBN.  I'll attempt to stick to the NBN as to not sidetrack the thread. * I don't see how there is any possible way one can rationally reject Labors FTTH NBN model and then support the Liberal FTTN alternative*.  One is the right way to do it that will last 60+ years and the other will require ongoing upgrades/maintenance until either an alternative model is available or upgrading to FTTH which will cost significantly more in the future. You either do it right and do it once or you don't do it at all and we hold off until most Australians are complaining about their inadequate service and upgrade then.

We will be bumping this thread in 10-20 years time pointing out what white elephant this policy become as a few of us will have cherry picked FTTH because TPG etc decided it was economically viable to upgrade that suburb while the rest of us will wait for sensible policy.  

Our copper must be replaced at some stage, it has already exceeded life expectancy and now would be the logical time to replace it.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> I don't recall this as the case, my memory is a bit scratchy of the 2007 election but weren't Labors two major polices to scrap work choices and the NBN.  I'll attempt to stick to the NBN as to not sidetrack the thread. * I don't see how there is any possible way one can rationally reject Labors FTTH NBN model and then support the Liberal FTTN alternative*.  One is the right way to do it that will last 60+ years and the other will require ongoing upgrades/maintenance until either an alternative model is available or upgrading to FTTH which will cost significantly more in the future. You either do it right and do it once or you don't do it at all and we hold off until most Australians are complaining about their inadequate service and upgrade then.
> 
> We will be bumping this thread in 10-20 years time pointing out what white elephant this policy become as a few of us will have cherry picked FTTH because TPG etc decided it was economically viable to upgrade that suburb while the rest of us will wait for sensible policy.
> 
> Our copper must be replaced at some stage, it has already exceeded life expectancy and now would be the logical time to replace it.



Apart from the top marginal income rate above $180k, Labor in 2007 went to the election matching the tax cuts the Coalition proposed during that campaign. There were obviously significant policy differences, but there were in the 2013 election as well. The question remains though as to what happened to Kevin Rudd the fiscal conservative ? 
That Kevin Rudd wasn't evident in the 2013 campaign.

The NBN that Labor proposed in 2007 was not the grand plan that's being built now. The rollout schedule is also fantasy and the cost estimates are heading in that direction. Both FTTP and FTTN need to be critically analysed, not in the context of choosing one of the major party's specific plans, but to best determine the rollout mix. 

What will be interesting in the immediate future is the results of the Coalition's audits. In the end, I suspect the outcome will be a compromise between the Coalition's and Labor's models with one current variable obviously being the state of the copper network. 

If the Coalition's progress ends up in more difficulties than Labor's, they'll be judged accordingly by the electorate.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBN will be scrapped, it will be gorne.

Like the "Weather" claptrap agency that has been abolished.

gg


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> The NBN that Labor proposed in 2007 was not the grand plan that's being built now. The rollout schedule is also fantasy and the cost estimates are heading in that direction. Both FTTP and FTTN need to be critically analysed, not in the context of choosing one of the major party's specific plans, but to best determine the rollout mix.




What happened?  Sol Trujillo.

Telstra put in a late non bid for the FTTN Labor was looking to build in 2007.

Once they realised that if Telstra didn't play ball it was going to cost way too much in court time and $$ to get the copper CAN back.

As you say, the performance of MT over the next 3 years will be a very hot topic at the next election.

I don't see how they can do a representative copper audit in 60-90 days.  If we take 65K of pillars and need to test copper on 71% of them and test just 10% of the avg 200 lines connected we're looking at over 900K of lines to test.   

Whether that will provide a true representation of the copper, I'm not sure.  i think I'm lucky that my house was recently built so my copper is likely to be < 20 years old.  The house near to me, could be 50+ years??

Who does the testing?  Telstra?  Don't they have a vested interest to have the copper good to get the highest sale price?  If not Telstra then who has a workforce covering the breadth of Australia with all the access required to test copper on Telstra network?  It's these sorts of Questions that should have been asked an answered before the election.


----------



## Smurf1976

sydboy007 said:


> A senior technician who is currently rolling out the NBN but performed an audit of Telstra's copper network some years ago - when Telstra itself was considering a FTTN rollout - told us that over 30 per cent of the records were wrong. He said that the only way to tell which copper line went from the turret to each house was to have teams of engineers (one at the turret and one at each address) test each line individually to check that it went to the right place.



You have (for example) a 100 pair cable with 70 of those pairs being needed for connections and the rest as spares.

Then a connection stops working. Rather than tracing the fault to a join (fixable) or the cable itself (not fixable unless that entire section is replaced) the easy way to fix a fault is to just connect to one of the spare copper pairs. That could be either at joins or all the way back to the exchange. 

Many such faults have occurred over the years, and I can certainly believe that technicians would not have kept the paper records up to date over the past few decades. So you end up with cables which (to illustrate the point in layman's terms - the actual pairs are colour coded) have pair 1 at the exchange no longer being pair 1 when it gets to your house. Along the way it's been swapped to pair 73 and then onto pair 91, finally appearing as pair 43 at your house. Can it all be traced? Yes - but certainly not easily.

I have never worked for Telstra (or Telecom / PMG) but I have worked on non-Telstra copper communications networks spanning a considerable distance. We had these exact problems - things were changed over the years and the records weren't accurate. Why? Time pressure is one thing (fix it then go straight to the next job ASAP) and the reality is that most people who do technical work simply don't like any form of paperwork in the first place.

So to rely on the records is akin to driving around Sydney with a map that's 100 years old. The basic streets are much the same until you find that someone's built a rather well known bridge, various roads have been diverted or closed completely and that most of the buildings shown on the map no longer exist so can't be used as a reference point. So you find yourself parked beside what is shown as a coal and coke depot but which is now an office building and having no idea how to actually get onto that bridge.

To be honest, based on my general experience with power and communications cabling (plus dealing with water authorities, gas and Telstra itself) they quite likely aren't too sure where some of the cables actually go anyway. Here's one end, here's a different cable that connects to it somewhere, but where does it go and where are the joins?

All that could be worked out, it's not impossible to trace cables and sort out what pair joins to what, but it's a pretty big task in itself.


----------



## Smurf1976

sydboy007 said:


> i think I'm lucky that my house was recently built so my copper is likely to be < 20 years old.  The house near to me, could be 50+ years??



Your house and even the cable in your street might be relatively new. But what other cables are between yours and the exchange? They might be 20 years old or it could well be that the "new" cable in your street simply connects as an extension of a previously existing cable that dates back to the 1950's.

It's the same with all utilities. You may have underground power cables but trace them back and you'll find that they are quite likely simply being fed from an overhead distribution line between the sub-station and the underground section. The sub-station itself could be anything from new to many decades old. And if you go back further well then it all comes from the same power stations whether your house is 5, 50 or 100 years old. Same with gas. Same with water.

If the whole area is new then the odds are that your cables are also fairly new, at least until you get to the other side of the local exchange, sub-station, water pumps or whatever. But unless you're living in a town that didn't exist at all until 20 years ago there is most likely some older stuff around somewhere.

My house was built in 1995 when the street was extended. But my water comes through the same pipes as the 50+ year old houses at the bottom of the street, and that water comes from a dam built in 1967 fed by a treatment plant that's the same age but which has had various additions and upgrades over the years. My power is underground but it's fed from an overhead distribution line just 200m down the road, that line itself being fed from a sub-station that was recently rebuilt but if you follow the transmission line right back then it ends up at a switchyard that's been in operation (with various modifications over the years) since 1957, that being 3 years longer than the power station right next to it. And so on.

This all comes about for the simple reason that all public utilities have been progressively developed over an extended period, with the new things added to the old by whatever means made the most sense at the time.


----------



## sydboy007

Smurf1976 said:


> Your house and even the cable in your street might be relatively new. But what other cables are between yours and the exchange? They might be 20 years old or it could well be that the "new" cable in your street simply connects as an extension of a previously existing cable that dates back to the 1950's.




True, but for the FTTN the only relevant section is the "last mile".  The quite old copper main cable will be replaced with fibre and connect to the pillar now turned into a nice Node Fridge.

I wish I could remember the web site that lets you do a speed test and then shows on a map the speeds those around you are getting.

I was quite surprised that people around me were significantly slower.  I suppose I have one of the newest properties in my area and am thankful I have 12Mbs when a lot of those around me seemed to top out at around 6Mbs.  To me that tends to indicate a lot of the copper around me is likley to have trouble meeting MTs minimum speed requirements.

Once you start having 20%+ remediation work you start to loose any form of economy of scale with a single network type.

Now that the Coalition has stopped releasing any information on refugee boat arrivals, I don't like our chances about getting much information released on the true state of the copper network should MT even attempt to get it before forcing his FTTN rollout to begin.


----------



## sydboy007

if you'd like to see how your broadband speeds compare to your neighbours

http://www.adsl2exchanges.com.au/heatmap-state.php?State=VIC

You can then do a search for your address and click on heatmap on the map

The site is also handy to see which ISPs have their own DSLAM in your exchange


----------



## Shaker

sydboy007 said:


> if you'd like to see how your broadband speeds compare to your neighbours
> 
> http://www.adsl2exchanges.com.au/heatmap-state.php?State=VIC
> 
> You can then do a search for your address and click on heatmap on the map
> 
> The site is also handy to see which ISPs have their own DSLAM in your exchange




Not very many spots on the heatmap in my area. I just did a download/upload test and I have 5Mb/s and 700Kb/s.
My plan is a Telstra ADSL2+ 17,329Kbs/800Kbs service.

Mt exchange is about 1.5 km away. I reckon I must have a few issues .

Shaker


----------



## drsmith

Some more reports out in the AFR today.

Firstly, at least 2.5 million premises contracted for FTTP under the previous government.

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_direct_link_ups_for_premises_KtBZwiFGYupLDR64ZJSQNL

Secondly, an article about the rollout itself (What went wrong with the NBN, subscription only).



> The National Broadband Network Company was to be the Labor government’s crowning achievement in the vein of Medicare and the Snowy River Dam Project. But four years on the reality is murkier.




http://www.afr.com/p/national/what_went_wrong_with_the_nbn_OOFd2s5eB4KLuceU4Cp9QO


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Now that the Coalition has stopped releasing any information on refugee boat arrivals, .......



They're serious about stopping them, unlike Labor.



> During the election campaign, Mr Morrison flagged the possibility that boat arrivals would no longer be reported if the Coalition won government. He said at the time this would be an "operational matter" for the three-star head of the Coalition's new Operation Sovereign Borders taskforce.
> 
> Mr Morrison's spokesman reaffirmed on Friday that it would be up to the newly appointed military head of Operation Sovereign Borders, Lieutenant-General Angus Campbell.
> 
> It is unclear whether General Campbell has yet issued a directive. As of Friday afternoon, sources on Christmas Island – to which asylum-seekers on intercepted boats are initially taken – were saying there had been no boats in recent days.




http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...s-on-asylum-boat-arrivals-20130920-2u5t5.html

This is probably a discussion for the asylum seeker thread.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> They're serious about stopping them, unlike Labor.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...s-on-asylum-boat-arrivals-20130920-2u5t5.html
> 
> This is probably a discussion for the asylum seeker thread.




My point being why the secrecy.  Oppositions always love open Government till they're in Government.  Labor have been just as bad.

Hopefully MT will provide full access to every report generated under his direction, though I'm sure he'll sit on anything too adverse just like any good minister.

Just for interest sake Dr Smith, have you checked out the heat map for your area?


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> My point being why the secrecy.  Oppositions always love open Government till they're in Government.  Labor have been just as bad.



On this, they did flag the possibility before the election and at the moment, it is still just that.

I doubt secrecy is the objective in any case. They're not going to be able to keep boat arrivals secret.



sydboy007 said:


> Hopefully MT will provide full access to every report generated under his direction, though I'm sure he'll sit on anything too adverse just like any good minister.



I think there's already something left in the chair from the previous occupant, slightly pressed and farted upon.



sydboy007 said:


> Just for interest sake Dr Smith, have you checked out the heat map for your area?



Out of curiosity, I did.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Sri Kosuri from Harvard has contacted me to bring to the attention of posters on this thread, some recent storage in DNA which will make metallic servers obsolete.

It is nicely summarised in the following article.

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/134672-harvard-cracks-dna-storage-crams-700-terabytes-of-data-into-a-single-gram



> Just think about it for a moment: One gram of DNA can store 700 terabytes of data. That’s 14,000 50-gigabyte Blu-ray discs… in a droplet of DNA that would fit on the tip of your pinky. To store the same kind of data on hard drives ”” the densest storage medium in use today ”” you’d need 233 3TB drives, weighing a total of 151 kilos. In Church and Kosuri’s case, they have successfully stored around 700 kilobytes of data in DNA ”” Church’s latest book, in fact ”” and proceeded to make 70 billion copies (which they claim, jokingly, makes it the best-selling book of all time!) totaling 44 petabytes of data stored.
> 
> Looking forward, they foresee a world where biological storage would allow us to record anything and everything without reservation. Today, we wouldn’t dream of blanketing every square meter of Earth with cameras, and recording every moment for all eternity/human posterity ”” we simply don’t have the storage capacity. There is a reason that backed up data is usually only kept for a few weeks or months ”” it just isn’t feasible to have warehouses full of hard drives, which could fail at any time. If the entirety of human knowledge ”” every book, uttered word, and funny cat video ”” can be stored in a few hundred kilos of DNA, though… well, it might just be possible to record everything (hello, police state!)
> 
> It’s also worth noting that it’s possible to store data in the DNA of living cells ”” though only for a short time. Storing data in your skin would be a fantastic way of transferring data securely…




I would predict that transfer of data using biological systems will not be far behind.

What a waste, all this money on the NBN, if that turns out to be the case.

Long live the mighty amoeba.

gg


----------



## sydboy007

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Sri Kosuri from Harvard has contacted me to bring to the attention of posters on this thread, some recent storage in DNA which will make metallic servers obsolete.
> 
> It is nicely summarised in the following article.
> 
> http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/134672-harvard-cracks-dna-storage-crams-700-terabytes-of-data-into-a-single-gram
> 
> I would predict that transfer of data using biological systems will not be far behind.
> 
> What a waste, all this money on the NBN, if that turns out to be the case.
> 
> Long live the mighty amoeba.
> 
> gg




Oh I've read many tech articles that show lab test results and the amazing tech that will come of it.  IBM have had many such successes and much of the discoveries take a good 20 years to commercialise.

Speed of light in a fibre optic cable ~ 200,000,000 M/S

Speed of nerve impulses - at best 119 M/S

Sort of sums up the difference between FTTP and FTTN nicely GG


----------



## bellenuit

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I would predict that transfer of data using biological systems will not be far behind.




Men and women have been doing that for years and enjoying the experience at the same time. How else could our DNA pass to the next generations.


----------



## medicowallet

http://www.theage.com.au/technology/technology-news/entire-nbn-board-resigns-20130922-2u84w.html

NBN board to resign.  

MW


----------



## drsmith

There's also this out this morning in the AFR (first part quoted below),



> Telstra has built a test site using the Coalition’s preferred national broadband network technology as part of an aggressive strategy to win billions of dollars in construction contracts.
> 
> The trials involve the construction of a fibre to the node test site by Telstra using equipment from Alcatel-Lucent.
> 
> The trials began in early September, just days after the Coalition’s federal election victory.
> 
> Industry experts believe Telstra stands to win construction contracts worth between  $5 billion and $6 billion if the Coalition agrees to let it build the NBN across Australia.
> 
> The entire board of NBN Co has offered to resign amid suggestions the new Coalition government does not have faith in them, The Sydney Morning Herald has reported.
> 
> A Telstra spokeswoman confirmed the tests were under way and said they were proving to be successful.




http://www.afr.com/p/australia2-0/telstra_targets_billion_dollar_nbn_X8Wul0CVmC2TossqGfpqMP

In reference to an article from last week,



drsmith said:


> Some more reports out in the AFR today.
> 
> Firstly, at least 2.5 million premises contracted for FTTP under the previous government.
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_direct_link_ups_for_premises_KtBZwiFGYupLDR64ZJSQNL
> 
> Secondly, an article about the rollout itself (What went wrong with the NBN, subscription only).
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/national/what_went_wrong_with_the_nbn_OOFd2s5eB4KLuceU4Cp9QO




I'm able to access the second article above this morning, without subscription. It's quiet a long read.



> The National Broadband Network Company was to be the Labor government’s crowning achievement in the vein of Medicare and the Snowy River Dam Project.
> 
> Where high speed broadband was traditionally restricted to corporate networks and international links, Labor would connect it to 93 per cent of homes and businesses, from the sandstone manors of Bellevue Hill to the valleys of Tasmania and everywhere in between.
> 
> But four years on the reality is murkier. Its founding chief executive has been pushed out the back door while the entire telecommunications industry is despondent.
> 
> The current chairman Siobhan McKenna – despite attempts to confront the company’s mismanagement – has been earmarked for replacement.
> 
> And Telstra, the one company NBN Co sought to sideline in its efforts to rewire Australia, has found itself with the whiphand; poised to get the very contracts it was denied.
> 
> How did things go so wrong and who is to blame?
> 
> According to those who claim to know , many of the problems can be traced to a single shock decision in 2011.
> 
> After a year of hard-fought negotiations between Australia’s 14 biggest construction firms the tender to build the national broadband number for $12-14 billion had been thrown out the window amid claims of mass price-gouging.
> 
> “We weren’t going to get to a fair price, and the only way to achieve that was to sit down opposite a credible company and work through the detail,” NBN Co head of corporate services Kevin Brown said later.
> 
> To the bidders involved, it sounded like a gut-churning April Fools’ joke. The decision to cancel tenders, approved by NBN Co’s inaugural chief executive Mike Quigley, led to the immediate departure of Patrick Flannigan, NBN Co’s first head of construction, just days after the announcement.
> 
> “It was obviously a shot across the bows and showed they were very determined to get the best value for money,” says Graeme Sumners, a former managing director of telecommunications services firm, Service Stream. It was one of the main companies responsible for building the NBN. Together with Lend Lease it formed a 50-50 joint venture named Syntheo that won contracts worth up to $315 million.
> 
> NBN Co eventually sat down with a select group of contractors and began to squeeze every cent of discount from the players at the table. Eventually four companies agreed to final contracts worth $1.1 billion.
> 
> *Fingers point blame at CEO Mike Quigley*
> 
> But notably missing was Telstra – the only company with the construction and telecommunications experience required to pull off a project as monumental as the NBN.
> 
> “There was absolutely executive discussion about getting Telstra engaged,” says one former high-level NBN Co employee. “We wanted them and needed them but we couldn’t find a way through the commercials that were acceptable to us.”
> 
> Though Telstra would eventually receive more than $11 billion in compensation for its existing infrastructure and the effective loss of its monopoly on broadband, it never received a major construction contract.
> 
> Fast forward to 2013 and it appears NBN Co was in the wrong, on both the contracts and Telstra. Syntheo has dissolved amid heavy losses, particularly to Service Stream, while those that survived are now being paid up to 20 per cent more money under renewed contracts.
> 
> Despite receiving $5.2 billion from the Government and hiring over 2600 staff, the company missed its June 30 target by 42 per cent having passed just 205,000 homes and businesses with fibre optic.
> 
> Some of the senior executives who worked at high levels of NBN Co have laid much of the blame at the feet of its star chief executive Mike Quigley.
> 
> Just three months after announcing his $43 billion network, then communications minister Stephen Conroy announced he’d found the man to lead it. Quigley was a cancer-surviving telecommunications veteran once seen as the future head of global tech giant Alcatel-Lucent.
> 
> “On the surface it looked like a fabulous appointment – highly experienced guy, global experience, long-term Alcatel guy who knew about telecommunications,” says an NBN Co insider. “But he didn’t know anything about construction.”
> 
> Quigley may have known all about the inner-workings of global board rooms but those closest said he was unable to master the nuances of Australia’s construction market – a fatal flaw for the man leading the country’s biggest construction project.
> 
> For behind the blinking lights and glass fibre cabling of the NBN’s high-speed broadband are thousands of workers who don hard hats to dig up streets.
> 
> “He was always the smartest guy in the room but he had to prove it,” they said. “So he’d have a discussion with someone in a particular field and then he’d have a better idea.”
> 
> *Political hot potato*
> 
> It didn’t help that politics were rife within NBN Co. Despite ostensibly being a start-up business, staff numbers exploded – hitting 2600 workers in just four years – factions quickly formed within the business.
> 
> Network design and procurement decisions were made without approval from the construction group, while stories of six-hour meetings with few actual decisions were common.
> 
> By January 2013 NBN Co had lost its second head of construction when Dan Flemming - a well-respected figure in the industry - was made redundant.
> 
> “If you look at the whole process from end-to-end it took a lot of effort,” says Sumner. “You’d find fault with one thing, it’d get sent back and then it’d go into an inevitable loop.
> 
> “In the end they weren’t able to adapt to new and changing information and that just unfortunately comes down to there being not enough people and depth of knowledge.”
> 
> The result was a construction timeline that has never stopped slipping. Since launching its first rollout forecasts in 2010, NBN Co has consistently been in the spotlight over what it has said it would do, versus what it actually managed to achieve.
> 
> Plans to reach 1.2 million homes and businesses by June 2013 - according to its 2010 plan - were downgraded to less than a quarter of that figure when an updated corporate plan was released in August 2012.
> 
> Six months later, NBN Co admitted it would fail to reach that target once again. A third draft corporate plan, never publicly released, reveals NBN Co did not expect to make up its construction losses for years to come.
> 
> For those in the know many of the problems stem from the fateful day in 2011 when contractors were squeezed for NBN Co’s bottom line, resulting in a distinct lack of industry investment.
> 
> “The biggest challenge was always mobilisation,” says Steve Christian, who headed NBN Co’s networks for three years before retiring to NSW’s North Coast in 2012.
> 
> “Getting contracts done with large vendors takes longer than people think. It takes a while to get contracts in place and once those are in place, it takes a while for the construction companies to get their resources on the ground and into a position where they can actually start building.”
> 
> Before joining the government business to make sure the network never went offline, Christian built Optus’ cable system, a network that passes 2.2 million premises in capital cities.
> 
> It, along with Telstra’s rival network, was the NBN of its day, promising fast broadband to Australians. But, where those networks used the might of the utilities and the density of the big cities, NBN Co faced a different path - wiring up homes as disparate as Willunga in South Australia and Armidale, 5.5 hours outside of Sydney.
> 
> “It took a lot longer to mobilise the right people at the right time in the right place with the right skills to get the job done,” Christian says. “Fundamentally that is where I think the whole thing, it was underestimated by everybody, the companies and the NBN.”
> 
> *Equivalent of building Snowy River Dam Project*
> 
> Ramping up to a construction effort that would hire 20,000 workers at its peak, and pass 6000 homes a day with fibre was never going to be an easy task - especially when there weren’t enough workers to go around.
> 
> In many ways it was the equivalent of building the Snowy River Dam Project without having a mass migration program.
> 
> “NBN Co never realised it was their responsibility was to develop the industry,” Sumner says. “No other carrier was going to pay for it and neither was any other contractor [because] the up-front payments paid to contractors were never large enough to pay for things like training schools.
> 
> “There was only one organisation that was able to and whose interests were best served by investing in industry development.”
> 
> Each player in the chain, from the contractors hired by NBN Co to design and build the network, to the high-vis-wearing man in a hard hat, had his margin. And by wittling down contractors to the lowest possible cost, NBN Co had reduced any chance of a profitable venture for the little guy.
> 
> As the project wore on, news of small construction and even air-conditioning companies going broke and threats of lawsuits against contractors began to emerge.
> 
> Union officials railed against the schemes, decrying the inexperienced ‘mum-and-dad contractors’ that were building the NBN when the veterans turned it down.
> 
> NBN Co denied there was a costs issues; the contractors were happy with the prices they were being paid, they said.
> 
> “It’s one thing for contractors like Service Stream to lose money, and I can tell you it isn’t good,” Sumners says. “But at the end of the day the industry has survived on the good will of subcontractors and small operators who need to be encouraged to stay in the industry.”
> 
> But in March 2013 there came a ray of what many hoped was sunshine. Close associate of Lachlan Murdoch and Ten Network director Siobhan McKenna took on the role of chairman with gusto.
> 
> She immediately took to the job with energy, learning how to splice fibre while meeting with stakeholders and staff alike. Board minutes show she demanded status updates on how the company was running and clarity on how bad the delays had become.
> 
> “I never met Harrison Young and I can’t really comment on him given I didn’t really know him,” says Sumner. “But Siobhan in my mind set out to address the issues and she tried to stuff the genies back in the bottle.
> 
> “But there were too many problems and by the end the relationship with Malcolm [Turnbull] wasn’t very good.”
> 
> *Turnbull NBN’s most effective critic*
> 
> Through it all then-Opposition Communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull was NBN Co’s most effective critic, drilling deeply into the project’s every flaw.
> 
> But despite McKenna’s overtures towards the Coalition and initiating a hunt for Quigley’s replacement, she never won Turnbull’s approval. It resulted in what some have seen as a fatal move - the appointment of lobbying firm Bespoke Approach to help firm up the jobs of NBN Co’s board members in case of a Coalition victory at the Federal election.
> 
> Far from impressing Turnbull, it accelerated his public anger and has hastened her likely departure.
> 
> There was one potential solution to those problems:  Telstra. One of the original 14 bidders to construct the network, the telecommunications behemoth had been given a token task building a trial site in Melbourne, along with some work building out some of the fibre networks linking cities and major network hubs.
> 
> But it remained largely on the sidelines of construction, a cause some say of a cultural aversion to NBN Co’s predecessor within the company. Yet Telstra’s gaze and quiet control of construction remained over the project, a fact that became quite apparent when, in late May this year, construction halted on the NBN.
> 
> Concerns that contractors had improperly removed and handled asbestos material lining the thousands of kilometres of ducts that lie under Australian streets sent instructions flying to immediately stop any work.
> 
> A snap meeting of government ministers, contractors and union leaders was held, and for weeks victims groups warned of the potential impact the hazardous materials could have on hundreds of bystanders.
> 
> For two-and-a-half months, the preliminary work necessary to begin NBN construction in a given suburb remained dormant, exemplifying just how much control Telstra exerted on the project.
> 
> Telstra is the captain’s pick for any significant changes to the network rollout. With a new, Coalition government promising greater efficiencies to the rollout, the company now can renegotiate its $11 billion deal, and gain construction deals.
> 
> It is the final irony that despite trying to remove Telstra’s monopoly NBN Co has returned the behemoth being front-and-centre of a future NBN with the Coalition seen as its saviour.


----------



## sydboy007

medicowallet said:


> http://www.theage.com.au/technology/technology-news/entire-nbn-board-resigns-20130922-2u84w.html
> 
> NBN board to resign.
> 
> MW




Well with the Cherry Picking in play for the cities the NBN is not going to have the income to cross subsidise the country areas without ongoing budget support.  Who'd want to be involved with that kind of debacle?

We're heading for a limited competition in the cities with large MDUs maybe having 2 or 3 companies equipment in the basemet and certain level of choice, while those not on the wireless / sat NBN will get??


----------



## 13ugs13unny

sydboy007 said:


> the NBN is not going to have the income to cross subsidise the country areas without ongoing budget support.  Who'd want to be involved with that kind of debacle?




Its the liberals monkey now. The ~60,000 cabinets with each containing ~12car batteries for back up power, and in the UK its been reported on hot days, they shut down due to excessive heat. Therefore given Australia's climate 60,000 cabinets will need to be refrigerated.

I'm not sure if the libs have thought this through. The irony is this could be a pink batts type of debacle.

I could go into the technical analysis in great detail, but you get the idea.


----------



## NBNMyths

sydboy007 said:


> Well with the Cherry Picking in play for the cities the NBN is not going to have the income to cross subsidise the country areas without ongoing budget support.  Who'd want to be involved with that kind of debacle?
> 
> We're heading for a limited competition in the cities with large MDUs maybe having 2 or 3 companies equipment in the basemet and certain level of choice, while those not on the wireless / sat NBN will get??




You've hit the nail on the head. That's exactly what Alan Kohler said later today:
http://www.businessspectator.com.au...l&utm_content=432134&utm_campaign=kgb&modapt=



> The current chair, Siobhan McKenna and her five colleagues, will no doubt be unable to get out of the place quick enough. Each will be hoping not to be the one whom the new minister and shareholder, Malcolm Turnbull, asks to stay on to assist with the transition.....
> 
> ....If David Teoh is allowed to have the apartment buildings in the cities, then the Malcolm Turnbull/Ziggy Switkowski NBN will simply be an unprofitable competitor on price in the cities and an unprofitable, supplier of fibre to the node services to rural Australia.....
> 
> ....It will, in short, be a donkey, a money sinkhole, a political noose, and an end-of-career nightmare for a mild-mannered nuclear physicist who might end up wishing he’d stayed at the opera.




Not only will the Coalition's 'NBN' be late and obsolete, but it will also be a financial disaster.




13ugs13unny said:


> Its the liberals monkey now. The ~60,000 cabinets with each containing ~12car batteries for back up power, and in the UK its been reported on hot days, they shut down due to excessive heat. Therefore given Australia's climate 60,000 cabinets will need to be refrigerated.
> 
> I'm not sure if the libs have thought this through. The irony is this could be a pink batts type of debacle.
> 
> I could go into the technical analysis in great detail, but you get the idea.





Yep, in the UK they shut down, while in the US the "vaults" (FTTN cabinets) catch fire:
http://www.fierceiptv.com/story/real-estate-lobby-calls-for-u-verse-fire-probe/2008-02-19


----------



## Smurf1976

drsmith said:


> I'm able to access the second article above this morning, without subscription. It's quiet a long read.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “No other carrier was going to pay for it and neither was any other contractor [because] the up-front payments paid to contractors were never large enough to pay for things like training schools.
> 
> “There was only one organisation that was able to and whose interests were best served by investing in industry development.”
> 
> Each player in the chain, from the contractors hired by NBN Co to design and build the network, to the high-vis-wearing man in a hard hat, had his margin. And by wittling down contractors to the lowest possible cost, NBN Co had reduced any chance of a profitable venture for the little guy.
> 
> As the project wore on, news of small construction and even air-conditioning companies going broke and threats of lawsuits against contractors began to emerge.
> 
> Union officials railed against the schemes, decrying the inexperienced ‘mum-and-dad contractors’ that were building the NBN when the veterans turned it down.
Click to expand...


Warning - very long post. 

I've been there, done that when it comes to putting cable (power and communications) into the ground both through existing infrastructure (conduits, pits etc) and new builds. I'll say this....

If your own business is primarily not related to cabling, and the job is straightforward and "generic" in nature (eg running a power cable from the electricity network in the street to a house / shop / warehouse etc) then you can go ahead and contract someone to do the lot. Provided that you use someone suitably qualified (electrical contractor or the holder of a communications cabling license as appropriate) and let them do the lot, then things will generally go according to plan. They'll typically sub-contract the excavation work and any asbestos removal, and will install the new infrastructure themselves in most cases (since they are legally responsible for it).

But if your business is effectively the entire industry, or most of it, then things are very different. You won't easily find someone competent to take on the whole task themselves, since by definition they aren't really in that line of work to start with (since you are the whole industry). Secondly, you'll get the "out of sight, out of mind" problem in a big way when it comes to underground works - and in this case practically everything is underground and thus impractical to inspect after the work is done. 

Planning is another thing. Running a cable from the street to a single building is pretty straightforward. Give the contractor a plan of the property showing the preferred route and location of other services. Then you're up and running - the contractor will already know where the switchboard or communications termination is going to be since they're doing that too (or at least connecting to an existing one). 

But where are the plans for the NBN? I just can't believe that anyone has handed a comprehensive set of plans to the contractors detailing everything that's required. That means that, in practice, the end result is largely being determined by the workers in hard hats building whatever they see fit in order to get from point A to point B. That's where the real trouble starts.

If they are your own employees, and thus accountable directly to the company for time, materials, public complaints, safety and the end result then it's reasonably easy to keep things in line as long as you've got decent workers. 

But if they are a sub-contractor of a sub-contractor of a contractor with nobody having an actual plan, nobody really being accoutable and all the major decisions being made on the job by those hauling the cables, driving excavators and so on well that's a recipe for disaster. You end up with a situation where nobody gives a damn what happens, so long as they don't get pulled up by Workplace Standards (or the equivalent in each state) and they get paid. Dig that trench, throw some conduit in, fill it up and move on. Asbestos? No worries - just throw it on the back of the truck. Properly laying the conduit? Why waste time with proper bedding or even glue when nobody's around to see what's going on. Nuclear test of compaction? What's that! The Council won't likely come along until long after the job is finished, and they'll never track down who was responsible anyway so no need to worry about that one. Reinstatement? If it looks good then she'll be right. The cable kinked, was barked or suffered some other problem during installation? No worries - out of sight, out of mind and you can always blame any of the other sub-contractors or, if it's going to be a while until it's used, just blame rats or some other utility (gas, power, water etc) and say it was fine when it was installed. 

It's akin to getting on a plane in Melbourne. The Captain thinks the destination is Perth but isn't concerned since he's paid as long as the plane takes off and subsequently lands _somewhere_. The First Officer thinks the destination is Darwin but isn't fussed since he's just a labour hire pilot and will be paid for overnight accommodation if required. The man loading the bags thought it was the flight to Los Angeles and loaded the bags for that flight onto this plane, which isn't capable of flying that far anyway (a point he noted, thought was odd but dismissed since it's not his problem). Meanwhile another baggage handler has loaded your bags onto the real flight to LA, which will be taking off just before yours. The flight attendants think they're heading to Brisbane. The passengers think they're flying to Auckland, as do the airline's check-in staff. And the man putting the fuel in the plane, only put in enough to get to Adelaide because he gets in trouble if there's too much fuel on board (excess weight). That being so, as a passenger you'd be better off if that plane stayed on the ground and didn't go anywhere. 

That analogy is awfully similar to what NBNCo are trying to achieve - building something which unavoidably lacks anything other than a broad concept plan at a higher level, reliant on workers "on the ground" who also don't know what's going on (the inevitable consequence of so many sub-sub-sub-contractors being involved) and who don't really care anyway since they'll be paid for whatever they do regardless of whether it's right or wrong. It's a recipe for problems, problems and more problems - all of which will end up being fixed by time and cost blow outs.

So the bottom line is that to properly build something like the NBN, NBNCo itself needs to be actively involved in physical construction. They don't need to necessarily do everything themselves, but there needs to be an NBN employee on site during all critical works. Realistically, they'd be wise to take direct control of cable hauling and conduit installation with an NBN foreman in charge of contractors engaged to provide physical labour only (paid by time on the job). They could outsource excavations etc where required, so long as actually installing the new conduit involves at least one NBN employee "on the tools" down in the trenches. Asbestos removal? No real hassle outsourcing that, provided that they do a lot of random inspections, sampling etc and that each contractor agrees to be filmed at any time without further notice. Do all that and it will cost less, and you'll actually get the thing built to meet real world requirements.

So long as NBNCo are focused solely on paperwork and not involved in construction they will continue to receive poor value and encounter problems. You can outsource some things, but not to the point that NBNCo (which largely _is_ the industry in this case) loses, or more likely doesn't gain in the first place, sound knowledge in house. As it stands now, they are at the mercy of whatever the contractors give them - price, time and quality.

Could Telstra do it better? That depends how they go about it, but they do have a reasonable base if knowledge in house to start with. They'll likely regret some of the job cutting they've done, but they still have reasonable knowledge from which to build up. NBNCo would still be at the contractor's (Telstra) mercy to some extent, but at least Telstra is capable of doing it, leaving only the question of whether they will actually do it properly - and that comes down to a question of final ownership. As with any contractor, they have an incentive to cut corners with quality if

So, there's 3 real options if they want a quality outcome.

1. Build it with NBNCo staff working alongside contractors on-site. It's not as contractually difficult as it may seem, so long as the contractors are engaged under appropriate terms (effectively labour and equipment hire).

2. Let Telstra build it with Telstra owning the completed network as a regulated asset. That is, NBNCo effectively rents the working network from what I'll refer to as "Telstra Network", with any "Telstra Retail" use of the system going via NBNCo the same as any other retailer would do. In practice, this would likely end with Telstra itself being split at the corporate level - a utility company that owns the NBN and makes capacity available to others, and a service company that sells communication services. Any problems with the network are a matter for the owner, such that construction quality liabilities don't sit with NBNCo. 

3. NBNCo aquires Telstra's existing network business in its entirety. Cables, vehicles, staff - the whole lot. Then get this aquired Telstra division to build the NBN. The only real difference to option 2 being in ownership of the completed network - Telstra versus NBNCo ownership.


----------



## NBNMyths

NBN Co used to have an employee at each site monitoring the construction. I'm not sure if this is still the case, but I presume it is. I'm sure they'd tell you if you asked.


----------



## sydboy007

Smurf1976 said:


> So, there's 3 real options if they want a quality outcome.
> 
> 1. Build it with NBNCo staff working alongside contractors on-site. It's not as contractually difficult as it may seem, so long as the contractors are engaged under appropriate terms (effectively labour and equipment hire).
> 
> 2. Let Telstra build it with Telstra owning the completed network as a regulated asset. That is, NBNCo effectively rents the working network from what I'll refer to as "Telstra Network", with any "Telstra Retail" use of the system going via NBNCo the same as any other retailer would do. In practice, this would likely end with Telstra itself being split at the corporate level - a utility company that owns the NBN and makes capacity available to others, and a service company that sells communication services. Any problems with the network are a matter for the owner, such that construction quality liabilities don't sit with NBNCo.
> 
> 3. NBNCo aquires Telstra's existing network business in its entirety. Cables, vehicles, staff - the whole lot. Then get this aquired Telstra division to build the NBN. The only real difference to option 2 being in ownership of the completed network - Telstra versus NBNCo ownership.




Great post Smurf.

I get the feeling MT is going to provide some lucrative contracts to Telstra to get the FTTN ball rolling.  Still I do wonder if they can cope with the extra work.  They seem to have MSDs (mass service disruptions) and high workload areas covering 99% of the country (well it feels like it).  They've had an MSD running for a few months now that covers the Greater Sydney metro area along with a lot of the central coast.  Repair times have blown out, and Telstra are not liable for any form of compensation once the MSD is declared.

I think option 3 might be an easier sell - maybe via a split of the shares so that you own Telstra NBN who will be the monopoly supplier of comms in the country and Telstra retail who provide services over Telstra NBN.  It gets around the issues of copper last mile ownership, and shareholders benefit from still having part ownership of a company that provides a steady income stream.

The tricky part will be determining how much Govt ownership will be of Telstra NBN since they'll be pumping something like $20-30B of funding into it.  It will be very interesting to see who MT can get on board NBN now.  With the treatment they gave the high level staff, Labor looking to get the knife in at every chance, you'd really have to have a masochistic streak to put ya hand up for a high level position with them.


----------



## So_Cynical

Smurf1976 said:


> Warning - very long post.
> 
> I've been there, done that when it comes to putting cable (power and communications) into the ground both through existing infrastructure (conduits, pits etc) and new builds. I'll say this....




I did cable and Satellite for a few years...contractors on the whole are capable of running cable and doing a good job of it, due to the size of the NBN gig i would imagine that having an assessment team going along behind the contractors and paying the contractors based on those assessments would be the go.


----------



## Smurf1976

NBNMyths said:


> NBN Co used to have an employee at each site monitoring the construction. I'm not sure if this is still the case, but I presume it is. I'm sure they'd tell you if you asked.




I've seen a few NBN works crews on the job (Hobart and suburbs).

Either the NBN employee was dressed in the same uniform as the contractors, was doing actual work not just monitoring and chose to turn a blind eye to a kink in the cable, or they weren't there. That was night works, inner Hobart CBD area.

I noted two safety breaches and one instance of possible cable damage, all in the time it took me to walk past.


----------



## moXJO

NBNMyths said:


> Not only will the Coalition's 'NBN' be late and obsolete, but it will also be a financial disaster.




I preferred labors NBN but I just couldn't see it being built at all, or anywhere near budget. Liberals NBN I don't have much faith in either and it looks a messy joke right now with a lot of potential problems. Imo labor flucked its implementation in the first 3 years and now its libs turn to mess it up a little more.
NBN good idea but thats where it ends.


----------



## sydboy007

http://www.computerworld.com.au/arti...ing_standards/

if this is correct, and you'd think that Huwawei have a pretty good idea as being a large vendor of the equipment, then I think MT is in HUGE trouble as the goalposts have moved from max cable run of 500M down to 300M to achieve the 50Mbs target.

_Huawei says VDSL2 can achieve speeds of 50Mbps within 300m of the node. Meanwhile, it says VDSL2 that uses vectoring can achieve speeds of 100Mbps within 300m of the node._


Note that for vectoring to work ALL LINES have to be connected to the same node so the anti noise signalling can be done. Will be interesting to see how the moving of all customers onto the node will occur. If some customers are left on ADSL connected to the exchange then any vectoring done will cause their ADSL service to be severely degraded.

Currently Transact in the ACT (bought out by IINet) are the only VDSL2 operators in Australia

http://www.sortius-is-a-geek.com/vds...ond-usability/

_TransACT makes no bones about VDSL/VDSL2, showing lacklustre real world speeds of ~6Mbps for VDSL and ~38Mbps for VDSL2. This is a far cry from where the NBN has started (100Mbps), and nowhere near where the NBN is about to be upgraded to (1000Mbps)._

----------

Now Vectoring is very new. The equipment vendors only started trialling their equipment with each other to ensure they play nice last year. It's highly unlikly vectoring will be available for the FTTN NBN until 2016-2017, and let me say after a couple of decades in the IT sector, being on the bleeding edge is not where you want a country wide network to be. Vectoring might be more viable from 2018-2019 depending on how fast the equipment vendors are able to get it working in the real world. The world of standards is a very slow process as you have sometimes dozens of companies all with their own agendas competing against each other.

In 10 years of rolling out ADSL and ADSL2+ Telstra has only 58% and 48% respectively of exchanges enabled.


----------



## Whiskers

I'm fearing a monumental stuff up in the making here, a- la the IBM Qld health pay roll mega disaster.

Am I not seeing the same signs of trouble here, namely; A huge highly technical project, attempted to be made better by bringing in new private enterprise to redesign a 'foreign' (as in designed and built by someone else)  system to supposedly work better, but ending up with phenomenal cost blowouts largely because the 'new private enterprise' knew it did not know the system well, and knew the politicians who were hell-bent on changing it (despite their own departmental teck staff warning caution) knowing even less, put contractual caveats in place that enabled it to prostitute the contract and plunder the public purse.

Is it worth the risk of an inferior system for the sake of trying to save a bit in relative terms?


----------



## drsmith

medicowallet said:


> http://www.theage.com.au/technology/technology-news/entire-nbn-board-resigns-20130922-2u84w.html
> 
> NBN board to resign.
> 
> MW






sydboy007 said:


> Well with the Cherry Picking in play for the cities the NBN is not going to have the income to cross subsidise the country areas without ongoing budget support.  Who'd want to be involved with that kind of debacle?



They didn't get up and walk of their own choice. 

They were given marching orders.



> The ABC has confirmed the board of NBN Co was asked to resign by the Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull.
> 
> Mr Turnbull has been severely critical of the board in the past, particularly its chairwoman, Siobhan McKenna, over cost blowouts and delays.
> 
> He made the request last week, ahead of a board meeting on Friday.
> 
> All but one board member, Brad Orgill, tendered their resignation.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-23/nbn-shell/4976378


----------



## Whiskers

drsmith, does "cost blowouts and delays" imply that there is also a lack of quality of work... or that as reported elsewhere apparently Siobhan McKenna was very hands on and a bit of a pain at checking the work of underlings for correctness which caused cost blowouts and delays?

Is the issue more about cost over runs at the expense of quality, or quality at the expense of cost over runs?


----------



## Julia

Whiskers said:


> drsmith, does "cost blowouts and delays" imply that there is also a lack of quality of work... or that as reported elsewhere apparently Siobhan McKenna was very hands on and a bit of a pain at checking the work of underlings for correctness which caused cost blowouts and delays?
> 
> Is the issue more about cost over runs at the expense of quality, or quality at the expense of cost over runs?



Doesn't matter, does it, Whiskers.  Whatever, it's entirely the fault of the new government, of course.
No question.  They've completely stuffed the country in less than a week.


----------



## Whiskers

Julia said:


> Doesn't matter, does it, Whiskers.  Whatever, it's entirely the fault of the new government, of course.
> No question.  They've completely stuffed the country in less than a week.




Hey, c'mon Julia... that comment is more akin to a pretty die-hard true blue blood lib... is that you, really? 

I thought you were more 'swinging', or at least more moderate... but given your preference for Abbott somewhere closer to the Big L end of lib over Turnbull, a small L liberal as leader, you may be a big L in disguise!

You'll never find my name firmly planted in the membership roll and devoutly loyal to any party... a local footy or cricket team maybe, but never a political one.

Anyway, it was a simple enough question to clarify an inherent ambiguity and conflict of opinion by political and media commentators.  

What's wrong with a bit of constructive 'devils advocate' ? Nothing... in fact there's everything good, even in a healthy well run  business, if you are not capable of role switching occasionally to ask the devils advocate questions, you ought to have someone who does if you expect to stay at least one step ahead of the opposition.

Are you in denial that the LNP can't get it wrong or make any bigger stuff up than Labor? 

Maybe in clambering across the seas (the kiwi's were sometimes referred to akin to illegal immigrants exploiting our generous bilateral agreements flooding our employment market) to this wonderful land of Aus for a better life than in kiwiland you haven't paid enough attention to local political history.

Oooooh... that was a bit below the belt too... but did I get in a better one than you!?
:couch

Julia, you should have studied up about the Trevor Chapel under arm bowl!

Seriously though, I'm all up for a battle of psychology if that's what you want... but I really prefer some respectable answers to simple questions to help keep the bastards honest. 

I note you've had quite a bit to say on the NBN in the past, so I presume you do know something about the technical issues or at least management of it... or has it always been bagging it just because it was initiated by Labor ?


----------



## sydboy007

Julia said:


> Doesn't matter, does it, Whiskers.  Whatever, it's entirely the fault of the new government, of course.
> No question.  They've completely stuffed the country in less than a week.




They will have to take ownership of the dramatic slow down in work from now on since it's due to their policy choice.   I'm waiting for how MT responds to Huwawei letting the cat out of the bag as to just how close every node is going to have to be for him to achieve his policy goal.

71% of premises will have a node fridge just 300M away from them, or suffer the speeds they are getting in NZ and the UK from their "failed" attempts at FTTN.  Even AT&T only offers roughly 30Mbs download speeds.

He's yet to mention that EVERYONE will have to have their services migrated to the node fridge at the same time, which is going to be a regulatory nightmare.


----------



## drsmith

Julia said:


> Doesn't matter, does it, Whiskers.  Whatever, it's entirely the fault of the new government, of course.
> No question.  They've completely stuffed the country in less than a week.



With Labor, it's always someone else's fault. They're like the child caught with one hand in the cookie jar and trying to point a finger on the other towards someone else.

Like with the Coalition's revision of announcing individual boat arrival announcements to weekly briefings, there's a the usual unnecessary hyperventilation from those whose political side lost the election.

On the rollout itself, there are now media reports suggesting the rollout by June 30 2014 could now be as low as 600,000.



> It is understood the NBN rollout will fall significantly short of its target set in August last year to run fibre past 1.31 million premises by the end of this financial year. The number of existing premises to be passed is now believed to be as low as 600,000.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...ind-board-purge/story-e6frgaif-1226725623661#


----------



## drsmith

Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull will spell out the Abbott government's initial plans for NBN Co on Tuesday afternoon.

Mr Turnbull will release an "interim statement of expectations" at a media conference in Sydney at 2pm (AEST).

http://news.brisbanetimes.com.au/br...-to-release-nbn-statement-20130924-2ub82.html


----------



## Whiskers

drsmith said:


> With Labor, it's always someone else's fault. They're like the child caught with one hand in the cookie jar and trying to point a finger on the other towards someone else.
> 
> Like with the Coalition's revision of announcing individual boat arrival announcements to weekly briefings, there's a the usual unnecessary hyperventilation from those whose political side lost the election.
> 
> On the rollout itself, there are now media reports suggesting the rollout by June 30 2014 could now be as low as 600,000.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...ind-board-purge/story-e6frgaif-1226725623661#




drsmith, have you ever quoted to do a job like you have never done before, or even a completely novel job that there were no precedents to draw estimates for you quote from?

How much did it estimate to travel to the moon first and how much did it actually cost? Was it worth it in the end?

How many of the initial tunnel projects in recent years estimated one thing and ended up costing more? Were they worth it in the end? I suspect some yes, some no. 

Have you ever worked in a supervisory position on a major project? What kind of things crop up in construction that for one reason or another were not foreseen or costed in the original estimate? 

The obvious point I'm questioning here is... is your basis of criticism simply that the costs exceed the estimates? Is that good grounds for canning a project? What is the net effect on the overall project cost benefit analysis?

There may be good reason to modify the project and toss the board... I don't know... BUT what I do know is you and a couple of others are not giving sound technical or business reasons to accompany your critique... which seems pretty much on political ideological grounds.

drsmith, while the slogans and clichÃ©s are loyal and funny to a point... a bit of substance would be nice for a change.


----------



## drsmith

Whiskers said:


> drsmith, have you ever quoted to do a job like you have never done before, or even a completely novel job that there were no precedents to draw estimates for you quote from?



Have you? and if you wish to be an oracle of enlightenment, perhaps you could provide the answers to the questions you ask in the above post.

My criticism of Labor's NBN is that within the parameters given, it was fantasy. I wish it wasn't but it is and the ongoing setbacks the project has endured only serves to demonstrate that point.


----------



## Whiskers

drsmith said:


> Have you? and if you wish to be an oracle of enlightenment, perhaps you could provide the answers to the questions you ask in the above post.




So am I correct in saying you have never done a quote for a job and don't venture into the unknown and probably have never run a business? 

For those of us who have, my questions to you are some basic indications of the complexities that your slogans fail to comprehend.



> My criticism of Labor's NBN is that within the parameters given, it was fantasy. I wish it wasn't but it is and the ongoing setbacks the project has endured only serves to demonstrate that point.




Ok, that's a fair enough 'headline' statement. But as in a business plan or critique thereof, where are your details of some of the specific issues.

I would clarify that for me the NBN is not an issue one way or the other for me so far in the sense that it's not something that is going to benefit me any time soon. It's been a bit like public health care, emergency services and public roads... we have to have them and keep up to date, even if many of us don't use them.


----------



## Julia

Whiskers said:


> Hey, c'mon Julia... that comment is more akin to a pretty die-hard true blue blood lib... is that you, really?
> 
> I thought you were more 'swinging', or at least more moderate... but given your preference for Abbott somewhere closer to the Big L end of lib over Turnbull, a small L liberal as leader, you may be a big L in disguise!



Look Whiskers, I'm just a bit tired of your ranting.  And, despite your continued provocation, I have no interest in engaging in a counterproductive jousting with you.
I voted for the Coalition.  I would probably have voted for almost anyone to get rid of Labor.
That is not to say I regard Mr Abbott or his team as especially capable of wondrous feats.
As did many others, I regarded him as the least worst alternative.

So kindly desist from attempting to paint me as some sort of uncritical devotee of the new PM.  I am simply prepared to give the new government a chance to show how they can manage things, and that's all I'm asking you or anyone else to do, rather than rant on incessantly about everything you can find on which to offer criticism.



> Are you in denial that the LNP can't get it wrong or make any bigger stuff up than Labor?



I'm not 'in denial' or in acceptance of anything at this early stage.  Time will tell.



> Maybe in clambering across the seas (the kiwi's were sometimes referred to akin to illegal immigrants exploiting our generous bilateral agreements flooding our employment market) to this wonderful land of Aus for a better life than in kiwiland you haven't paid enough attention to local political history.
> 
> Oooooh... that was a bit below the belt too... but did I get in a better one than you!?
> :couch
> 
> Julia, you should have studied up about the Trevor Chapel under arm bowl!



The relevance of the above is not apparent to me.  I've lived here for 20 years, have experienced different governments in that time, have voted for both major parties, and am at present simply glad that the Labor circus is gone and prepared to wait to see how the Coalition performs.



> I note you've had quite a bit to say on the NBN in the past,



Have I?   Perhaps you'd like to quote the relevant posts.   As far as I can recall my commentary on it has been minimal.  I don't often even read the thread.


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> On the rollout itself, there are now media reports suggesting the rollout by June 30 2014 could now be as low as 600,000.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...ind-board-purge/story-e6frgaif-1226725623661#



With regard to the figure above, Malcolm Turnbull in his presser today has confirmed that the rollout target for the above date has been reduced by almost half when compared to that given a few months ago.


----------



## drsmith

If the revised numbers in the Fairfax press are correct, the rollout target to June 30 2015 has also been halved from the 3,500,000 in the August 2012 NBN corporate plan.



> Forecasts for the number of premises passed by fibre cable have been revised down.
> 
> The figure is expected to be 729,000 by June 30, 2014, 1.74 million by June 20, 2015, and 3.115 million by June 30, 2016.
> 
> It was originally expected in the 2010 NBN corporate plan that 5.65 million premises would be passed by mid-2016.



http://www.smh.com.au/business/turnbull-gives-nbn-new-directions-20130924-2ubg9.html


----------



## sydboy007

Anyone who thinks Telstra can ride in to save the day might want to think twice.

From one of our field techs at work:

Gosnells WA Telstra exchange

All three installed Alcatel rectifiers that feed the exchange batteries failed. The reason cannot be identified but it was thought the batteries had aged (9 years) and gone into thermal runaway causing the rectifiers to go into overload. Since there was no LV disconnect on the rectifiers (Telstra don’t use LV disconnect!) the batteries continued to discharge making it harder for the rectifiers to re charge the batteries. When I arrived, the battery voltage was at about 35v meaning the current required to maintain the exchange and charge the batteries, exceeded the rectifier output causing it to overload.

CPS arrived in the afternoon and installed 4 x temporary 200A rectifiers and a 500A battery bank. This was connected to the exchange at approx. 5.45 PM and service was restored.

It was mentioned that no spares are available in Australia, for the onsite rectifiers and parts would have to be sourced from the US. I don’t know what Telstra aim to do to repair the rectifiers but the old batteries will need to be replaced.

The batteries were so hot and bloated you could hear the plastic cracking (see photo of the cracks around the battery terminal).

One bank of batteries seemed OK and CPS were going to charge these separately overnight and add them to the temporary 500A bank today.

----------------------

Lets hope the Fridge Node batteries are maintained better otherwise we'll be seeign the odd explosion / fire


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> If the revised numbers in the Fairfax press are correct, the rollout target to June 30 2015 has also been halved from the 3,500,000 in the August 2012 NBN corporate plan.
> 
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/business/turnbull-gives-nbn-new-directions-20130924-2ubg9.html




It certainly doesn't look good, the only positive being that the take up rate on the most expensive and profitable 100mbs plan has exceeded expectations which may offset some of the costs for these delays.  There is no doubt there is/will be time and cost blowouts and I'm not sure at what point this becomes excessive but obviously if the taxpayer input becomes substantially more than forecasted then we would need to look at other models but considering this is a self sufficient funding model then hopefully that wouldn't be the case. 

But the question is at what point do we ever replace the old copper?  It's an old redundant technology that would make no business sense in replacing and considering Telstra told shareholders that ADSL was abstracting the last bit of life out of the aging copper I don't think they're planning on replacing it.  Now given the announcements in the past week from TPG announcing they plan on rolling out fibre to the most profitable sector (multi residential apartments) we are already seeing the digital divide begin under the FTTN.  The concern is that once the private sector goes so far there will be no going back, the government will never get the support to roll out FTTP to outer suburbs and regional areas as they wont have these profitable sectors to ensure financial viability.  The copper must be replaced at some stage and now is the most suitable time to do it as a national infrastructure project, after this it becomes incredibly messy but the short sited coalition government don't care about this.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> It certainly doesn't look good, the only positive being that the take up rate on the most expensive and profitable 100mbs plan has exceeded expectations which may offset some of the costs for these delays.  There is no doubt there is/will be time and cost blowouts and I'm not sure at what point this becomes excessive but obviously if the taxpayer input becomes substantially more than forecasted then we would need to look at other models but considering this is a self sufficient funding model then hopefully that wouldn't be the case.
> 
> But the question is at what point do we ever replace the old copper?  It's an old redundant technology that would make no business sense in replacing and considering Telstra told shareholders that ADSL was abstracting the last bit of life out of the aging copper I don't think they're planning on replacing it.  Now given the announcements in the past week from TPG announcing they plan on rolling out fibre to the most profitable sector (multi residential apartments) we are already seeing the digital divide begin under the FTTN.  The concern is that once the private sector goes so far there will be no going back, the government will never get the support to roll out FTTP to outer suburbs and regional areas as they wont have these profitable sectors to ensure financial viability.  The copper must be replaced at some stage and now is the most suitable time to do it as a national infrastructure project, after this it becomes incredibly messy but the short sited coalition government don't care about this.



What we do know is that the project is increasingly not deliverable within the present rollout schedule parameters. One would imagine there would be an impact on the project's economics as a result, but Malcolm was tight lipped on this today when he was asked about the current rollout cost per premise. Public information on this I suspect will have to wait for the outcome of the strategic review.

Meaningful comparisons between FTTP and FTTN will be easier to make after the strategic review is completed. Malcolm Turnbull described himself as a technology agnostic at his presser today, so I wouldn't necessarily be ruling out changes to aspects of the Coalition's model either.

On the topic of numbers, the Fairfax press fills in a little more detail on the rollout numbers to June 30 2014.



> Mr Tunbull said NBN Co told the government was revising down its target for premises passed at June 30, 2014 from 981,000 to 729,000. A spokesman for NBN Co said this latest revision ''reflects the impact of Telstra's five-month remediation stoppage''. Telstra halted remediation work on its infrastructure in May after unions raised concerns about contractors working with asbestos without proper training or protective equipment.




http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...ew-instructions-to-nbn-co-20130924-hv1so.html


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> On the topic of numbers, the Fairfax press fills in a little more detail on the rollout numbers to June 30 2014.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...ew-instructions-to-nbn-co-20130924-hv1so.html




Sounds like Labor has had to wear a lot of the blame for issues that have been caused by Telstra.

The asbestos issues are not going to magically disappear under the FTTN, though might not be quite as bad if an area doesn't need too much copper remediation.

Lets hope MT has a road to Damascus style convestion in terms of not repealling Labors anti cherry picking laws otherwise the gold rush claims for profitable MDUs will destroy any economics for the NBN in whatever form it takes.


----------



## moXJO

Whiskers said:


> So am I correct in saying you have never done a quote for a job and don't venture into the unknown and probably have never run a business?
> .




I have plenty of times but whats your point. 
They have a whole team working on pricing with a % for blow outs. God Id love to rock up and say here is a quote for an open ended amount and no solid finish date or quality control.
 Labor seems to have worked off the cheap end of the scale when they blurted out the original amount. It was never going to happen.


----------



## IFocus

drsmith said:


> One would imagine there would be an impact on the project's economics as a result,
> http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...ew-instructions-to-nbn-co-20130924-hv1so.html




The elephant in the room is the Coalitions allowing competition which will totally destroy the over all return Alan K had some thing to say about it in the Australian


----------



## Whiskers

drsmith said:


> What we do know is that the project is increasingly not deliverable within the present rollout schedule parameters. One would imagine there would be an impact on the project's economics as a result, but Malcolm was tight lipped on this today when he was asked about the current rollout cost per premise. Public information on this I suspect will have to wait for the outcome of the strategic review.
> 
> Meaningful comparisons between FTTP and FTTN will be easier to make after the strategic review is completed. Malcolm Turnbull described himself as a technology agnostic at his presser today, so I wouldn't necessarily be ruling out changes to aspects of the Coalition's model either.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...ew-instructions-to-nbn-co-20130924-hv1so.html




I really feel for MT. I think he's basically a very decent moderate political person. But I get a sense that he has had to move from his natural position and swallow quite a bit more humble pie than he ought, to toe the company line including on the NBN.

He's no dill from a business and legal perspective, so I'm waiting with interest for what a complete overhaul (or not) of all the contractual arrangements including with Telstra reveals. That may well determine the technology issue change (or not).

There's been a lot of huff and puff up to know and this is where the LNP hard liners will inherit ownership for responsibility for any changes. 

Abbott originally opposed or had no intention to do anything about many issues until Labor pork barrelled the electorate up so much, that he had to try to match some of the offers. His usual way to get a point of difference is on economics, a promise to do something cheaper. 

I've seen it happen all to often where an opposition opposes a bill/law/project for the sake of political expediency knowing they can't stop it, sometimes opposing just to deprive the gov of some oxygen, for taken credit for doing something before they thought of it... then come the day they win gov, ooh it's too costly and complicated to change, so we'll have to just have to live with it.


----------



## drsmith

Whiskers said:


> I really feel for MT. I think he's basically a very decent moderate political person. But I get a sense that he has had to move from his natural position and swallow quite a bit more humble pie than he ought, to toe the company line including on the NBN.



Wishful thinking bearing in mind the rollout delays. 

The strategic review will include projections of the rollout under the FTTP model. That in itself will make for interesting reading but in a broader context, it will only add the detail to what we already know.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Malcolm Turnbull's press conference today.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-24/malcolm-turnbull-details-changes-to-nbn-co-board/4978218


----------



## drsmith

As part of the new statement of expectations issued to NBNCo today, weekly updates are to be provided on the rollout.

http://www.dbcde.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/186115/130924_NBN_Co.pdf

Main NBN page within DBCDE,

http://www.dbcde.gov.au/broadband/n...buffer&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Buffer

ABC 730 segment,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-24/government-outlines-cost-and-time-savings-for-nbn/4978942


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Sounds like Labor has had to wear a lot of the blame for issues that have been caused by Telstra.
> 
> The asbestos issues are not going to magically disappear under the FTTN, though might not be quite as bad if an area doesn't need too much copper remediation.
> 
> Lets hope MT has a road to Damascus style convestion in terms of not repealling Labors anti cherry picking laws otherwise the gold rush claims for profitable MDUs will destroy any economics for the NBN in whatever form it takes.



While Telstra are responsible for the physical remediation of their pits and ducts, the problems should have been foreseen by NBNCo and the government.

Asbestos issues obviously won't be as bad under FTTN unless all the copper is replaced.

Perhaps the cherry picking issue illustrates the underlying economics of the NBN. Regardless of whether the return on the government's network is reduced by allowing wholesale competition or NBNCo charges more as a monopoly, the taxpayer/user still ultimately pays. 

For many of the issues surrounding the NBN, it's now a wait for the strategic review.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> While Telstra are responsible for the physical remediation of their pits and ducts, the problems should have been foreseen by NBNCo and the government.
> 
> Asbestos issues obviously won't be as bad under FTTN unless all the copper is replaced.
> 
> Perhaps the cherry picking issue illustrates the underlying economics of the NBN. Regardless of whether the return on the government's network is reduced by allowing wholesale competition or NBNCo charges more as a monopoly, the taxpayer/user still ultimately pays.
> 
> For many of the issues surrounding the NBN, it's now a wait for the strategic review.




Wth very large and complex projects a lot of issues are not easily forseeable. Seems Telstra was not very forthcoming with what they knew about how much of an issue asbetsos could be.  Changing to a FTTN network design is going to have other unforseeable issues, which will further delay the rollout.

The cherry picking laws are in place for the simple reason that probably 30-40% of the population would not receive any form of broadband upgrade without cross subsidisation.  It happens either at the retail level of RSP charges, or it happens by a tax transfer.

If MT removes the ability of NBNCo to do the subsidising of regional areas, then that leaves further pressure on the budget.


----------



## So_Cynical

sydboy007 said:


> If MT removes the ability of NBNCo to do the subsidising of regional areas, then that leaves further pressure on the budget.




Without the socialisation, the city subsidising the country...the NBN just doesn't work.

We end up with what we had before, the country gets nothing and the city's everything...it clear that's what the noalition hate about the NBN, the fact that its about equality and quality of service and the money is secondary.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Wth very large and complex projects a lot of issues are not easily forseeable.



It may not be easily foreseeable but the directors and senior executives get the big dollars to see and do what is not easy as do the politicians. 

It's barren ground to defend the delays in Labor's FTTP project and has been for some time. Labor had its chance and failed on the delivery. The reviews now under way by the Coalition are the next step in the process and we will obviously have to wait and see to what extent those reviews answer the various discussion points around their rollout as well as the final analysis on labor's.


----------



## Smurf1976

So_Cynical said:


> Without the socialisation, the city subsidising the country...the NBN just doesn't work.



It's the same with electricity, roads and many other things. Services in the country are subsidised by city residents. The wealth of the cities largely originates in the country. So it works both ways - each propping up the other in some way.

We'll end up with a situation where, for political reasons, governments are forced to directly subsidise services outside the cities. A classic case of pursuing an ideology which ends up costing government, and thus taxpayers, more in the long term. Just like how electricity concessions (pensioners etc) are now funded directly from taxes - meanwhile the privatised power retailers never did pass on the savings. Once you lose, twice you lose.....


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> While Telstra are responsible for the physical remediation of their pits and ducts, the problems should have been foreseen by NBNCo and the government.
> 
> Asbestos issues obviously won't be as bad under FTTN unless all the copper is replaced.
> 
> Perhaps the cherry picking issue illustrates the underlying economics of the NBN. Regardless of whether the return on the government's network is reduced by allowing wholesale competition or NBNCo charges more as a monopoly, the taxpayer/user still ultimately pays.
> 
> For many of the issues surrounding the NBN, it's now a wait for the strategic review.




The asbestos issue was foreseen, and was mentioned long ago. The issue was that Telstra subcontracted their remediation work, and didn't train the subbies (or verify that they were trained).

Then when it all blew up, they had to pause to sort it out.

There won't be much difference between remediation required for FTTN. If the nodes are every ~300m, then that's the only bit you're not remediating. And you're only not remediating it if no-one in that 300m requests an FTTP upgrade or if not a single pair of copper in that 300m requires replacement.

The cross-subsidy is a standard 'feature' of every single utility network. The copper network, electricity, water, sewer and gas. Why would/should the NBN be any different?


----------



## overhang

So it seems since the MT press conference that NBN co has leaked the draft plan.
"*FTTP Access Network cost per premises passed has decreased from an average of $5,000 for the
Tasmanian Pre-Release sites to an Estimate at Completion (EAC) average cost of between $1,100
and $1,400 per premises passed for FSAMs currently under construction for which DDDs are
available.*"

Interesting they still believe they're inline for a 2021 completion date.  Maybe MT's report wont read so bad.

http://mynbn.info/assets/draftcorpplan-2013.pdf


----------



## sydboy007

overhang said:


> So it seems since the MT press conference that NBN co has leaked the draft plan.
> "*FTTP Access Network cost per premises passed has decreased from an average of $5,000 for the
> Tasmanian Pre-Release sites to an Estimate at Completion (EAC) average cost of between $1,100
> and $1,400 per premises passed for FSAMs currently under construction for which DDDs are
> available.*"
> 
> Interesting they still believe they're inline for a 2021 completion date.  Maybe MT's report wont read so bad.
> 
> http://mynbn.info/assets/draftcorpplan-2013.pdf




If that's correct then that's very good news considering the low population density of Tasmania.

I'd be interested to see what the costs have been on the mainland.  I know my parents area in Kiama would probably not be that cheap, well the initial rollout in Minnamurra maybe and Kiama itself, but once you hit Jamberoo which is quite rural the cost would escalate, but then again it might be cheaper when there's not so much other infrastructure around.

I wonder if MT wants good truths, or just the bad ones that further his agenda?  How much information that shows what the Coalition said during the election is a lie before the report is determined to be a state / military secret.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> The asbestos issue was foreseen, and was mentioned long ago. The issue was that Telstra subcontracted their remediation work, and didn't train the subbies (or verify that they were trained).
> 
> Then when it all blew up, they had to pause to sort it out.



The trend from their corporate plan updates is one of ongoing and continual decline in their forecasts.



> LEIGH SALES: We've heard a lot about targets and deadlines slipping with the NBN. Were the targets unrealistic all along, or were the targets realistic and the NBN Co management just not up to meeting them?
> 
> MALCOLM TURNBULL: I think the targets were essentially political. I don't think they were ever realistic, to be frank with you. You can take two views, I suppose. You can say they were always unrealistic or some people thought they were, with the benefit of hindsight, naively or over optimistically thought they were realistic. But the fact is they've slipped enormously. *I mean if you look at the forecast for premises passed by fibre as at June 2014, the end of June 2010 they said there would be 2.7 million premises, in August 2012 they said 1.3 million and then in June they said it would only be 981,000. A figure that Anthony Albanese kept secret. This was in the draft corporate plan that he refused to release, you might remember. And then in their latest forecasts, which is just this month, they've said it will be 729,000. So in the space of a few years the forecast has dropped by nearly 75 per cent.*




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-24/malcolm-turnbull-outlines-nbn-review-and-supports/4978948

My bolds.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> The trend from their corporate plan updates is one of ongoing and continual decline in their forecasts.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-24/malcolm-turnbull-outlines-nbn-review-and-supports/4978948
> 
> My bolds.




As you know, by far the biggest delay was because of the Telstra agreement. They started 9 months late, hence the initial halving of forecasts.

There's no reason why the target can't be met now however, so long as the contractors employ a suitable number of people. It's well within the speed of similar rollouts here and overseas, even allowing for the delays to date:


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> As you know, by far the biggest delay was because of the Telstra agreement. They started 9 months late, hence the initial halving of forecasts.
> 
> There's no reason why the target can't be met now however, so long as the contractors employ a suitable number of people. It's well within the speed of similar rollouts here and overseas, even allowing for the delays to date:



If the fox hadn't stopped to crap and had four extra legs, it would have caught the hare.

10 out of 10 though for wishful thinking.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> So it seems since the MT press conference that NBN co has leaked the draft plan.
> "*FTTP Access Network cost per premises passed has decreased from an average of $5,000 for the
> Tasmanian Pre-Release sites to an Estimate at Completion (EAC) average cost of between $1,100
> and $1,400 per premises passed for FSAMs currently under construction for which DDDs are
> available.*"
> 
> Interesting they still believe they're inline for a 2021 completion date.  Maybe MT's report wont read so bad.
> 
> http://mynbn.info/assets/draftcorpplan-2013.pdf



That draft is the one Albo sat on during the election campaign and has already been superseded.

I hope they do have costs per premise under control as that will give Malcolm Turnbull more flexibility with the FTTP/FTTN mix.

This though if as reported isn't encouraging,



> In another sign of risks to the project, the government has uncovered a $600 million blowout in the cost of the billing and other information systems at the heart of the network, taking computer-system costs to $2.2 billion.




The following was also mentioned in Malcolm Turnbull's brief yesterday,



> It has confirmed a backlog of 66,000 premises - including schools and apartment buildings - with "service class zero" because they have fibre cable within reach but cannot use the network.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-turnbull-review/story-e6frgaif-1226726522823

Rollout targets by June 30 2015 and June 30 2016 have also been revised down to 1.74 million and 3.115 million respectively.


----------



## drsmith

Was the NBN ultimately Labor's biggest ever pork barrel ?



> The Australian can reveal that, earlier this year, the NBN Co received a letter from its then shareholder ministers - former communications minister Stephen Conroy and finance ministers Penny Wong - with the instruction to have started work in all electorates by mid-2016.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...e-to-all-voters/story-e6frgaif-1226727265180#

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A summary on the numbers that could be maintained FTTP under existing contracts under the Coalition's plan,



> It will complete work on connections to 300,000 premises that are already contracted, continue to work on connecting 645,000 premises where plans are advanced, and look for ways to link 66,000 premises including apartment blocks that have been passed by fibre, but not connected.
> 
> Work on connecting another 900,000 premises is to be suspended until the strategic review is completed, and the government decides what shape its revised network will take.




http://www.smh.com.au/business/telstra-key-to-stop-nbn-wobbles-20130924-2uc6x.html


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Was the NBN ultimately Labor's biggest ever pork barrel ?




Though far more useful than the Adelaid Darwin rail link


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Though far more useful than the Adelaid Darwin rail link



You've got a point there.

Mr Red Underpants and Miss Judas Sisterhood couldn't demand that be in every electorate by a specific date.


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> Though far more useful than the Adelaid Darwin rail link




That is debatable, whether you like it or not everything (other than electronic data) is transported. 

We move it by road, air, sea or rail. The shortest way from Asia to Adelaide is through Darwin.

If carbon taxing becomes a norm and as you are pro carbon reduction, the Darwin Adelaide rail link becomes essential. 
The Adelaide freight movement study, forecasts a threefold increase in freight from WA - Darwin via Adelaide by 2030.

My guess is that is conservative, if weather extremes change as per the greenies, much more freight will be transported overland. Sea transport,especially to Asia will be kept to a minimum distance, just my guess.

As far as the NBN goes, I'm getting a box on the wall.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> That is debatable, whether you like it or not everything (other than electronic data) is transported.
> 
> We move it by road, air, sea or rail. The shortest way from Asia to Adelaide is through Darwin.
> 
> If carbon taxing becomes a norm and as you are pro carbon reduction, the Darwin Adelaide rail link becomes essential.
> The Adelaide freight movement study, forecasts a threefold increase in freight from WA - Darwin via Adelaide by 2030.
> 
> My guess is that is conservative, if weather extremes change as per the greenies, much more freight will be transported overland. Sea transport,especially to Asia will be kept to a minimum distance, just my guess.
> 
> As far as the NBN goes, I'm getting a box on the wall.




So your argument seems to be to build the capacity before it's actually required?  Sounds rather like the NBN, only on current take up rates for the NBN it seems most are quite happy to pay the small increase to have the highest speed plans compared to the low speed ones.  You can survey people to see what they will do, but when they actually part with the $$ you get to see the true demand for a product.  People making a conscious decision to use the NBN has been far higher than comparable rollouts around the world.  There's plenty of demand for fast reliable broadband.

I dare say the money spend for the ADE DRW rail link would have provided a pay back by now if it had been spent on straightening the rail line linking BNE SYD MEL to allow faster freight transport.

I wasn't able to find the tripling forecast you mention.  The only tripling I could see was for freight into and out from Adelaide which includes the fright to MEL and PER along with DRW:

_One key reason for forecasting the rail freight task was to understand the future importance of Adelaide as distinct from Perth (and to a much lesser extent Darwin) as a destination and origin market for railed freight._


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> So your argument seems to be to build the capacity before it's actually required?  Sounds rather like the NBN, only on current take up rates for the NBN it seems most are quite happy to pay the small increase to have the highest speed plans compared to the low speed ones.  You can survey people to see what they will do, but when they actually part with the $$ you get to see the true demand for a product.  People making a conscious decision to use the NBN has been far higher than comparable rollouts around the world.  There's plenty of demand for fast reliable broadband.
> 
> I dare say the money spend for the ADE DRW rail link would have provided a pay back by now if it had been spent on straightening the rail line linking BNE SYD MEL to allow faster freight transport.
> 
> I wasn't able to find the tripling forecast you mention.  The only tripling I could see was for freight into and out from Adelaide which includes the fright to MEL and PER along with DRW:
> 
> _One key reason for forecasting the rail freight task was to understand the future importance of Adelaide as distinct from Perth (and to a much lesser extent Darwin) as a destination and origin market for railed freight._




I've always said government should spend the money on infrastructure and yes it should be installed before a bottleneck occurs.
Also I've said on numerous occassions the NBN is a great idea, I just feel there is other pressing infrastructure requirements competing for the same money.
It boils down to personal preferences and priorities, no one has the perfect solution, just their preference.


----------



## drsmith

Some bubbling of issues to the surface from within,



> NBN Co board member Kerry Schott has acknowledged the network’s board “struggled” with the rollout of the telecommunications project, arguing that former NBN head Mike Quigley was “not the right person” to run it.
> 
> Ms Schott’s criticism was backed by long-serving Leighton Holdings construction chief executive and potential NBN Co board director Wal King, who slammed the national broadband network’s rollout as “chaotic”.
> 
> The comments from insiders provide a rare insight into the politics and schisms at the highest levels of Australia’s biggest infrastructure project since the Snowy River Dam Scheme.




http://www.afr.com/p/australia2-0/nbn_board_struggled_quigley_not_QorGNEWQHqjPZheTHXzHKJ


----------



## drsmith

In a broad context, the following article from the AFR isn't a bad read.

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/turnbull_pre_election_nbn_rhetoric_WrF7fbrSdu3VDPfb5RxuvO


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> In a broad context, the following article from the AFR isn't a bad read.
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/technology/turnbull_pre_election_nbn_rhetoric_WrF7fbrSdu3VDPfb5RxuvO




I had to laugh at this complaint

_Senior analyst at Informa Telecoms and Media, Tony Brown, says that the outgoing NBN Co board deserves some sympathy, as it had been saddled with an almost impossible task by the previous government’s overly ambitious targets.
_

Considering the targets MT has set I 'd say they're just as impossible, if not more so.


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> Considering the targets MT has set I 'd say they're just as impossible, if not more so.




sydboy's Malcolm Turnbull voodoo doll.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I had to laugh at this complaint
> 
> _Senior analyst at Informa Telecoms and Media, Tony Brown, says that the outgoing NBN Co board deserves some sympathy, as it had been saddled with an almost impossible task by the previous government’s overly ambitious targets.
> _



It's been proven to be true.


----------



## sydboy007

Calliope said:


> sydboy's Malcolm Turnbull voodoo doll.




:topic

- - - Updated - - -



drsmith said:


> It's been proven to be true.




Yet no mention of the impossible expectations of the new board from MT.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Yet no mention of the impossible expectations of the new board from MT.



He won't be asking his board to don red underpants.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> He won't be asking his board to don red underpants.




Of courcse not.  Don't be silly.  It will be an extension of the blue tie Coalition Cabinet


----------



## IFocus

drsmith said:


> In a broad context, the following article from the AFR isn't a bad read.
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/technology/turnbull_pre_election_nbn_rhetoric_WrF7fbrSdu3VDPfb5RxuvO




Introduction of competition will be the interesting bit pretty much makes the whole project non-viable from a return basis.



> Aside from restocking NBN Co’s leadership ranks, in fairly short order, he will need to have a clear plan for unwinding Labor’s fibre to the home (FTTH) plans, make headway on high stakes negotiations with Telstra and *explain how his NBN will make enough money to remain off-budget with more *competition introduced.*





And this to some extent (unless MT has a cunning plan) shows MT is still to learn the art of politics.




> In short, by cleaning out the remnants of Labor’s project so quickly, he has taken an approach *that will leave him nowhere to hide* in a very short space of time.


----------



## sydboy007

Well, either the Coalition has decided to start recycling, or they really have no new ideas on broadband

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/coonan_approached_as_nbn_board_takes_MAfIRIlVjxyRLRWVBc4VBM

Coonan was barely a step up up from Senator Luddite.  Talk about jobs for Liberal mates.


----------



## sydboy007

So Malcolm has started to move the goal posts already.

During the election he said he would hold a review of the NBN that would report within 60 days of taking office.

Now it's within 60 days of the new NBN board taking over.

Now now Malcolm.  Surely you had planned for fact you were going to sack the current NBN board and install one to your personal liking when you made that policy statement pre election?  If not then one has to wonder what plans, if any, you had pre election.


----------



## sydboy007

Do we have yet another non core promise broken??  I suppose it'll take a week to move through the coalition vetting process before MT can say anything 

During the Federal Election campaign, then-Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull had appeared to confirm the NBN’s previous fibre to the premises model would be fully deployed in Tasmania, as the state was already covered by existing construction contracts which Turnbull had pledged to honour.

Last week, as Communications Minister, Turnbull issued a revised Statement of Expectations letter to NBN Co, ordering the company to continue existing construction only where build instructions had been issued to delivery partners, but not explicitly confirming the fate of the Tasmanian rollout.

In Tasmania, construction for the entire state has already been contracted; including 200,000 homes in the state via fibre to the premises where for many detailed designs are not yet ready. “Yesterday’s announcement only guaranteed that 300,000 more connections would be made by fibre optic nationwide, however if that figure also includes the 200,000 in Tasmania there can’t be many contracts signed for the whole of mainland Australia,” said Digital Tasmania in its statement. “Something doesn’t add up!!”


----------



## drsmith

Ziggy Switkowski is interim CEO of NBN Co.

With the board of three announced, the strategic review has also commenced.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-03/malcolm-turnbull-announces-ziggy-switkowski-as/4997146


----------



## drsmith

> THE National Broadband Network can be built more quickly and at less cost to taxpayers using the Coalition model, outgoing NBN Co chief executive Mike Quigley conceded as the Abbott government signed off on a radical shake up of the company's board and management.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...o-head-new-board/story-e6frgaif-1226732614762

Also in the article,



> The review will investigate the cost of completing the project under Labor's model of laying fibre to the home and under the Coalition's preferred model of making greater use of fibre-to-the-node in brownfield, or established, areas, and then Telstra's copper network.
> 
> Mr Quigley said in his email that the fibre-to-the-premises rollout was "behind where we would like it to be".
> 
> "However, as a matter of principle I have never believed that the solution to this problem was to spend more taxpayers' money than is required for an efficient network build, even if doing so may have made life a bit easier for management and myself," Mr Quigley wrote.
> 
> "Rather, I would prefer that we take the time to calmly establish sustainable new construction models to add the construction capacity that we need."
> 
> Overall, the outgoing chief executive wrote, the broadband network was "still largely on budget".
> 
> There were hard-working contractors and subcontractors "who are prepared to work for a reasonable rate" and "we have been bringing more of these companies on board in recent months".
> 
> Telstra chief executive David Thodey said last year that fibre-to-the-node was faster and cheaper to deliver but cautioned that in some areas the copper had been there a long time "and there could be issues".




It will be interesting to see what the strategic review due to be handed to government on December 2 reveals.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...o-head-new-board/story-e6frgaif-1226732614762
> 
> Also in the article,
> 
> 
> 
> It will be interesting to see what the strategic review due to be handed to government on December 2 reveals.




Not really interesting at all.  The Govt controls the scope and extent of the review, and will control the release of information.

If MT was truly for the transparency he claims, we wouldn't have needed over $2K for a FoI request to get the Telecommunications Blue Book.

Lets see how many "issues" the Telstra copper will provide.  You'd think MT would have ordered some sort of audit, though no report of this as yet.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Not really interesting at all.  The Govt controls the scope and extent of the review, and will control the release of information.
> 
> If MT was truly for the transparency he claims, we wouldn't have needed over $2K for a FoI request to get the Telecommunications Blue Book.
> 
> Lets see how many "issues" the Telstra copper will provide.  You'd think MT would have ordered some sort of audit, though no report of this as yet.



Regardless of how the politics plays out from here, it's clear from Mike Quigley himself that Labor's full FTTP rollout was a political objective rather than a practical one.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

drsmith said:


> Regardless of how the politics plays out from here, it's clear from Mike Quigley himself that Labor's full FTTP rollout was a political objective rather than a practical one.




I still reckon all these NBN jokers will be shown in history as similar to those who continued with steam when oil came in for motors.

Go the amoeba I say.

NBN Rollout has been scrapped.

Let's await the next invention, biological transmission of data.

Go the amoeba.

gg


----------



## drsmith

Two more views from outgoing directors. Malcolm Turnbull cops some negative and some positive, but on Labor and Stephen Conroy, the desire to shed the red underpants is increasingly universal.



> NBN Co director Brad Orgill has slammed interference in the national broadband network from both sides of politics, claiming the rollout was dysfunctional under Labor and lashing new minister Malcolm Turnbull over his purge of the board.
> 
> Mr Orgill said that when he joined the board in September 2012 parts of NBN Co were dysfunctional and that delays in the rollout were unacceptable.
> 
> Mr Orgill was the only director who refused to voluntarily resign from the board last week.
> 
> “I chose not to resign with all other board members . . . [because of] my weariness at politics overshadowing fair process,” he said in an exclusive opinion piece in Friday’s Australian Financial Review. “That [Mr Turnbull] declined to even meet with the board before demanding all to resign was disappointing.”




http://www.afr.com/p/australia2-0/nbn_director_slams_both_conroy_and_QnAV30RjyINrs2UAvaoweO



> THE Coalition's National Broadband Network will focus on areas that can "get more dollars in sooner" and where the existing services are poorest.
> 
> The vow, from Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull, is part of a push to put an end to claims of political interference that have dogged the project.
> 
> It comes as a former NBN Co deputy chair, Diane Smith-Gander, said she was "hugely encouraged" by the approach Mr Turnbull had taken towards NBN Co.
> 
> Ms Smith-Gander -- who quit the NBN Co board to take up a board seat with NBN construction contractor Transfield Services in early September -- said there was a great difference in approach between Mr Turnbull and his predecessor Stephen Conroy, but it was not about fibre to the home (Labor's model) versus fibre to the node (the Coalition's preferred model).
> 
> "It's to do with how the company's run," she said. "I'm hugely encouraged by what Turnbull's doing."




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...on-quick-return/story-e6frgaif-1226733246783#


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Two more views from outgoing directors. Malcolm Turnbull cops some negative and some positive, but on Labor and Stephen Conroy, the desire to shed the red underpants is increasingly universal.
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/australia2-0/nbn_director_slams_both_conroy_and_QnAV30RjyINrs2UAvaoweO
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...on-quick-return/story-e6frgaif-1226733246783#




Considering how politicised MT made the NBN it's nice of him to decide to take the politics out now.  Shame he couldn't bring himself to do it 3 years ago, but then he didn't have a policy till 6 months ago.

Will be interesting to see how they plan to change the rollout schedule to get more money in faster.  That would seem to indicate rural areas will get an upgrade at a slower pace than metro areas with poor broadband, though how you determine what areas are poorly served will be a political exercise in itself.

Lets see how long the Nats play nice before we have a petulant "Boom Boom" Barnaby showing how unhappy he is.  Any shock jock weddings coming up for him to do some megaphone diplomacy from???


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Lets see how long the Nats play nice before we have a petulant "Boom Boom" Barnaby showing how unhappy he is.  Any shock jock weddings coming up for him to do some megaphone diplomacy from???




Jeez Syd, I hope you've saved one of these for yourself.



sydboy007 said:


> another :topic




It's clear that Labor's one size fits 93% FTTP rollout was political from the start.


----------



## drsmith

In Tasmania, the current rollout does not appear to be going particularly well.



> The problem-plagued NBN rollout is almost at a standstill in most parts of Tasmania and Malcolm Turnbull is blaming the former Labor Government.
> 
> "The contractor has basically stopped work for several months," said Mr Turnbull.
> 
> "There's nothing we could do to slow down the rollout in Tasmania because it has been dead stopped."
> 
> While Tasmania's NBN rollout is due to be completed by the end of 20-15, Tony Cook of the Civil Contractors Federation says that deadline is slipping away.
> 
> "Totally unachievable and the further that this thing sinks backwards the harder it will be to get contractors to work for them," he said.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-...e-nbn-rollout-in-tasmania/4999570?section=tas


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Jeez Syd, I hope you've saved one of these for yourself.
> 
> It's clear that Labor's one size fits 93% FTTP rollout was political from the start.




And the Coalition FTTN was a political response, and still we have none of the transparency that MT has been saying.

Why is maximum cable distance to attain 25 and 50Mbs a state secret?  Why have we yet to gain access to all the assumptions on the Coalitions policy that came up with their $29.2B price tag?  So far they seem too scared to face any of the scrutiny they focused on the Labor NBN for 3 years.

MT expected quite a bit of information from the previous NBN board, yet so much of the same information is still not available now he's in charge.

Why couldn't he provide the Telecommunications Bluebook un-redacted saving a $2,000 FoI request?  Now that would make me believe he was serious about transparency.

Oh, and why appoint a new Chair to the NBN board that is unable to take part in the Telstra negotiations?  The single biggest potential cost blow out for the FTTN and Switkowski has be sidelined.

We've also yet to see MT say sorry for being so wrong about the cost of FTTP.  All those years banging on about how expensive it was, and NBN has shown, after the steep learning curve, that it's about the same cost as copper to install.


----------



## drsmith

Malcolm Turnbull in the ABC's Insiders program today.



> BARRIE CASSIDY: We will go to your portfolio issues now. The NBN. Given the size and scope of that, does that mean the issue will be the biggest challenge for you over the next three years? Inevitably it will dominate what you do?
> 
> MALCOLM TURNBULL: It is certainly a very big issue in the portfolio. I hesitate to say it is the biggest, because the minute I say that something else will blow up that will be even bigger, but it is a very big issue.
> 
> The Labor Party has left us with a shocking mess there. This project has been going for four years and they've completed less than two per cent of the construction. It has been a shocking exercise in mismanagement right from the conception of it. Anyway, we have a lot of work to do to sort it out and it is under way now.
> 
> BARRIE CASSIDY: You have a review under way now, will that slow it down? When will the re view start and how long will it take?
> 
> MALCOLM TURNBULL: The review starts on Monday I guess. Ziggy Switkowski, the new executive chairman has only just been appointed after Cabinet on Thursday, and it is due to report in 60 days, on 2 December.
> 
> What it is seeking to do, Barrie, is firstly tell us exactly where the project is at the moment. We want no nonsense factual, no spin, where are we now. Then we need to know what it will cost and how long it will take were we to continue it on the specifications the Labor Party had set. Fibre to 93 per cent of the population. That's a very important benchmark.
> 
> Then to analyse and assess what are the options for doing it more quickly, completing it more quickly and at less cost, both the taxpayers' and of course more affordably for consumers. After that is complete, we will then know the context, the parameters, within which we can make the policy decisions.
> 
> BARRIE CASSIDY: What if it shows if you spend less now, you might have to spend more later on? Are those sorts of outcomes going to be taken seriously by you and the government?
> 
> MALCOLM TURNBULL: Of course. As a keen student of our broadband policy, you would have noticed there is a lengthy discussion about the time value of money and the whole debate about spending money now to cater for demands that might not arise for 20 years. That's very quantifiable and something that will be a key part of the strategic review that we are talking about right now.
> 
> BARRIE CASSIDY: Future broadband requirements, will it look at that as well?
> 
> MALCOLM TURNBULL: Absolutely. That's a key part of it. In fact, this is something that is being done in a number of markets, to look at broadband demand now and then to analyse it carefully because there has been a lazy assumption that demand for additional higher speeds, for example, line speeds, is just going to increase exponentially. You don't have to reflect on it to realise that can't be right.
> 
> You are talking tens of billions of dollars being spent here, you have to focus carefully on demand. If you get these things wrong, you can spend a lot of money you don't need to. In Sydney, think of the cross city tunnel, hundreds of millions of dollars wasted, misspent, when they assumed it was going to have 90,000 cars a day, it only had 30,000. If you get demand forecasts wrong, you can spend a lot of money you don't need to.
> 
> BARRIE CASSIDY: As you open up the network to greater competition, what do you say to the Nationals about that and what that implies about the disadvantage for the bush?
> 
> MALCOLM TURNBULL: Interestingly, Barrie, under our approach, the bush will do much better because there will be much more wire line broadband, so faster broadband and more affordable broadband in the bush for reasons you can only put down to ideology and prejudice.
> 
> The Labor Party said fibre to the premises would be the answer for 93 per cent of the population. One of the cut-offs was communities with less than 1,000 premises, 1,000 houses and businesses. There is a lot of country towns that fall into that category and they don't regard themselves as isolated hamlets.
> 
> Those country towns are absolutely ideal for the fibre to the node architecture that we will certainly be deploying, the question is how much of it, because those towns have typically got a Telstra exchange connected to fibre, so you can very readily upgrade your service in that country town to very high speed broadband, higher than you can get with wireless, which is all that the Labor Party was going to offer them.
> 
> The bush will get better broadband sooner and more affordably under our plan than they would have done under Labor's.




http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2012/s3863199.htm


----------



## Calliope

drsmith said:


> Malcolm Turnbull in the ABC's Insiders program today.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2012/s3863199.htm




I don't think Barrie Cassidy will be asking Turnbull back in a hurry.


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> Malcolm Turnbull in the ABC's Insiders program today.
> 
> BARRIE CASSIDY: Future broadband requirements, will it look at that as well?
> 
> MALCOLM TURNBULL: Absolutely. That's a key part of it. In fact, this is something that is being done in a number of markets, to look at broadband demand now and then to analyse it carefully *because there has been a lazy assumption that demand for additional higher speeds, for example, line speeds, is just going to increase exponentially. You don't have to reflect on it to realise that can't be right. *
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2012/s3863199.htm




My bolds.
It's concerning that MT would make such a judgement when the lazy assumptions are based on data that shows no such decrease in demand for faster speeds.  Considering how the internet is evolving to become the main media platform one must expect the demand for high definition media to be the way of the future, considering TV's are now moving to the ultra high definition format then it's only natural that the internet will follow the same path.  This high definition media will require FTTP to keep up with demand and most likely the 1gbs that NBN co were implementing.  So it seems quite clear the demand for higher speeds will be increasing in the not to distant future.  Now one might support the position that it isn't the governments responsibility to build such a service but that's a separate argument. 




drsmith said:


> *MALCOLM TURNBULL: so you can very readily upgrade your service in that country town to very high speed broadband, higher than you can get with wireless, which is all that the Labor Party was going to offer them. *




Isn't this the same party that suggested wireless was the way of the future while in opposition?


----------



## sydboy007

I love this from MT

_The Labor Party said fibre to the premises would be the answer for 93 per cent of the population. One of the cut-offs was communities with less than 1,000 premises, 1,000 houses and businesses. There is a lot of country towns that fall into that category and they don't regard themselves as isolated hamlets. _

So he wants to have FTTN in the areas with some of the oldest and least maintained copper.  Can't wait to see what the remediation costs are.  His 60 day report will hopefully show some real world test results of copper in various areas around Australia so a reasonable guestimate of how much copper will need to be replaced can be done.

I also love the way he argues people don't currently want / want the speed of FTTP, yet the sub 1000 premises towns deserves the highest speeds possible via FTTN.  Which is it MT?


----------



## drsmith

What I find encouraging from Malcolm Turnbull is flexibility in approach to deliver the best overall outcome.



> What it is seeking to do, Barrie, is firstly tell us exactly where the project is at the moment. We want no nonsense factual, no spin, where are we now. Then we need to know what it will cost and how long it will take were we to continue it on the specifications the Labor Party had set. Fibre to 93 per cent of the population. That's a very important benchmark.
> 
> Then to analyse and assess what are the options for doing it more quickly, completing it more quickly and at less cost, both the taxpayers' and of course more affordably for consumers. After that is complete, we will then know the context, the parameters, within which we can make the policy decisions.




That's something Labor and Mr Red Underpants had a lot more difficulty with.


----------



## drsmith

More on the Tasmanian rollout,



> Visionstream, a wholly owned subsidiary of Leighton Holdings, secured a $300 million contract in March 2012 to connect around 190,000 homes and businesses to the NBN with fibre optic cabling. But sources close to the project said the company had all but stopped construction work and slashed its Tasmanian NBN workforce from around 550 staff in April 2013 to around 50 full-time employees in late September.
> 
> The Australian Financial Review also understands the company asked NBN Co for more money in late August after construction company Silcar ne*gotiated a 20 per cent increase in its NBN contracts. Silcar is also a wholly owned subsidiary of Leighton Holdings. A spokeswoman for Visionstream declined to comment on the Tasmanian situation.




http://www.afr.com/p/business/companies/turnbull_blames_leighton_subsidiary_EldNGORmFBwPJFqCPCjn9L


----------



## drsmith

On the broader issue of cost, it would be interesting to know whether a 20 per cent increase in NBN contracts negotiated by Silcar as outlined in the AFR article above was factored into the June 2013 corporate plan.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> THE National Broadband Network can be built more quickly and at less cost to taxpayers using the Coalition model, outgoing NBN Co chief executive Mike Quigley conceded as the Abbott government signed off on a radical shake up of the company's board and management.http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...o-head-new-board/story-e6frgaif-1226732614762






drsmith said:


> Regardless of how the politics plays out from here, it's clear from Mike Quigley himself that Labor's full FTTP rollout was a political objective rather than a practical one.




Not at all. He's just stating the obvious. Quigley has never said FTTP was cheaper or faster to build than FTTN. Nobody has, to my knowledge.

But just because something is cheaper and faster to build doesn't mean it's the best course of action. And it absolutely does not mean it's the best long-term option.

A tent is much cheaper and faster to build than a house.

A dirt road is cheaper and faster to build than an asphalt one.


So why aren't we all living in tents, built alongside dirt roads?


----------



## drsmith

We've been here before, but not all shelters need to be houses and not all roads need to be sealed. A tent is appropriate for a campsite as is a dirt road to that camp site.

This argument's been had and lost by Labor. 

Time to move on.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> We've been here before, but not all shelters need to be houses and not all roads need to be sealed. A tent is appropriate for a campsite as is a dirt road to that camp site.
> 
> This argument's been had and lost by Labor.
> 
> Time to move on.




Indeed, and the remote "campsite" only had a dirt road and a tent under the ALP policy.

Turnbull, on the other hand, thinks that _77%_ of Australians only need a tent and a dirt road. Despite the fact that over 60% of NBN fibre subscribers so far have chosen a speed that's in excess of the speed limit on his dirt road. And that's _now_! Imagine what that percentage will be by 2020. What broadband speed did you have 10 years ago?


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Imagine what that percentage will be by 2020.



Not 93% or anything close to that. To continue your analogy, millions would still be out in the weather with no clothes at the pace Labor's rollout was progressing.

With regard to the AFR article above on the Tasmanian rollout, do you have any insight on whether Silcar's negotiated 20 per cent increase in NBN contracts as reported is reflected in the June 2013 corporate plan costs ?


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Not 93% or anything close to that. To continue your analogy, millions would still be out in the weather with no clothes at the pace Labor's rollout was progressing.
> 
> With regard to the AFR article above on the Tasmanian rollout, do you have any insight on whether Silcar's negotiated 20 per cent increase in NBN contracts as reported is reflected in the June 2013 corporate plan costs ?




Would it not hit both versions of the NBN?

Or will businesses somehow decide to provide the L=N party a mates rate install?


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> Indeed, and the remote "campsite" only had a dirt road and a tent under the ALP policy.
> 
> Turnbull, on the other hand, thinks that _77%_ of Australians only need a tent and a dirt road. Despite the fact that over 60% of NBN fibre subscribers so far have chosen a speed that's in excess of the speed limit on his dirt road. And that's _now_! Imagine what that percentage will be by 2020. What broadband speed did you have 10 years ago?




If there is a $60 billion difference, then sure, people who only want to camp in their backyard, only need tents (ie download pr0n and pirate dvds)

It is only the businesses that export that need the asphalt for their trucks to get to the port.... you know the ports that could well do with some of that $60 billion cash injection.

The problem with the NBN is that it is being rolled out to everyone, of which a huge majority only needs ADSL.

We could have done this in 10 years time with better, cheaper technology.

MW


----------



## sydboy007

Mr Fraudband caught out telling porkies yet again

http://www.itnews.com.au/News/359925,visionstream-hits-back-at-turnbulls-nbn-stop-work-claim.aspx


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> If there is a $60 billion difference, then sure, people who only want to camp in their backyard, only need tents (ie download pr0n and pirate dvds)
> 
> It is only the businesses that export that need the asphalt for their trucks to get to the port.... you know the ports that could well do with some of that $60 billion cash injection.
> 
> The problem with the NBN is that it is being rolled out to everyone, of which a huge majority only needs ADSL.
> 
> We could have done this in 10 years time with better, cheaper technology.
> 
> MW




1. The "$60bn" difference has already been exposed as BS. http://delimiter2.com.au/just-plain-wrong-full-refutation-coalitions-94bn-nbn-costing/

2. Around 60% of NBN signups have already chosen 50/20 and 100/40Mbps speeds. Well above those available on either ADSL or even FTTN. Especially upload (you know, the bit you need for "exporting".)

3. The vast majority of NBN costs are construction, not equipment. So it will be vastly more expensive in 10 years, not cheaper.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Not 93% or anything close to that. To continue your analogy, millions would still be out in the weather with no clothes at the pace Labor's rollout was progressing.
> 
> With regard to the AFR article above on the Tasmanian rollout, do you have any insight on whether Silcar's negotiated 20 per cent increase in NBN contracts as reported is reflected in the June 2013 corporate plan costs ?




You sure? Would you have said the same thing if someone had told you 10 years ago that most people would have "24Mbps" broadband today?

Given that ~60% of people have already chosen 50/20 or 100/40, what percentage do you think it would be in 2020 if people have the choice?

And more to the point, what percentage would it have to be for you to support the continuation of FTTP?


No idea about Silcar's reported increase being included in the Corp plan or not.


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> 1. The "$60bn" difference has already been exposed as BS. http://delimiter2.com.au/just-plain-wrong-full-refutation-coalitions-94bn-nbn-costing/
> 
> 2. Around 60% of NBN signups have already chosen 50/20 and 100/40Mbps speeds. Well above those available on either ADSL or even FTTN. Especially upload (you know, the bit you need for "exporting".)
> 
> 3. The vast majority of NBN costs are construction, not equipment. So it will be vastly more expensive in 10 years, not cheaper.




1. I can't access that article.

2. They choose it, but do they NEED it.   Your argument is that people want to download pr0n faster, but does it mean we export more.

3. You have limited understanding of investing?  What if I invested $30 billion into roads, rail, ports, farms etc that actually show a ROI to invest in 10 years time.  Surely it would be more intelligent to do that.

MW


----------



## sydboy007

shock horror wireless will kill off fixed broadband


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> 1. I can't access that article.
> 
> 2. They choose it, but do they NEED it.   Your argument is that people want to download pr0n faster, but does it mean we export more.
> 
> 3. You have limited understanding of investing?  What if I invested $30 billion into roads, rail, ports, farms etc that actually show a ROI to invest in 10 years time.  Surely it would be more intelligent to do that.
> 
> MW




1. Well, it explains why the Coalition's "$94bn" claims were BS.

2. Does it matter? Who decides what is a "need" and what is a "want"? If they are choosing 50 and 100 speeds, then they are contributing more to the NBN's revenue, and therefore its ROI.

3. The NBN is projected to earn a 7% ROI. And what is to say that putting $30bn into ports/rail/farms would earn a larger ROI? Adelaide-Darwin rail link, anyone?


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Mr Fraudband caught out telling porkies yet again
> 
> http://www.itnews.com.au/News/359925,visionstream-hits-back-at-turnbulls-nbn-stop-work-claim.aspx




While Malcolm's initial comments were over reach, there is this clarification.



> A spokesperson for Turnbull later clarified work hadn’t stopped completely but had been “very slow and patchy”.




Also from the article,



> The spokesperson said the company was currently undertaking “construction of fibre servicing area modules (FSAM) in Launceston, a large amount of aerial cabling across the state, and is issuing tenders for new construction civil works as work packages are released by NBN.”
> 
> It conceded it had suffered delays to work volumes as a result of unsafe asbestos handling discovered during Telstra pit remediation, but said it was working with both the telco and NBN Co to commence construction of works as it is deemed safe to do so.




The implication is that Visionstream’s pit and duct install has indeed been impacted, and for reasons that go beyond asbestos.



> Visionstream’s Tasmanian rollout has been dogged by pay disputes with subcontractors, which claim to be owed up to $15 million. The disputes allegedly forced subcontractors to let go of 200 workers due to an inability to pay them.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Well with the Cherry Picking in play for the cities the NBN is not going to have the income to cross subsidise the country areas without ongoing budget support.  Who'd want to be involved with that kind of debacle?




It turns out that the NBN's former directors were somewhat keen to stay.



> Former directors of NBN Co paid more than $110,000 in consulting fees to Coalition-linked lobby group Bespoke Approach in a failed bid to retain their jobs past the federal election.




http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_directors_spent_to_save_skins_6rN4q7YRZ7DBUHOwk7PXPI


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> It turns out that the NBN's former directors were somewhat keen to stay.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_directors_spent_to_save_skins_6rN4q7YRZ7DBUHOwk7PXPI




Good for them.  Lets see how Telecommunications rollout ala Hybrid coax goes.  50% of the population with infrastructure competition leading to no private $$$ left over to service the other 50%.  I can see new apartment buildings selling the broadband rights like they do the facilities management now and locking in those living their to 1 provider.

It'll probably take years of court cases to get everyone to agree on how to ensure their equipment plays nice with the network, and it's going to be fun seeing h/w vendors, and network providers finger pointing at each other when issues arise, and trust me in complex networks like this without any standard kit installed there will be problems aplenty.

then we'll have no cross subisidies since most of the profitable infrastructure has privatised the profits, so we socialise the loses via the tax system.

Can't say i'll shed a tear if it happens since a great many of the affected voted for it.


----------



## sptrawler

Well, Conroy admits they underestimated the enormity of the project, from a construction perspective.
Anyone who has had anything to do with major construction projects, knew that.:1zhelp:

http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...-ambitious-stephen-conroy-20131011-hv244.html


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> 1. Well, it explains why the Coalition's "$94bn" claims were BS.
> 
> 2. Does it matter? Who decides what is a "need" and what is a "want"? If they are choosing 50 and 100 speeds, then they are contributing more to the NBN's revenue, and therefore its ROI.
> 
> 3. The NBN is projected to earn a 7% ROI. And what is to say that putting $30bn into ports/rail/farms would earn a larger ROI? Adelaide-Darwin rail link, anyone?




3.  You are assuming rollout is on time (not at the moment) on budget (not at the moment) and will continue (not likely.

Stop living in disneyland.

The NBN is over.

The NBN has a poor ROI at its current poor delivery by a bunch of incompetents.

The NBN is not NEEDED, it is merely wanted.

MW


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Good for them.



It's not so good for you.

Re-read your own post. I highlighted it for you.


----------



## drsmith

sptrawler said:


> Well, Conroy admits they underestimated the enormity of the project, from a construction perspective.
> Anyone who has had anything to do with major construction projects, knew that.:1zhelp:
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...-ambitious-stephen-conroy-20131011-hv244.html




The most stunning admission is that it's not all due to drawn out negotiations with Telstra and the asbestos issue.



> Former communications minister Stephen Conroy has conceded construction targets for the national broadband network were "overly ambitious" and overestimated the capacity of the construction industry.




Mr Red Underpants himself has belatedly raised the white flag on Labor's NBN fantasy.


----------



## drsmith

An edited video segment of Stephen Conroy's NBN concession comments,

http://media.smh.com.au/news/national-news/where-labor-went-wrong-with-the-nbn-4823259.html

It was of course all Mr Hindsight's fault.


----------



## sptrawler

drsmith said:


> The most stunning admission is that it's not all due to drawn out negotiations with Telstra and the asbestos issue.





You can't knock them for having a grandiose plan, just the pre planning and analysis was lacking. 
If they had applied a logical approach to it rather than an ideological approach, they would have had a more support and more sucess.IMO
They should have structured the roll out so high volume commercial users were connected first, their usage would have given an instant return on capital.
This could have then helped subsidise the roll out cost to second tier commercial.
Then the really expensive roll out to the houses would at least be assisted by the first and second tier consumers.
IMO the problem with Labor is, they put the plan, before the funding model. 
Then they expect everyone to accept that they aren't responsible for the cost blow out.


----------



## drsmith

sptrawler said:


> You can't knock them for having a grandiose plan, just the pre planning and analysis was lacking.
> If they had applied a logical approach to it rather than an ideological approach, they would have had a more support and more sucess.IMO
> They should have structured the roll out so high volume commercial users were connected first, their usage would have given an instant return on capital.
> This could have then helped subsidise the roll out cost to second tier commercial.
> Then the really expensive roll out to the houses would at least be assisted by the first and second tier consumers.
> IMO the problem with Labor is, they put the plan, before the funding model.
> Then they expect everyone to accept that they aren't responsible for the cost blow out.



In the video link above, their ideological nature of their decisions is laid bare with Stephen Conroy's comments on MDU's and the rollout in Tasmania.


----------



## DB008

medicowallet said:


> The NBN has a poor ROI at its current poor delivery by a bunch of incompetents.




Which is why I have been scratching my head...Why not roll out the NBN in the most populated areas first, to get cash flowing back into the coffers?

Madness


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> 3.  You are assuming rollout is on time (not at the moment) on budget (not at the moment) and will continue (not likely.
> 
> Stop living in disneyland.
> 
> The NBN is over.
> 
> The NBN has a poor ROI at its current poor delivery by a bunch of incompetents.
> 
> The NBN is not NEEDED, it is merely wanted.
> 
> MW




No, I'm not assuming it was on time, but the delays were allowed for while still retaining the return, because the ARPU was so far above expectations (due to such a high takeup of 100Mbps plans - you know, the ones that "aren't needed"), that the extra revenue almost accounted for the cost of the delays. If you'd been keeping up, you'd know that the peak funding required was increased by $1.6bn a few months ago (although NBN Co did have a $3bn contingency fund, and it's not known whether the $1.6bn was absorbed by that).

And yes, it is (pretty much) on budget actually. Forecast capex has not increased.

It's not over, it's just (probably) being scaled back to obsolete FTTN technology, which will have to be replaced in 5 or 10 years at more cost, and probably cost 3-4 times more in annual opex. Oh well, it's only money.

Need v Want is a matter of opinion, not fact.




DB008 said:


> Which is why I have been scratching my head...Why not roll out the NBN in the most populated areas first, to get cash flowing back into the coffers?
> 
> Madness




The NBN is/was being rolled out simultaneously in all sorts of areas, fanning out from the 121 nationwide points of interconnect. Urban, suburban, regional.

The takeup has actually been highest in regional areas so far, probably because they have the worst services currently. So I doubt that a metro-first rollout would have provided improved cash flow.

The Coalition policy is the same. More so in fact, as they've specifically said they'll do metro areas last as they already have adequate services.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> It's not over, it's just (probably) being scaled back to obsolete FTTN technology, which will have to be replaced in 5 or 10 years at more cost, and probably cost 3-4 times more in annual opex. Oh well, it's only money.
> 
> Need v Want is a matter of opinion, not fact.
> .




I had this debate with a rusted on Laborite friend last night.lol

Why don't we just double everything we build, hospitals if you require 200 beds make them double 400 bed.
Roads, only make 4 lane roads as a minimum, eventually traffic will fill them. 
Schools, if there are only 300 children, make them big enough to take 600, it's bound to happen.
Also put in enough fibre outlets for all the expected children to have their own dedicated outlet.
The problem is, something misses out and everyone pays for it


----------



## drsmith

With regard to the copper, my download speed on ADSL is as follows;



> Your line speed is 12.06 Mbps (12061 kbps). Your download speed is 1.47 MB/s (1508 KB/s).




Estimated copper length from exchange: ~ 1.8km.

http://www.ozspeedtest.com/bandwidth-test/


----------



## sptrawler

drsmith said:


> With regard to the copper, my download speed on ADSL is as follows;
> 
> 
> 
> Estimated copper length from exchange: ~ 1.8km.
> 
> http://www.ozspeedtest.com/bandwidth-test/




Thanks doc, I just ran it and the results were.

8.07Mb/s line speed and 1008KB/s download speed. approx 1km from exchange


----------



## sydboy007

DB008 said:


> Which is why I have been scratching my head...Why not roll out the NBN in the most populated areas first, to get cash flowing back into the coffers?
> 
> Madness




Partly due to the unrepresentative Senate at the time.  Personally I think if the rollout had occurred in the cities the conversation would be very different.  Certainly the number of premises connected would be far higher due to the high densities.

MDUs could have been sorted out via FTB and then let the apartment body corp decide if they want VDSL / Ethernet / Fibre, with the proviso that NBN has a standard kit to be used to reduce any compatibility issues.

Anyways, I wait with baited breath what Telstra shareholders allow management to do, I wait for real world copper audit results, and I wait for real world speeds results on the poorly maintain, low 0.4 gauge copper we have in this country that sees far higher signal attenuation than say the UK that used 0.6 gauge and better for most of their network.

I'm sure MT will declare these state secrets just as he has with most of the assumptions he's made to guestimate his FTTN costings.


----------



## sydboy007

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/telstra_nodes_close_enough_to_homes_o4wkWX8slzPfjTC4AHc4RO

surprised this one hasn't been highlighted yet.

just so there's no confusion:

The "independent" aspect of this study is highly questionable. The consulting firm that carried out the desktop study was GQI Consulting. The parent company of GQI Consulting is ISGM. ISGM have the contract for the installation, construction and maintenance of Telstra’s copper network from the exchange to the customer’s premises.

Also

_GQI Consulting director Cliff Gibson told The Australian Financial Review that the study was preliminary and could be prone to error, as it relies on the same address database NBN Co has determined as inaccurate._

No mention of the age or gauge of the copper in Europe they are benchmarking.  There's also 60% difference between attainable speeds which shows the high variability of using copper for the "last mile"


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> With regard to the copper, my download speed on ADSL is as follows;
> 
> Your line speed is 12.06 Mbps (12061 kbps). Your download speed is 1.47 MB/s (1508 KB/s).
> 
> Estimated copper length from exchange: ~ 1.8km.
> 
> http://www.ozspeedtest.com/bandwidth-test/




I can refine this information a little more.

I'm 1.22km from the exchange as the crow flies with an estimated cable length of 1.89km. 

http://www.adsl2exchanges.com.au/ 

The estimated speed according to the above site it 14.666 Mbps

I might run the speed test daily for a while to see how it varies. 

Note: The adsl2exchanges link has previously been provided in a thread on this forum IIRC, but I didn't recover the link from there.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> Thanks doc, I just ran it and the results were.
> 
> 8.07Mb/s line speed and 1008KB/s download speed. approx 1km from exchange




If you are really only 1KM cable length from the exchange you should be getting a lot higher speed - note the CAN can sometimes take the scenic route.

If you're able to log into your modem and look at the DSL line stats you can use this website - http://fremnet.net/article/216 to get an idea of the kind of speed you should be getting.

To give you an idea of what I mean google maps shows I'm around 1200M from the Newtown exchange.

My cable length is nearly twice my walking distance.

Fortunately I seem to have pretty decent copper - could be due to my house being built in 96 - so what I'm getting and what I theoretically should get are pretty similar.  Optus seem to use a slightly conservative ADSL profile which improves speed but cuts down on speed a bit but I've not had a disconnect for over 69 days.

How much FTTN will overcome the scenic router for the copper I'm not sure, but as soon as you want to start changing the path of the copper from the pillar to house the cost of FTTN goes up exponentially and you might as well do FTTP.


----------



## drsmith

Tonight's result,

Your line speed is 11.57 Mbps (11567 kbps). Your download speed is 1.41 MB/s (1446 KB/s).


----------



## sptrawler

drsmith said:


> Tonight's result,
> 
> Your line speed is 11.57 Mbps (11567 kbps). Your download speed is 1.41 MB/s (1446 KB/s).




I thought I would try it on the wifes laptop, it is cable connected to the modem( i should have thought of that when I tested mine).
Anyway 5 minutes ago 18.30 Sat night. 
8.48MB/s line speed and 1.04MB/s download.
I will have to check out Syd's suggestions


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Conroy has come out, at last.

He says that the NBN was an unaffordable brainfart.

gg


----------



## drsmith

Garpal Gumnut said:


> He says that the NBN was an unaffordable brainfart.



It's what some of us realised from the start.


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Conroy has come out, at last.
> 
> He says that the NBN was an unaffordable brainfart.
> 
> gg




You seem to have some issues with comprehension. 

Perhaps that explains the post that started this whole thread off as well....Some guy you know said "The NBN is about to be rolled out in Townsville", which you heard as "The NBN has been cancelled".

I can see how the two can be confused. Just like your interpretation of what Conroy said.....


----------



## medicowallet

NBNMyths said:


> You seem to have some issues with comprehension.
> 
> Perhaps that explains the post that started this whole thread off as well....Some guy you know said "The NBN is about to be rolled out in Townsville", which you heard as "The NBN has been cancelled".
> 
> I can see how the two can be confused. Just like your interpretation of what Conroy said.....




Some of my friends live in Townsville.  They don't have NBN yet.

How long will it be until they get their FTTH?
What speed do they need now?
What speed do they need in 10 years time?
How much in export dollars do they generate now with their ADSL2?   
How much in export dollars will they generate with NBN speeds?

Thankyou for your consideration in answering these very important questions.

MW


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> You seem to have some issues with comprehension.
> 
> Perhaps that explains the post that started this whole thread off as well....Some guy you know said "The NBN is about to be rolled out in Townsville", which you heard as "The NBN has been cancelled".
> 
> I can see how the two can be confused. Just like your interpretation of what Conroy said.....




Read what he said.

And as someone who has some skills in corporate governance, I would ask you, did he assess risk, benefits, projections, costings,

When he had his brainfart with Kevin Rudd at 30,000 feet on the back of an envelope on a taxpayer funded flight, did he make a wise decision.

I care not for your gigabyte answers.

This comes down to spending of public monies.

There was more governance on the Snowy Scheme than on the NBN, when governance was not even in the dictionary. 

gg


----------



## drsmith

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Read what he said.




I'll offer some assistance there.



> "I think we underestimated the capacity of the construction industry to respond to the challenge and that has led to the majority of the publicity around the alleged blowouts, not that anybody can point to one," he said. "The construction model could be legitimately criticised."




Oopsie. I wonder how well the share price would reflect the published accounts if this were listed.



> Part of this was due to the government asking NBN Co to pick up the fibre construction for new housing estates, something he said NBN Co "wasn't prepared for", as well as the government's decision to include the 34 percent of premises in Australia that are part of a multi-dwelling unit (MDU).
> 
> "Saying that 34 percent of Australians were not left behind and weren't able to get access to the [1 Gbps] and beyond, was a tough decision because it meant MDUs were going to be dealt with on a much more rigirous basis than just putting a box into the basement, whatever that means," he said.




There's 1/3 of the difference between The Coalition's and Labor's NBN plans gone in a single breath. Perhaps  "whatever that means" should have been considered more closely.



> "[The construction targets] were always ambitious [and] that was an area where we were overly ambitious."




It's obvious what that meant. 



> "Did you miss me?"




Not for one last effort crowned in his own red underpants.

http://www.zdnet.com/au/nbn-construction-targets-were-too-ambitious-conroy-7000021850/

Meanwhile, in Tasmania,



> The ABC has obtained figures showing the network had passed 32,000 premises in the state in August, with no progress since.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-...enewed-pressure-to-resolve-nbn-delays/5018522


----------



## drsmith

More on the rollout from the AFR.

http://www.afr.com/p/business/companies/nbn_rollout_slows_to_grind_nationwide_xFL12C3itUMoCEGi8H07xH


----------



## drsmith

The contents of the AFR article puts the timing of Stephen Conroy's confession statement in an interesting light and also this comment,



> But in seeking to protect his legacy, Conroy said that any further delays in the NBN rollout would be on the head of new Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull, and his decision to review the design of the NBN.
> 
> "The biggest threat to that ramp up will be the extent of any delay as Mr Turnbull's new board goes through all its reviews," he said.
> 
> "Any further delays to the rollout beyond the schedule in the revised plan that has now been submitted to Mr Turnbull ... will be a consequence of his policies and his change in policy agenda."




What's left of Stephen Conroy's NBN house of cards though appears to be falling apart even before his seat has cooled.



> NBN Co’s 2012 corporate plan predicted the rollout would give access to 1028 existing homes and businesses a day by June 30, 2013.
> 
> This was then meant to ramp up to 3372 premises a day by June 30, 2014. But it is understood NBN Co is currently passing about 1250 premises a week.
> 
> Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull recently downgraded NBN Co’s June 30, 2014 construction target from 1.3 million premises passed with fibre to 729,000, citing problems with the rollout.
> 
> According to a senior industry source close to the NBN, the missed targets were largely due to contractors slowing down.
> 
> Syntheo, which is a 50-50 joint venture between Service Stream and Lend Lease, is pulling out of contracts to build the network in Western Australia and South Australia.
> 
> “The productivity inside NBN Co at the moment is very low,” the company said.
> 
> “No one is pushing the contractors at the moment because there are all these reviews going on. There are so many issues it will probably take 12 months to turn around.”


----------



## Calliope

drsmith said:


> What's left of Stephen Conroy's NBN house of cards though appears to be falling apart even before his seat has cooled.




It is interesting to note that our two resident NBN "experts" have set much higher standards and expectations for Turnbull than they set for Conroy.



> Conroy may not have been the most impressive minister to be sworn in by an Australian governor-general, but it would be harsh to suggest the NBN debacle was caused by his particular incompetence.
> 
> Rather, like so many of the Rudd and Gillard administrations' failures, the NBN invested too much faith in the ability of the state to micro-manage private lives.
> 
> After everything we have learnt about government central planning over the past 60 years, the Rudd government's decision to nationalise broadband looked mad from the beginning.
> 
> Some four and a half years later, with fewer than 100,000 homes and businesses actually connected - a reach of less than 1 per cent - it looks stark, staring bonkers.




- See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...y-fnhulhjj-1226739861353#sthash.cFGklEuR.dpuf


----------



## sptrawler

The same amount of thought went into the NBN, as went into the roof insulation project. 
In Mandurah W.A they are connecting investment properties and holiday homes, that are empty. 
While businesses patiently wait.


----------



## drsmith

sptrawler said:


> In Mandurah W.A they are connecting investment properties and holiday homes, that are empty. While businesses patiently wait.




I suppose an upside is that it's still being rolled out somewhere.

The rollout numbers outlined in the above AFR article if accurate make for very sobering reading,



> NBN Co had projected in July that it would pass about 318,700 existing homes and businesses with fibre optic cabling by the end of September.
> 
> But as of October 7, the company had passed 227,454 premises – many of which were apartments and shopping arcades that can’t order an NBN service, according to internal statistics obtained by The Australian Financial Review.






> But it is understood NBN Co is currently passing about 1250 premises a week.




If that's ultimately reflective of the rollout to June 30 2013 (1250 premises a week), the NBN will pass 276,204 premises by then or about half the number suggested in the Coalition's plan let alone any of NBN Co's constantly downward revised estimates. 

The numbers presented on the Tasmanian rollout are even more grim,



> Tasmania has been the worst affected state with the official number of premises that can connect to the NBN actually falling backwards over the past two months.
> 
> While 32,003 premises were counted as passed on August 12, this fell to 32,001 as of October 7, after NBN Co corrected inaccurate data.


----------



## drsmith

Stephen Conroy on Lateline last night,

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2013/s3868978.htm

David Chandler's view,

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...use-of-nbn-woes/story-e6frgaif-1226739889457#


----------



## sydboy007

The copper fantastic.

Was speaking to one of the account managers at work about a customer we have in varsity lakes QLD.

When trying to give them a 10Mbs service we found it impossible due to the lack of viable copper.  For those who don't know where Varsity lakes is, it's a suburb of the Gold Coast, so you'd think they'd have reasonable infrastructure.

In the end we had to go for a microwave based Big Air link to get them up and working.

But dun worry, now that MT is in charge the copper has magically been restored to pristine condition and he's somehow going to only need 50,000 nodes to give everyone a minimum of 50Mbs download speed.

50K of nodes is more likely to be in the vicinity of 75Kfor the frist round, with howmany extra to hit the 50mbs target I'm not sure.  10% copper remediation budget seems pretty slim and I'd say the figure is more like to be in the 20-30% range.

But since MT has released NO COSTINGS for his policy it seems unfair to criticise Labor when the Coalition have ~80 pages of "policy" that shows not one financial calculation on how they came up with their total cost.  No costing for nodes, how much it will cost to connect each node to the power network, no figures for how much copper remediation will cost.  Surely MT could have released all this by now, especially if he was being honest with his pledge for openness and accountability.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> The copper fantastic.



1250 premises a week.

How long will it take to get to 12 million at that rate ?

I'm not surprised you've given up defending it.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> 1250 premises a week.
> 
> How long will it take to get to 12 million at that rate ?
> 
> I'm not surprised you've given up defending it.




No probs.  In 6 months we'll still be at 0 nodes installed, in 12 months probably 0 nodes as well, but you guys will still think there's double rainbows and unicorns simply due to a Liberal Federal Govt.

Care to offer a reason why MT hasn't released any of the assumptions made to come up with his FTTN costings?  Why are they held like a top secret report i wonder?


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> No probs.  In 6 months we'll still be at 0 nodes installed, in 12 months probably 0 nodes as well, but you guys will still think there's double rainbows and unicorns simply due to a Liberal Federal Govt.
> 
> Care to offer a reason why MT hasn't released any of the assumptions made to come up with his FTTN costings?  Why are they held like a top secret report i wonder?



But in the meantime we have all those contracts signed for Labor's FTTP rollout. 

I have no doubt the strategic review will make for interesting reading.

What exchange services Varsity Lakes QLD ?


----------



## Calliope

drsmith said:


> I have no doubt the strategic review will make for interesting reading.




It certainly will. But this is the gist of it.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> But in the meantime we have all those contracts signed for Labor's FTTP rollout.
> 
> I have no doubt the strategic review will make for interesting reading.
> 
> What exchange services Varsity Lakes QLD ?




How can it be a strategic review if there's no copper audit?  If the primary argument for an FTTN network is that by reusing the copper tail you save lots of $$$, but then have no factual basis to determine if this is true, then policy meet table napkin I'd say.

I'm trying to decide if MT is just wilfully ignoring the woeful state of the copper, or he genuinely believes he can get away with replacing just 10%.

Depending on where exactly you are in Varsity Lakes you could be on either Robina or Stephens exchanges.  My employer has equipment at the Robina TEBA (Exchange)


----------



## sydboy007

Calliope said:


> It certainly will. But this is the gist of it.




Considering it's had some of the fatest take up rates of comparble projects around the world, that the majority of subscribers are putting their money into the top speed plans, I say the ALP NBN has more chance of making money than say the private sector toll roads like the Sydney Cross City Tunnel or the wonderful toll roads in the Sunshine State


----------



## medicowallet

sydboy007 said:


> Considering it's had some of the fatest take up rates of comparble projects around the world, that the majority of subscribers are putting their money into the top speed plans, I say the ALP NBN has more chance of making money than say the private sector toll roads like the Sydney Cross City Tunnel or the wonderful toll roads in the Sunshine State




Uptake is not to shabby.

Rollout is absolutely hopeless, and very reflective of the hopeless labor government of the past 6 year.

MW


----------



## sydboy007

medicowallet said:


> Uptake is not to shabby.
> 
> Rollout is absolutely hopeless, and very reflective of the hopeless labor government of the past 6 year.
> 
> MW




So you call practically the only rich OECD member to have real income growth as a poor legacy of the Labor Govt.  If Tony is able to achieve the same I hope you are equally as disappointed.


----------



## drsmith

Speed test this evening,



> Data: 14 MB
> Test Time: 10.01 secs
> 
> Your line speed is 11.63 Mbps (11635 kbps).
> Your download speed is 1.42 MB/s (1454 KB/s).






sydboy007 said:


> How can it be a strategic review if there's no copper audit?  If the primary argument for an FTTN network is that by reusing the copper tail you save lots of $$$, but then have no factual basis to determine if this is true, then policy meet table napkin I'd say.
> 
> I'm trying to decide if MT is just wilfully ignoring the woeful state of the copper, or he genuinely believes he can get away with replacing just 10%.
> 
> Depending on where exactly you are in Varsity Lakes you could be on either Robina or Stephens exchanges.  My employer has equipment at the Robina TEBA (Exchange)



What have to seen to specifically suggest no assessment of the current copper network ?

The crux of the question in relation to Varsity Lakes is how far is your customer from the exchange ?


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Speed test this evening,
> 
> What have to seen to specifically suggest no assessment of the current copper network ?
> 
> The crux of the question in relation to Varsity Lakes is how far is your customer from the exchange ?




Speed test = tests if you are able to get your sync speed.  If your ISP has congestion at the exchange or on their peering links then you wont.  Generally the cheaper the ISP, the more likely they are to run a t high contention ratios and experience congestion during their peaks - usually from around 6pm till 10pm, though it can be all day when apple releases a new version of IOS, or a very popular game releases a new version or large update.

I've not read anything to indicate MT has ordered a copper audit as part of the current review process.  If you know of something please point me in the right direction.  I dare say he can't do it because real world data would kill of much of his cheaper and faster argument, and it would also make negotiations tricky with Telstra if he's forced to pay for top dollar for the equivalent of a rusted 40 year old car.

Not exactly sure the distance the customer was from the Robina exchange, but we were using EFM (Ethernet First Mile) which allows the grouping of up to 32 copper lines to provide a link.  At up to 1KM we can do that with 2, up to 2KM usually 3-5, up to 3KM it might need 5-8 lines, though I've seen in areas with good copper 15Mbs with 6 lines at over 2KM.

We have customers wanting to upgrade their services but Telstra are unwilling to install more copper as what's available doesn't even pass their relatively low SQ benchmarks.

To give you an idea of how Telstra are fudging things in the ADSL space, they used to set the SNR bar at 6.5 and lower was deemed to indicate a possible line issue.  That's now been dropped to 5.5.  The dB scale is logarithmic so a 1dB drop from 6.5 to 5.5 means the cut off mark for a potential fault is some 10 times "quieter" than the original one.  SNR is how much louder the ADSL signal is compared to the background noise on the copper.  Obviously higher SNR is better, whereas you want the attenuation (signal degradation) to be as low as possible.  Attenuation is partly copper quality, but mainly length - ~13db each KM as a rough guide.  

In the UK they will generally have a lower attenuation for a give cable length because they used 0.6mm whereas we took the cheap and nasty path by using 0.40mm, so when MT uses the UK as an example it's not particularly relevant to Australia.  Most countries with FTTN are not directly transferable to Australia as they all seem to have better quality copper than us.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I've not read anything to indicate MT has ordered a copper audit as part of the current review process.




This offers a broad guide,



> Where does fibre to the premises fit?
> 
> Fibre generally should be deployed in new (‘greenfield’) housing estates and wherever copper has to be replaced (unless there are particular commercial reasons not to do so). There will also be established areas where high maintenance costs or the condition of the copper renders fTTn unattractive and the best alternative is fTTP.




https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=798424

It's encouraging to know there are areas with good copper.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> This offers a broad guide,
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=798424
> 
> It's encouraging to know there are areas with good copper.




My point is he has claimed FTTN is cheaper than FTTP because of the reuse of the copper.  He has no factual basis to make this claim.  He's budged for 10% of the copper to be replaced.  He wont even share the analysis that lead him to make that assumption.  We have no access to any of the analysis that went into his network costings.  Why?

If he has to replace 2 or 3 times more of the copper than he has budgeted for, then are his claims still valid?

I'd also argue that going forward there will be far more types of equipment and vendors, so there's likely to be an exponential increase in the number of compatibility issues that will plague the network.  They wont all happen at the start, but as software and firmware upgrades occur you will get weird issues happening and vendors pointing the finger at each other.  In my last 3 jobs I've seen this in networks that have pretty standard kit at the customer, access layer and core.


----------



## drsmith

Syd,

A general question. 

From where we currently stand, do you think we should still be engaging in a FTTP rollout to 93% of premises as outlined in Labor's original plan ?  

If not, in what proportion should the fixed line rollout in part use other alternatives (such as FTTN) and for what situations would you consider such alternatives to be appropriate ?


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Syd,
> 
> A general question.
> 
> From where we currently stand, do you think we should still be engaging in a FTTP rollout to 93% of premises as outlined in Labor's original plan ?
> 
> If not, in what proportion should the fixed line rollout in part use other alternatives (such as FTTN) and for what situations would you consider such alternatives to be appropriate ?




I can see FTTB as being a viable alternative for MDUs.  Leave it to the body corporates to decide if they use VDSL / Ethernet / Fiber into the individual properties, with the proviso that NBN has a list of tested compatible equipment to connect to the network.

For the rest, I'd argue over a 10 year period that FTTP will work out cheaper.  The only way FTTN works out cheaper is if you disregard the cost of moving to FTTN at some point in the future.

FTTN uses more energy, requires hundreds of thousands of batteries to provide backup to the nodes, has higher ongoing maintenance costs, and as yet I've not heard MT advise how voice is going to be handled under FTTN.  Will it be copper as we currently have, or like a UNI V port as the current NBN supports.

MT also hasn't acknowledge that a large chunk of NBN subscribers have taken up speeds higher than his 2016 rollout target, so the demand for high speed broadband is clearly already here, yet MT says you can have those speeds by 2016, and anyone who thinks you can roll out a FTTN in around 2 years to ~70% of current housing is dreaming.  Factor in how many people on 12 or 25 Mbs plans will upgrade by 2016, and I don't see the value of the FTTN.  It's cutting a small amount of costs now but will ensure a much larger cost in the future.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I can see FTTB as being a viable alternative for MDUs.  Leave it to the body corporates to decide if they use VDSL / Ethernet / Fiber into the individual properties, with the proviso that NBN has a list of tested compatible equipment to connect to the network.
> 
> For the rest, I'd argue over a 10 year period that FTTP will work out cheaper.




34% of premises in Australia are part of an MDU (Stephen Conroy).

You're obviously in favour of considering alternatives models for MDU's as per the second dot point of the strategic review below.



> The Strategic Review is being led by NBN Co’s Board and executive management. Its primary objective is to evaluate both the:
> •Current NBN operational and financial performance; and the
> •Timing, financials and product offers under *alternative models* of delivering very fast broadband to homes and businesses across Australia




http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/media/news/nbn-co-strategic-review.html

For MDU's, is this a view you have always had, or has it evolved as the rollout has progressed and more information come to light ?

As for the rest, continuing to debate the finer detail of the Coalition's plan from opposition from the perspective of a rigid view on rejecting alternative models before the outcome of the strategic review is bound to involve an element of wasted keystrokes. The review itself is a process from which the Coalition government can refine the detail of its concept outlined from opposition and perhaps answer some of the questions presented.

It's a much better process than Stephen's Conroy's long and troubled journey to Damascus on MDU's and on his rollout ambitions in general.

My bolds.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> 34% of premises in Australia are part of an MDU (Stephen Conroy).
> 
> You're obviously in favour of considering alternatives models for MDU's as per the second dot point of the strategic review below.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/media/news/nbn-co-strategic-review.html
> 
> For MDU's, is this a view you have always had, or has it evolved as the rollout has progressed and more information come to light ?
> 
> As for the rest, continuing to debate the finer detail of the Coalition's plan from opposition from the perspective of a rigid view on rejecting alternative models before the outcome of the strategic review is bound to involve an element of wasted keystrokes. The review itself is a process from which the Coalition government can refine the detail of its concept outlined from opposition and perhaps answer some of the questions presented.
> 
> It's a much better process than Stephen's Conroy's long and troubled journey to Damascus on MDU's and on his rollout ambitions in general.
> 
> My bolds.




For MDUs I didn't really know what the best way forward was going to be, but since there's such a focus on getting connected I feel NBN is better to get the pipe installed and then let any delays be the responsibility of the body corp.  No point getting in the middle of the arguments as to how best to connect the apartments.

You seem to be arguing that the policy the Coalition went to the election is no longer relevant since they are doing a review now?  Shouldn't these issues have been dealt with since they argued the FTTN is cheaper and faster?  Sounds like they argued for their approach over a number of years, and only after getting approval are they now actually doing the appropriate analysis.

The Telco industry is now in a bit of a limbo.  FTTP rollout will continue at a slowed pace, FTTN will not begin for around 1 year, possibly longer.  Most of the issues to be examined in the review should have been dealt with in the Coalitions policy already, with a minimal refinement being employed now.

Will they even do some real world testing of nodes from vendors to see which ones can survive an Australian summer?  We've already had a number of 40 degree days in Sydney and it's still early spring.  The FTTN economics will be shot to pieces if it's determined active cooling will be required.  Once again this issue should have been dealt with pre election.

You're very critical of the Labor Government's handling of the NBN rollout, yet seem to give MT a free pass.  The policy they've presented isn't even half baked.  MTs already moved the goal posts of the review from 60 days after forming Govt to 60 days after the new Chariman started.  If Labor had done this I know you'd have been highly critical of it, yet you seem to feel it's OK since it's a Liberal doing the sleight of hand.

I'll also add that MT has a much easier job now that a lot of the regulatory framework via the ACCC has been ironed out, the backbone is nearly complete, pretty much all the POIs are operational.  These costs in the NBN budget don't seem to be part of the FTTN budget.

Then there's the grand daddy of all issues in terms of how MT proposes to get access to the copper CAN without paying Telstra any extra $$$.  As a Telstra shareholder providiing free access to what has been changed into a very valuable asset is not in my best interests.  An outright purchase would kill the economics, and a leasing arrangement would probably cause FTTN plans to be higher than FTTP.

We also have the issue of will he wont he remove the anti cherry picking laws.  If he does then that releases a whole new can of worms.  If you live in an MDU what rights do you have?  If TPG or IINet install their equipment will you be able to access another RSP?  If multiple RSPs install their equipment how does one transfer a service between them?  

MT did a nice publicity stunt at the Sydney Park Village when OPENetworks went live with their VDSL deployment. What he failed to mention is you have a choice of 2 RSPs.  Their plans are quite uncompetitive compared to what's on offer via the NBN.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> You seem to be arguing that the policy the Coalition went to the election is no longer relevant since they are doing a review now?



I'm simply suggesting that from this point it's better to wait for the outcome of the strategic review than keep one's knickers in a twist.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> I'm simply suggesting that from this point it's better to wait for the outcome of the strategic review than keep one's knickers in a twist.




No twisted knickers here.  Just lots of unasnwered questions that should have been answered prior to the election.

People on this forum claim the ALP had a poorly thought out policy, yet the Coalition seems to have done a half page essay for their final exam.

I'll be interested to see which Liberal affiliated company gets the lucrative contract from the NBN board to run the review.  Possibly they'll have a chat to Gladys in NSW


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> People on this forum claim the ALP had a poorly thought out policy, yet the Coalition seems to have done a half page essay for their final exam.



you're exaggerating now Syd.

Labor's policy was poorly thought out as the results have shown. Indeed Stephen Conroy's own judgements are that the rollout targets were ambitious (in other words, fiction) and he himself was naive.

Labor failed in the job and after 6 years were sacked by the electorate. Part of that failure with their NBN was one of ideology. The Coalition at least is indicating the specific proportions that are FTTP and FTTN is subject to further analysis and that's a plus over Labor that gives their approach a greater chance of success.


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> No twisted knickers here.




That's right...as displayed in your avatar.


----------



## drsmith

There was an interesting segment on Tony Delroy's Nightlife show on the NBN yesterday evening. The Guest dished plenty of criticism around, both to Labor's project and the Coalition. It was broadcast between 7pm and 8pm WST (ABC radio 720 Perth ).

A link to the audio is unfortunately not available on ABC's Nightline website. Local coverage of the NSW fires is provided instead (10pm to 11pm EDST).

http://www.abc.net.au/nightlife/


----------



## sydboy007

http://www.itnews.com.au/News/360962,iinets-nbn-fibre-customers-use-60-percent-more-internet.aspx

FYI - iiNet currently have approx 20% of all NBN customers, so they would have a representative sample size.

I know my parents have gone from using 1 or 2GB of their 5GB ADSL allowance to over 10GB a month on their 8 times faster NBN connection, all while saving around $35 a month.


----------



## IFocus

sydboy007 said:


> http://www.itnews.com.au/News/360962,iinets-nbn-fibre-customers-use-60-percent-more-internet.aspx
> 
> FYI - iiNet currently have approx 20% of all NBN customers, so they would have a representative sample size.
> 
> I know my parents have gone from using 1 or 2GB of their 5GB ADSL allowance to over 10GB a month on their 8 times faster NBN connection, all while saving around $35 a month.




I am on a 1.5MB X 20GB ADSL 1 and it drives me nuts as more media goes to vid and beyond. I cannot muti task, daughter goes to uni so we cannot share the net etc.

I was lined up for NBN but now I think MT will put me onto a fu(king street node rant over.

Not surprised at your and iinets experience.


----------



## sydboy007

http://tinyurl.com/l7lh9n2

Provides quite an interesting comparison between Stockholm and Copenhagen.

For those that don't want to read the whole report

Stockholm and Copenhagen are relatively similar in terms of size population and economy.

It is particularly interesting to compare the broadband situation in the two cities, since diametrically opposite conclusions were reached in connection with the deregulation of the telecom market , as to who should own
the ICT infrastructure and how this should be organised.

Stockholm chose, as already described, to view the ICT infrastructure as something that should be accessible to everyone and be delivered by a neutral player in order to create competition.

Copenhagen opted , like most of Europe, to see the ICT infrastructure as the direct prerogative of the market and telecom operators.

This has resulted in the incumbent player TDC being the one who owns and controls most of the ICT infrastructure in Copenhagen.

After about 20 years, it is interesting to see what differentiates the two cities.

Regarding the development of the fibre network, barely 20% of multi-dwelling units in Copenhagen are connected, to be compared with more than 90% in Stockholm.

This means that in Stockholm there are considerably more people that can get high speed broadband, and the cost for a broadband provider to reach customers is lower because the passive infrastructure (representing around 80% of total investment) is already there.

Even the price of dark fibre, the basic ICT infrastructure, is significantly lower in Stockholm than in Copenhagen for both consumers and enterprises.

While in Stockholm all those who need fibre can design their network structure themselves , in Copenhagen the design possibility is heavily limited because the dominant player chose to build a the network frugally, and designed to meet their own service – delivery needs.

The result is a fibre – poor network, which decreases flexibility and design possibility drastically for other operators.

The low level of fibre deployment in Copenhagen also affects the possibility of Symmetric high – speed broadband connection . Hence, while broadband at 100 Mb/s speed both downstream and upstream is common for the majority of residents in Stockholm, it is virtually impossible for households in Copenhagen.

Moreover , the price of a n asymmetric broadband connection (with low upstream speed) in Copenhagen is almost twice the price of a symmetric Broadband connection (with high upstream ) speed in Stockholm.

This has also a strong impact on the business climate, as the possibilities for data communication are crucial for the business creation.

It is symptomatic for instance, that more and more international enterprises have chosen to locate their Scandinavian headquarters in Stockholm in 2009, Stockholm had 69% more establishments than Copenhagen (compared to 10% in 2006)


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> With regard to the AFR article above on the Tasmanian rollout, do you have any insight on whether Silcar's negotiated 20 per cent increase in NBN contracts as reported is reflected in the June 2013 corporate plan costs ?






NBNMyths said:


> No idea about Silcar's reported increase being included in the Corp plan or not.




On the topic of costs, the following article from the AFR is after the June 30 2013 corporate plan, dated August 07.



> On signing the original, two-year $380 million contract in 2011, NBN Co said a renewal would be worth an extra $740 million for a further two years.
> 
> However, in its attempt to rush the signing, NBN Co is believed to have agreed to increased payments to Silcar, which is paid per premises it passes with fibre optic cabling.
> 
> The company also agreed to waive millions of dollars in penalties known as “liquidated damages” for which Silcar was liable, in failing to meet internal targets under the existing contract.
> 
> A spokesman for Leighton Holdings subsidiary Thiess, which took full control of Silcar last month, said the deal’s value of “up to $300 million” over 12 months depended on the scope of construction, which was yet to be decided.




http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_co_renews_lucrative_contract_9BqF2e7dpi2RIpDaOQA1yI

The article to which the above was linked was this from late last week,

http://www.afr.com/p/national/nbn_builders_really_struggling_AvQXe0z06mrpuU16Mqq7HJ


----------



## sydboy007

http://delimiter.com.au/2013/10/21/fttx-chaos-nbn-co-cant-price-everything/

Will be interesting to see if the pricing chaos rules.  Considerign the POIN mess the ACCC enforced i would expect we will definitely see different pricing for FTTN / FTTB / FTTP and who knows what pricing changes will occur for the fixed wireless and satellite.

The cost for internet access from the same company at the same speed tier and quota limit could change from presmises to premises on a street purely due to the mode of access available.

I doubt MT will be talking about this issue any time soon.  He's been too busy softening up the NBN board with more ex Telstra employees.  Mightn't be too much longer before the Big T logo replaces the NBNCo one.


----------



## sydboy007

nice to see open transparent Malcolm is now avoiding the media over the appointment of his Ozemale mate Russelot and ex Telstra employee to boot, along with Milne.

neither seems to have been involved with telco infrastructure, so one has to wonder besides political favouritism and possible Telstrafication of NBNCo, why did they get the jobs so easily?

So we have ex telstra employees with a histroy of backign the Liberal party, and Russelot has also been out spoken on his support of FTTN.

Seems like MT has taken to heart never hold an enquiry unless you know the recommendation.


----------



## overhang

sydboy007 said:


> nice to see open transparent Malcolm is now avoiding the media over the appointment of his Ozemale mate Russelot and ex Telstra employee to boot, along with Milne.
> 
> neither seems to have been involved with telco infrastructure, so one has to wonder besides political favouritism and possible Telstrafication of NBNCo, why did they get the jobs so easily?
> 
> So we have ex telstra employees with a histroy of backign the Liberal party, and Russelot has also been out spoken on his support of FTTN.
> 
> Seems like MT has taken to heart never hold an enquiry unless you know the recommendation.




It gets worse, Milne still owns 305k of shares in Telstra worth about $1.5 million.  How can he possibly be considered for such a position given the obvious conflict of interests. This demonstrates sheer incompetence in selecting this board however I don't think that's the case,  more the case of MT choosing people that achieve his desired broadband plan.  As we find out more it seems clear this is hardly an impartial transparent review that we should expect.  Is a Telstra shareholder really going to have tax payers best interests at heart when reviewing the renegotiation of the Telstra deal worth billions?  Milne has also publicly been on record supporting FTTN over FTTP, MT sure stacked the deck on this one.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

sydboy007 said:


> nice to see open transparent Malcolm is now avoiding the media over the appointment of his Ozemale mate Russelot and ex Telstra employee to boot, along with Milne.
> 
> neither seems to have been involved with telco infrastructure, so one has to wonder besides political favouritism and possible Telstrafication of NBNCo, why did they get the jobs so easily?
> 
> So we have ex telstra employees with a histroy of backign the Liberal party, and Russelot has also been out spoken on his support of FTTN.
> 
> Seems like MT has taken to heart never hold an enquiry unless you know the recommendation.






overhang said:


> It gets worse, Milne still owns 305k of shares in Telstra worth about $1.5 million.  How can he possibly be considered for such a position given the obvious conflict of interests. This demonstrates sheer incompetence in selecting this board however I don't think that's the case,  more the case of MT choosing people that achieve his desired broadband plan.  As we find out more it seems clear this is hardly an impartial transparent review that we should expect.  Is a Telstra shareholder really going to have tax payers best interests at heart when reviewing the renegotiation of the Telstra deal worth billions?  Milne has also publicly been on record supporting FTTN over FTTP, MT sure stacked the deck on this one.




It will take some time to work through the complete enema that the ALP unleashed on Telecommunications when it devised the NBN.

Be patient Syd and Overhang.

Hug your thighs and await for a cleansing of governance, which has been sadly lacking from this constipated brainfart by two of the biggest dills in the ALP, Conroy and Rudd.

This project needs management, not every second **** a hoop IT guy with an opinion.

It may be a nation changing project, but it needs proper governance.

gg


----------



## sydboy007

Garpal Gumnut said:


> It will take some time to work through the complete enema that the ALP unleashed on Telecommunications when it devised the NBN.
> 
> Be patient Syd and Overhang.
> 
> Hug your thighs and await for a cleansing of governance, which has been sadly lacking from this constipated brainfart by two of the biggest dills in the ALP, Conroy and Rudd.
> 
> This project needs management, not every second **** a hoop IT guy with an opinion.
> 
> It may be a nation changing project, but it needs proper governance.
> 
> gg




So you're quite comfortable with Malcolm providing jobs to close friends who are ex Telstra employees.

Any idea how people who still have a vested interest in Telstra can act impartially?  Is it wise to set up a technologically agnostic review of the NBN and assign someone who is strongly pro FTTN to help run the audit?

I've seen you criticise the ALP for jobs to mates, yet your strangely silent when the Liberals do it.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

sydboy007 said:


> So you're quite comfortable with Malcolm providing jobs to close friends who are ex Telstra employees.
> 
> Any idea how people who still have a vested interest in Telstra can act impartially?  Is it wise to set up a technologically agnostic review of the NBN and assign someone who is strongly pro FTTN to help run the audit?
> 
> I've seen you criticise the ALP for jobs to mates, yet your strangely silent when the Liberals do it.




I can hear your concerns Syd.

My impression is that they are EX Telstra people.

And that Malcolm Turnbull is a much smarter businessman than Conroy ever was.

The ALP is an organisation which has specialised in "jobs for mates ", so I make no comment on your slur on Malcolm Turnbull.

I would be surprised if Muppets were appointed.

gg


----------



## overhang

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I can hear your concerns Syd.
> 
> My impression is that they are EX Telstra people.
> 
> And that Malcolm Turnbull is a much smarter businessman than Conroy ever was.
> 
> The ALP is an organisation which has specialised in "jobs for mates ", so I make no comment on your slur on Malcolm Turnbull.
> 
> I would be surprised if Muppets were appointed.
> 
> gg




I agree MT is a more astute businessman than Conroy but Conroy also seemed to have a greater grasp of the IT sector than MT all though I find them both knowledgeable in this area. 
The bottom line is Milne should have never taken this job with the obvious conflict of interests and he shouldn't have been asked to.  I'm also concerned that this report won't be impartial considering the majority of the IT sector indorses FTTP over FTTN but yet MT seems to have arranged for the minority of those opposed to FTTP to head this report but I guess balance on the matter would have been too much to ask for.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

overhang said:


> I agree MT is a more astute businessman than Conroy but Conroy also seemed to have a greater grasp of the IT sector than MT all though I find them both knowledgeable in this area.
> The bottom line is Milne should have never taken this job with the obvious conflict of interests and he shouldn't have been asked to.  I'm also concerned that this report won't be impartial considering the majority of the IT sector indorses FTTP over FTTN but yet MT seems to have arranged for the minority of those opposed to FTTP to head this report but I guess balance on the matter would have been too much to ask for.




I'd agree with your comments, overhang.

gg


----------



## sydboy007

Rumour has it that MT is asking Dodo to write the speed disclaimer for his Fridge Node Network

_The actual speed you experience depends on a number of factors, including, your equipment, the quality and location of your line, including how far your connection is from the local telephone exchange, the applications you are using, the capacity and speed of our systems, the systems of our suppliers, and the Internet generally. For these reasons, you should not expect your actual speed to be at or near the theoretical maximum._


----------



## sydboy007

My gosh.  CRISIS with MTs NBN

NBN Co executive Leisel Ramjoo quits post.


----------



## Logique

http://www.boursorama.com/forum-alcatel-lucent-telstra-copper-network-hits-100mbps-427074247-1

*Telstra copper network hits 100Mbps mark*
By: Fran Foo, The Australian, October 29, 2013 

"TELSTRA and Alcatel-Lucent have achieved speeds of up to 100 megabits per second over existing copper networks, which the Coalition aims to use as part of its fibre-to-the-node National Broadband Network plan.

The news comes as the French telecommunications equipment maker called on the government to be "swift and efficient" with its NBN reviews.

In their trials, Telstra and Alcatel-Lucent used vectoring technology, which enables download speeds of up to 100Mbps on copper lines using noise-cancelling technology.

The trials, which began last month, aimed to showcase Telstra's credentials as a potential NBN construction partner.

Alcatel-Lucent said the results were consistent with its global experience of between 80Mbps and 100Mbps over 400m-500m of copper wire.

The length of the copper line to internet nodes makes a difference to the connection performance - the longer the line, the worse the quality.

Unlike Labor's fibre-to-the-premises approach, the Coalition's FTTN model relies on Telstra's vast copper network to connect users to the internet after fibre is laid to street cabinets or nodes.

While Labor relied primarily on fibre to connect individual premises, the Coalition has opted for a mix of technologies to deploy the NBN at a faster rate and lower cost.

Labor's $37.3 billion NBN, capable of speeds up to 1000Mbps, would have been completed in mid-2021.

This compares with the Coalition's 2019 target, which will deliver a minimum of 25Mbps.

Alcatel-Lucent is involved in projects with global carriers that have switched from FTTP to FTTN for various reasons, from budget to faster deployment.

Alcatel-Lucent Australia president Sean O'Halloran said the company was well positioned to deal with the future make-up of the NBN, even if the ban on Chinese telecommunications equipment maker Huawei for national security reasons was lifted. Mr O'Halloran said FTTN technologies could be purchased under its existing contract with NBN Co, which is worth up to $1.5bn.

Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull has said that the government will honour existing NBN contracts.

The government is conducting four reviews into the NBN to determine the state of the project.

Deloitte, KordaMentha and Boston Consulting Group will assist in a 60-day audit of NBN Co's operations, due to report in early December.

It will be led by the network builder's head of strategy and transformation, JB Rousselot.

Other studies include a 90-day study of broadband quality by the Department of Communications, a cost-benefit analysis by independent consultants and an independent audit into NBN Co's governance.

Mr O'Halloran said he was keen for the reviews to be conducted "as quickly and efficiently as possible so that we can move forward and get on with what we need to do".

"The scrutiny is good. The result of this will be a more robust approach to the National Broadband Network," he told The Australian on the sidelines of the Broadband World Forum in Amsterdam last week.

"I'm looking for a result that will give us a clear path forward and (address) some of the criticisms of the past and concerns that people have.

"We just want that process to be as quick as it can be in order to achieve that result."

Alcatel-Lucent is also involved in newly announced trials, with NBN Co to test fibre-to-the-basement technology for multi-dwelling units.

Mr O'Halloran said the direction NBN Co had under the previous government "didn't give them enough flexibility". "They were kind of restricted in looking at some of the efficiencies that they could have got in connecting premises. What I like about the approach with the Coalition is they're adding another access technology, which gives NBN Co a lot more flexibility.""


----------



## drsmith

NBN Co's 2013 annual report is out today,

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco/documents/nbn-co-annual-report-2013.pdf

In it is this,



> Construction commenced or completed(1),
> 
> Fibre brownfields premises 1,114,964 (2013 cumulative)
> 
> (1) Construction commenced or completed: refer to definition of construction commenced in the glossary of terms.




Construction Commenced from Glossary of terms,



> FTTP Brownfields:
> Contract Instructions (CI) have been issued together with the initial Network Design Documents
> (NDD) so that construction partners can commence work on the detailed design, field inspections and
> rodding/roping activities in an FSAM. This is followed by the release of a rollout map for the FSAM on
> the NBN Co website showing the coverage area for that FSAM and the estimated number of premises
> to be passed.


----------



## medicowallet

http://www.theage.com.au/technology...posts-932m-operating-loss-20131029-2wegk.html

NBN Co posts $932m operating loss

And while the company's total yearly telecommunication revenue of $17 million

     

If I ran my business like that.....

MW


----------



## sydboy007

medicowallet said:


> http://www.theage.com.au/technology...posts-932m-operating-loss-20131029-2wegk.html
> 
> NBN Co posts $932m operating loss
> 
> And while the company's total yearly telecommunication revenue of $17 million
> 
> 
> 
> If I ran my business like that.....
> 
> MW




So you're saying you could start a capital intensive business from scratch and would generate a profit pretty much immediately?

If there's a loss in the 2014-15 FY will you be as critical?

QF is looking to break even within 3-5 years with their Jetstar Japan rollout.  Woolworths was looking at around 5 years to break even with their Masters rollout (if you read the excuses they raised about the higher than expected losses you'd be shocked), and they're not nearly as CAPEX heavy as the NBN.


----------



## dutchie

Joe's got this right..

Joe Hockey says no to Huawei investment in NBN

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ment-in-nbn-20131030-2wf1f.html#ixzz2j9v5cluH


----------



## drsmith

The delays in the rollout saved NBN Co from a bigger 2012/13 operating loss.



> THE company building the National Broadband Network has revealed a $932 million operating loss after recording only $17 million in revenue for the 2013 financial year.
> 
> While NBN Co increased revenue by $15 million compared to the 12 months to June 30, 2012, the company fell short of the revenue targets outlined in its Corporate Plan which predicted the company to bring in $18 million this year.
> 
> Revenue generated from the NBN Co's 70,100 retail customers provided an average revenue per user (ARPU) figure of $37 a month, which was higher than expected.
> 
> NBN Co’s loss before interest and tax was $880 million, far below the projected $1.3 billion loss it forecast in its corporate plan. The loss was not as severe as projected as delays to the rollout schedule meant the NBN Co’s capital and operating expenses were lower than first forecast. NBN Co’s capital expenditure was $1.76 billion against the $3.19 billion forecast in its corporate plan.
> 
> The figures, which are contained in the NBN Co's annual report for the 12 months to June 30, 2013, also reveal that the company had $1 billion in cash and investments following government-funded equity injections of $2.4 billion during the year.
> 
> Those equity injections, however, were $2.3 billion less than the company's forecast contribution of $4.7 billion for the year.
> 
> The NBN Co's operating expenditure came in at $749 million, significantly lower than its forecast $1 billion, because of delays in its rollout schedule.
> 
> "The main contributing factors for this were slower than anticipated progress in the rollout of the fibre," the NBN Co said.




The flip side in the delays though would be a longer transition to profitability.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...operating-losses/story-e6frgaif-1226749116622


----------



## drsmith

Legal spat between Telstra and NBN Co,



> Under its deal with the NBN, Telstra will receive $9bn in net present value for providing access to certain infrastructure, including fibre, exchange space and ducts. The dispute is of significant financial value to Telstra as payments to the telco are to increase with CPI for the term of deal's 30-year lease period.
> 
> The telco giant believes that because that $11bn deal was signed in June 2011 that CPI adjustments on its payments should have triggered on January 1, 2012. The NBN Co however wanted the adjustments to begin a year later on January 1, 2013.
> 
> "We have one take on the contract and NBN Co has another. We have not been able to reach agreement through a long mediation process so, as provided for in the contract and as the next step, Telstra is asking the Court to decide," said a Telstra spokesperson.




I would have thought this was a pretty basic term in the contract to get clear in the first place.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-cpi-adjustments/story-e6frgaif-1226749562372


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Legal spat between Telstra and NBN Co,
> 
> 
> 
> I would have thought this was a pretty basic term in the contract to get clear in the first place.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-cpi-adjustments/story-e6frgaif-1226749562372




My experience with these large contracts is too many assumptions are made.

In my previous job looking after a bank network we lost the contract to a large Telco.  My company being the morons they were did a lot of things for free to keep the bank happy, then wondered why they could barely turn a profit from $60-70M in revenue every year.

The bank staff assumed a lot of the extra freebies we were giving them were in the contract, so never actually got them added into the terms of service with the new Telco.  Suffice to say the bank got a rude shock when they were paying a lot of money for those extras.

It was fun to watch them go at each other.  Both were used to getting their ways.  It was a very strained relationship, with 10 years of married life.

The great laugh for us was the fact the Telco had told the bank they would migrate the bank to their network within 6 months.  I think the first service was migrated around the 15th month mark, with final service moved 25 or 26 months months later.


----------



## medicowallet

sydboy007 said:


> So you're saying you could start a capital intensive business from scratch and would generate a profit pretty much immediately?
> 
> If there's a loss in the 2014-15 FY will you be as critical?
> 
> QF is looking to break even within 3-5 years with their Jetstar Japan rollout.  Woolworths was looking at around 5 years to break even with their Masters rollout (if you read the excuses they raised about the higher than expected losses you'd be shocked), and they're not nearly as CAPEX heavy as the NBN.




capital expenditure does not equal revenue.

revenue is so far out of whack with the expenses it is not funny.   The rollout is so far behind it is not funny.

The best thing was to sack the lot of the clowns and start again.

I have started a capital intensive business before and it broke even within 2 years... how long has the NBN been around for?

MW


----------



## drsmith

NBN Co's rollout maps have been updated to now show just two categories, Services available and Build commenced.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/when-do-i-get-it/rollout-map.html

http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/...ut-on-fibre-20131030-2wfcr.html#ixzz2jBLjhEOI

http://www.itnews.com.au/News/362333,half-a-million-nbn-fibre-connections-in-limbo.aspx

Also of interest is the following graphic on the rollout,

http://www.mynbn.info/stats

If those stats are correct (they're unofficial), the slowdown after reaching the downward revised June 30 target is telling.


----------



## sydboy007

medicowallet said:


> capital expenditure does not equal revenue.
> 
> revenue is so far out of whack with the expenses it is not funny.   The rollout is so far behind it is not funny.
> 
> The best thing was to sack the lot of the clowns and start again.
> 
> I have started a capital intensive business before and it broke even within 2 years... how long has the NBN been around for?
> 
> MW




Wow.  You started a company that covers pretty much the whole of Australia, purchased a couple of satellites, built ground stations, well into the process of building 121 POIs and well into the FSAN rollout and broke even in the second year.  Gosh they should have hired you to get the rollout done.  We could be fibered by Christmas with your abilities.

How many years will it take the FTTN to break even?  2 years?

There's an 18 month gap between NBN in an area ON and Telstra basically cutting services and forced migrations for those who were stuck on their old ADSL plans.  I dare say revenue will start to take off pretty quickly over the next couple of years mainly due to this.  People seem to already be migrating of their own free will at pretty decent rates.

Other issue I have is the NBN was forced to rollout services in the least profitable areas.  If we'd left the remote areas to fend for themselves on the Howard era Satellite scheme and focused all the rollout in the capital cities I dare say the CAPEX would be far lower and the revenue a good deal higher.  Unless the nationals roll over, MT is going to be in the same situation.


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> Wow.  You started a company that covers pretty much the whole of Australia, purchased a couple of satellites, built ground stations, well into the process of building 121 POIs and well into the FSAN rollout and broke even in the second year.  Gosh they should have hired you to get the rollout done.  We could be fibered by Christmas with your abilities.
> 
> How many years will it take the FTTN to break even?  2 years?
> 
> There's an 18 month gap between NBN in an area ON and Telstra basically cutting services and forced migrations for those who were stuck on their old ADSL plans.  I dare say revenue will start to take off pretty quickly over the next couple of years mainly due to this.  People seem to already be migrating of their own free will at pretty decent rates.
> 
> Other issue I have is the NBN was forced to rollout services in the least profitable areas.  If we'd left the remote areas to fend for themselves on the Howard era Satellite scheme and focused all the rollout in the capital cities I dare say the CAPEX would be far lower and the revenue a good deal higher.  Unless the nationals roll over, MT is going to be in the same situation.




FTTN or FTTP it doesn't matter, neither will break even in the next 20 years.
That's conditional that it is intergrated enough to be a sellable proposition, which I doubt will ever happen.
The enormous size of the project, will end up strangling it to death and that goes for both models. 
Some of the smaller country towns won't be there when the NBN goes through, and some of the towns already done will be gone after the NBN has been installed.
IMO a dumb model that adds no real value, stick to cities and major country towns also priorities CBD's and high volume industries first.
But we have been saying that for a few years now. 
Still I can't complain, the holiday house has a box on the outside wall and no one inside the property.


----------



## medicowallet

sydboy007 said:


> Wow.  You started a company that covers pretty much the whole of Australia, purchased a couple of satellites, built ground stations, well into the process of building 121 POIs and well into the FSAN rollout and broke even in the second year.  Gosh they should have hired you to get the rollout done.  We could be fibered by Christmas with your abilities.
> 
> How many years will it take the FTTN to break even?  2 years?
> 
> There's an 18 month gap between NBN in an area ON and Telstra basically cutting services and forced migrations for those who were stuck on their old ADSL plans.  I dare say revenue will start to take off pretty quickly over the next couple of years mainly due to this.  People seem to already be migrating of their own free will at pretty decent rates.
> 
> Other issue I have is the NBN was forced to rollout services in the least profitable areas.  If we'd left the remote areas to fend for themselves on the Howard era Satellite scheme and focused all the rollout in the capital cities I dare say the CAPEX would be far lower and the revenue a good deal higher.  Unless the nationals roll over, MT is going to be in the same situation.





When I was considering my business, I did due diligence, I worked out budgets, forecasts for potential circumstances, and took a conservative approach with my assumptions.

I thought I would break even between 1-3 years.

I happen to remember some people spruiking that the NBN will be fantastic with returns of blahblagblag, will rollout in whatever time, and with a takeup of humptydoo.

If Rudd hadn't made this up on the fly, perhaps proper planning would have been undertaken, and this bs waste of money wouldn't be such a cluster....

I do agree that it should have been rolled out in areas that would be most economically viable, you can blame Labor for that.

MW

Perhaps if you had ever achieved something of substance you would have less tolerance for incompetence?


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> NBN Co's rollout maps have been updated to now show just two categories, Services available and Build commenced.
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/when-do-i-get-it/rollout-map.html
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/...ut-on-fibre-20131030-2wfcr.html#ixzz2jBLjhEOI
> 
> http://www.itnews.com.au/News/362333,half-a-million-nbn-fibre-connections-in-limbo.aspx
> 
> Also of interest is the following graphic on the rollout,
> 
> http://www.mynbn.info/stats
> 
> If those stats are correct (they're unofficial), the slowdown after reaching the downward revised June 30 target is telling.



Further to the above, 307,800 premises in the new dataset have ready for service (RFS) dates (according to one of the articles above) and these go out to September 2014 (Whirlpool).

As of October 21, Real Premises Passed (RPP) was 228600. Exactly how that translates into RFS can only be guessed at, but the interim statement of expectations from September 24 offers a guide,



> A key priority will be to reduce the backlog of 66,000 premises passed by the NBN Co network which can’t currently obtain a service.  This includes the majority of apartments, schools and businesses where the fibre network has been rolled out.




http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/m...im-nbn-statement-of-expectations#.UnDrUDaQ9aQ

Overall, this suggests the FTTP brownfields rollout will likely be less than 500,000 by the end of September 2014, unless more are subsequently added to the new dataset for RFS by that date.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

medicowallet said:


> When I was considering my business, I did due diligence, I worked out budgets, forecasts for potential circumstances, and took a conservative approach with my assumptions.
> 
> I thought I would break even between 1-3 years.
> 
> I happen to remember some people spruiking that the NBN will be fantastic with returns of blahblagblag, will rollout in whatever time, and with a takeup of humptydoo.
> 
> If Rudd hadn't made this up on the fly, perhaps proper planning would have been undertaken, and this bs waste of money wouldn't be such a cluster....
> 
> I do agree that it should have been rolled out in areas that would be most economically viable, you can blame Labor for that.
> 
> MW
> 
> Perhaps if you had ever achieved something of substance you would have less tolerance for incompetence?




Mw you are wasting your breath on these pointy headed geeks, raised on a socialist teat.

The difference between them and US innovators such as Jobs is that the latter was a bottom up capitalist exercise built on hard work and risk.

The NBN is a crazy stunt designed by people, Rudd and Conroy, with no business experience and no skin in the game.

gg


----------



## Calliope

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Mw you are wasting your breath on these pointy headed geeks, raised on a socialist teat.
> 
> The difference between them and US innovators such as Jobs is that the latter was a bottom up capitalist exercise built on hard work and risk.
> 
> The NBN is a crazy stunt designed by people, Rudd and Conroy, with no business experience and no skin in the game.
> 
> gg




Game, set and match GG. Your thread has been validated. Congratulations.


----------



## drsmith

Some more rollout figures,



> A total of 65,000 homes had been passed with fibre optic cabling since July 1, reaching a total network of 229,398 premises as of October 27.
> 
> However, a third of those homes and businesses are currently unable to connect to the NBN as they are in apartment buildings or shopping complexes, which require additional work.
> 
> The update indicates some 3000 homes in new developments received connections during October, with a total 62,242 homes and businesses now using fibre connections across the country.




http://www.afr.com/p/technology/new_rollout_statistics_highlight_VrHvagU1lrEOEl3ImwUHBI

NBN Co's weekly update,

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam...weekly-progress-report-week-ending-271013.pdf


----------



## sptrawler

sptrawler said:


> FTTN or FTTP it doesn't matter, neither will break even in the next 20 years.
> That's conditional that it is intergrated enough to be a sellable proposition, which I doubt will ever happen.
> The enormous size of the project, will end up strangling it to death and that goes for both models.
> Some of the smaller country towns won't be there when the NBN goes through, and some of the towns already done will be gone after the NBN has been installed.
> IMO a dumb model that adds no real value, stick to cities and major country towns also priorities CBD's and high volume industries first.
> But we have been saying that for a few years now.
> *Still I can't complain, the holiday house has a box on the outside wall and no one inside the property*.




Forgot to mention, the holiday house next door has a box on the wall and no one living there also.
What a fiasco.


----------



## So_Cynical

My FTTH internet connection was installed today 

Only 3 Mbps but unlimited up and downloads (subject to reasonable use etc) i believe this speed has been achieved via a AON (Active optical network) but not 100% sure on that point..however i am sure that its Fibre coming out of the wall because i have photos.

I need photos because im in Aust and not in my Apartment in the Philippines where the Fibre has just been installed, i have a FTTH connection in a 3rd world country at least 2 or more likely 3 or 4 years before i could have a similar (inferior) service in Australia.

$40 per month with Landline and some free calls....we are so far behind in this country, seriously its pathetic and getting worse as the noalition gets going with the NBN hatchet job...happy to be well on my way out the door.
~


----------



## drsmith

FTTH approved for another 150,000 premises.

http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/gov...nections-approved-for-nbn-20131031-hv2bn.html



> The additional 150,000 premises were previously part of a group of 645,000 premises where NBN Co had done its preparation work but had not yet issued construction contracts.
> 
> Mr Turnbull said in late September that NBN Co would finish construction at 300,000 premises where contracts had been signed, that 645,000 were yet to be decided, and that 900,000 were to be delayed pending the outcome of a strategic review, due on December 2. The 900,000 figure has now increased to about 1.4 million.
> 
> NBN Co spokesman Andrew Sholl said NBN Co would start issuing build instructions for the 150,000 premises, which were scattered around the country, from next week until February to ‘‘minimise disruption to the construction industry’’




With regard to the status of the current rollout including the nature of the contracts, the following part of the above article is also an interesting read.



> However, sub-contractors have been warning the lack of work coming from NBN Co’s construction partners since the election could lead to job cuts. NBN Co has blamed Telstra’s asbestos removal program for the delay because construction work cannot start until asbestos is removed. Telstra halted remediation work for nearly three months this year and resumed it gradually from mid-August, leading to a ‘‘significant backlog’’ of work.
> 
> A spokeswoman for Telstra said it wasn't to blame for the backlog because it was "well ahead of schedule when the stop work commenced" and has worked constructively with NBN Co to ramp back up and avoid delays.
> 
> *Meanwhile, it has emerged that that NBN Co’s construction contracts were flexible enough for the government to change the type of work done while still keeping its pre-election promise to honour existing commitments. For example, changing the work from fibre-to-home connections to a fibre-to-the-node rollout.*




Oh, the irony.

My bolds. 



So_Cynical said:


> happy to be well on my way out the door.
> ~



Cheerio.


----------



## medicowallet

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Mw you are wasting your breath on these pointy headed geeks, raised on a socialist teat.
> 
> The difference between them and US innovators such as Jobs is that the latter was a bottom up capitalist exercise built on hard work and risk.
> 
> The NBN is a crazy stunt designed by people, Rudd and Conroy, with no business experience and no skin in the game.
> 
> gg




Thanks gg.

Sometimes I get on my high horse and start blowing my own trumpet, without tempering my emotion. 

MW


----------



## drsmith

Link to weekly progress report by NBN Co,

http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/media/news/weekly-rollout-metrics.html


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> I need photos because im in Aust and not in my Apartment in the Philippines where the Fibre has just been installed, i have a FTTH connection in a 3rd world country at least 2 or more likely 3 or 4 years before i could have a similar (inferior) service in Australia.
> 
> $40 per month with Landline and some free calls....we are so far behind in this country, seriously its pathetic and getting worse as the noalition gets going with the NBN hatchet job...happy to be well on my way out the door.
> ~




Yes I can understand your frustration, in the Philippines, you have fibre to the home. 
However you have no sewage or garbage collection and poor welfare, hostpital care and education.

I can't understand why all the asylum seekers don't follow you over to the Philippines, they obviously haven't heard about the internet speed difference.lol


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

So_Cynical said:


> My FTTH internet connection was installed today
> 
> Only 3 Mbps but unlimited up and downloads (subject to reasonable use etc) i believe this speed has been achieved via a AON (Active optical network) but not 100% sure on that point..however i am sure that its Fibre coming out of the wall because i have photos.
> 
> I need photos because im in Aust and not in my Apartment in the Philippines where the Fibre has just been installed, i have a FTTH connection in a 3rd world country at least 2 or more likely 3 or 4 years before i could have a similar (inferior) service in Australia.
> 
> $40 per month with Landline and some free calls....we are so far behind in this country, seriously its pathetic and getting worse as the noalition gets going with the NBN hatchet job...happy to be well on my way out the door.
> ~




It's called slave labour, and corruption.

If your internet providing mates in the Philippines were paying taxes, and their workers were in a union, you wouldn't be able to get away with such cheap rates.

It sounds like exploitation to me.

gg


----------



## So_Cynical

sptrawler said:


> Yes I can understand your frustration, in the Philippines, you have fibre to the home.
> However you have no sewage or garbage collection and poor welfare, hospital care and education.




I'm all right Jack, my apartment complex has everything and yet 500 meters down the road people are living under cardboard...its weird for sure



sptrawler said:


> I can't understand why all the asylum seekers don't follow you over to the Philippines, they obviously haven't heard about the internet speed difference.lol




Highlights the difference between the people wanting to not live under cardboard with the people who have never lived under cardboard....the 3rd world is such a contrast to the developed, in the Philippines Infrastructure is not a political issue, its to important for that.

------------------



Garpal Gumnut said:


> It's called slave labour, and corruption.
> 
> If your internet providing mates in the Philippines were paying taxes, and their workers were in a union, you wouldn't be able to get away with such cheap rates.
> 
> It sounds like exploitation to me.
> 
> gg




^ Its all true/real...just as my FTTH connection is.

Its partly cheap because the apartment developer did an exclusive deal with the Filipino equivalent of Telstra, 1200 units locked in to one provider, no choice what so ever...just happy that Fibre is my only choice.  the noalitions NBN is only going to give most Australians 1 choice, inferior Fibre/copper internet.


----------



## drsmith

Another piece in the puzzle on the issue of the rollout progress in Tasmania and the costs.

From Malcolm Turnbull,



> Prior to the election I said that the Coalition would ensure the NBN Co honoured all of its existing contractual obligations including those with respect to the Tasmanian rollout.
> 
> I also said that we did not have access to the terms of those contracts.
> 
> The NBN Co has advised me that it has a contract with Visionstream to run fibre past about 190,000 premises in Tasmania, of which around 18,000 have been already passed by Visionstream making a total of 32,000 passed in Tasmania.
> 
> That contract specifies certain rates at which Visionstream will be paid for its work.
> 
> I am advised by NBN Co  that Visionstream has slowed down its work considerably, passing only 2,000 premises since the 15 of July. The NBN Co further advises me that Visionstream now complains that the rate to which it previously agreed is too low and is not enough to enable it to get the job done.
> 
> Visionstream has asked the NBN Co to substantially increase the rate for this work - in other words it has asked for more money to complete the project.
> 
> The NBN Co is currently in commercial discussions with Visionstream about this matter and the Tasmanian rollout is receiving close consideration in the work on the Strategic Review.
> 
> Honouring an agreement means complying with its terms, but for a contract to be performed both sides have to be be prepared to do that.




http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/media/it-takes-two-to-tango-nbn-rollout-in-tasmania#.UnOcIDaQ9aQ


----------



## Shaker

Lol

Well I got a good look at the state of the copper network in my area today. My neighbor placed a fault with Telstra for a noisy line. I got home with safety fence around my pit and a contractor visible down the road.

I walked down to chat with him and he showed me the mess he was dealing with. Basically the joints have perished and they strip cables below the joint to access the pairs. They then wrap in see thru plastic tape and jobs done.

The contractor fixed the problem and explained he was not allowed to repair properly as he would not get paid for it.
I live in a new suburb which is 17 years old.

God help the Libs when they try their FTTN model. They are plain crazy to attempt it.

Shaker


----------



## drsmith

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...bn-rollout-risk/story-e6frgago-1226751590262#

I haven't seen the full article above from The Australian above, but the teaser is below.



> A CABINET briefing document obtained by The Weekend Australian confirms the Rudd government was aware of significant risks to the National Broadband Network rollout and that delays would strip $1.4 billion in revenues throughout the election campaign.
> 
> The document revealed an assessment by consultants KPMG -- who had been engaged by the then Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy Department -- warning that the ramp-up to achieve rollout targets was "presenting a significant risk to the project" and that this "has not been achieved in any international comparison". - See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/in-depth/labor-knew-of-nbn-rollout-


----------



## Whiskers

Shaker said:


> Lol
> 
> Well I got a good look at the state of the copper network in my area today. My neighbor placed a fault with Telstra for a noisy line. I got home with safety fence around my pit and a contractor visible down the road.
> 
> I walked down to chat with him and he showed me the mess he was dealing with. Basically the joints have perished and they strip cables below the joint to access the pairs. They then wrap in see thru plastic tape and jobs done.
> 
> The contractor fixed the problem and explained he was not allowed to repair properly as he would not get paid for it.
> I live in a new suburb which is 17 years old.
> 
> God help the Libs when they try their FTTN model. They are plain crazy to attempt it.
> 
> Shaker




Had the same experience, Shaker. Not good for the integrity of our telecommunications network... especially in times of disaster or user overload for whatever reason.



drsmith said:


> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...bn-rollout-risk/story-e6frgago-1226751590262#
> 
> I haven't seen the full article above from The Australian above, but the teaser is below.




Does _the ramp-up to achieve rollout targets was "presenting a significant risk to the project" and that this "has not been achieved in any international comparison"... _reflect on the wisdom of pushing the rollout too hard or more the particular way of the ramp-up?

What are the ramifications for Turnbull?


----------



## drsmith

The ramifications are that Malcolm Turnbull and the Liberal government will have to clean up this mess and that copper was going to remain a significant part of Australia's telecommunications network for a long time in any case because of the unrealistic nature of the FTTP rollout schedule.

That's not to say the Coalition won't face issues. They obviously will and it will be interesting to see how they manage them, in particular the concerns around the state of the copper network. If their handling of the boat arrival problem since coming to office is any guide, that at least offers confidence that they have both the willingness and capability to make the best of a bad situation.

It's now a waiting game to see what their reviews reveal.


----------



## drsmith

> A CABINET briefing document obtained by The Weekend Australian confirms the Rudd government was aware of significant risks to the National Broadband Network rollout and that delays would strip $1.4 billion in revenues throughout the election campaign.
> 
> The document revealed an assessment by consultants KPMG -- who had been engaged by the then Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy Department -- warning that the ramp-up to achieve rollout targets was "presenting a significant risk to the project" and that this "has not been achieved in any international comparison".




A bit more from the above article,



> The summary of a cabinet submission by then communications minister Anthony Albanese for the meeting scheduled for July 22 ... [said:] “Given existing delays and the emerging industrial issues, we consider the rollout forecasts are questionable...”
> 
> Mr Albanese was pressed during the election campaign on his knowledge of this corporate plan, notably in a debate on ABC’s Lateline program on August 12…
> 
> Lateline host Emma Alberici...) “Have you got a date for receiving it?”
> 
> “We have not received””well, that’s up to the board, but we have not received the final business plan,” said Mr Albanese.




http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...abor_kept_quiet_about_another_14_nbn_blowout/


----------



## drsmith

The full article from The Australian,



> A CABINET briefing document obtained by The Weekend Australian confirms the Rudd government was aware of significant risks to the National Broadband Network rollout and that delays would strip $1.4 billion in revenues throughout the election campaign.
> 
> The document revealed an assessment by consultants KPMG -- who had been engaged by the then Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy Department -- warning that the ramp-up to achieve rollout targets was "presenting a significant risk to the project" and that this "has not been achieved in any international comparison".
> 
> The summary of a cabinet submission by then communications minister Anthony Albanese for the meeting scheduled for July 22, a fortnight before the election was called, showed a revised corporate plan for the NBN would be considered. The NBN was to figure prominently in the campaign as a signature government policy.
> 
> "Given existing delays and the emerging industrial issues, we consider the rollout forecasts are questionable," the summary said. "Further delays will increase funding requirements for the project (existing three month delay cost $1.4 billion in lost revenue)." As well as saying that the planned ramp-up for the NBN had not been achieved in any comparable scheme overseas, the document raised significant questions about project financing.
> 
> "KPMG also advised there is a significant risk NBN Co will not be able to raise debt in 2015 without a government guarantee." This was despite the corporate plan assuming $590 million would be raised in that year.
> 
> Mr Albanese was pressed during the election campaign on his knowledge of this corporate plan, notably in a debate on ABC's Lateline program on August 12."Anthony is sitting on the latest corporate plan," said then opposition spokesman Malcolm Turnbull. "(He) has not released it to the public.
> 
> "Mr Turnbull pressed the then minister. "Well, why don't you produce the latest business plan? It's sitting on your desk. Why don't you produce it? The company gave it to you only a month or so ago."
> 
> "That's not right," responded Mr Albanese. "They have not produced the final business plan."
> 
> "Oh, I see," said Mr Turnbull. "You've made them keep the draft stamp on it so you don't have to give it out before the election."
> 
> "They have not produced the final business plan," replied the minister.
> 
> Lateline host Emma Alberici then intervened. "Have you got a date for receiving it?" she asked.
> 
> "We have not received -- well, that's up to the board, but we have not received the final business plan," said Mr Albanese.
> 
> The cabinet submission summary obtained by The Weekend Australian shows cabinet was to consider a revised plan three weeks earlier.
> 
> "We understand Minister Albanese proposes to refer the Corporate Plan back to NBN Co for further work," the document said, "and intends to bring back a revised Plan for Government consideration and release later in the year."
> 
> A leaked draft of the plan confirmed the hit to revenues of $1.4bn between 2011 and 2021, and showed the NBN Co expected it would need $1.6bn more funding.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

This is the stuff of Royal Commissions.

A waste of taxpayers money for wilful political gain.

Typical ALP stuff.

gg


----------



## drsmith

Garpal Gumnut said:


> This is the stuff of Royal Commissions.



I wonder where Myths is ??



> I’m a full-time professional firefighter, and I also run a photography business based in the Blue Mountains, west of Sydney.




http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/about/

Perhaps spring time is wedding season and business is booming,

http://www.australianimages.com.au/

It's good to see a small business thriving under a Coalition government.


----------



## DB008

MT is on 'Meet the Press' right now.

Have to say, MT seems fair. 

NBN Myths - my previous comments on rolling out the NBN to get a ROI still stands.

ALP caught with their pants down...again...


----------



## drsmith

DB008 said:


> MT is on 'Meet the Press' right now.



I'll be interested to watch that when it comes over here in the west.

On the topic of copper, there were a couple of articles out last week and within, what could be an answer to one question,



> Both global and local technology experts acknowledge the carrier’s decision to use thinner copper wiring in newer suburbs could reduce the maximum potential speeds by up to 10 per cent.




https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=800767

The Australian also had a piece on the Telstra/Alcatel-Lucent FTTN trials,



> In their trials, Telstra and Alcatel-Lucent used vectoring technology, which enables download speeds of up to 100Mbps on copper lines using noise-cancelling technology.
> 
> The trials, which began last month, aimed to showcase Telstra's credentials as a potential NBN construction partner.
> 
> Alcatel-Lucent said the results were consistent with its global experience of between 80Mbps and 100Mbps over 400m-500m of copper wire.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...its-100mbps-mark/story-e6frgaif-1226748468637


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=800767



Link correction,

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/telstra_copper_network_backed_to_cSAUUINnkDELhP7Hqa31KK


----------



## drsmith

Some insight into what the strategic review is likely to conclude,



> MALCOLM TURNBULL: Well, that’s what we’re assessing, Hugh. We’ve got a strategic review underway. In all of these fixed-line areas, people will get access to the NBN. It may not necessarily be with fibre to the premises. In fact, for most of the brownfield areas, it’s unlikely that it would be. I would like to build as much fibre to the premises as we could, but we’ve got to get the cost down. See, the problem with the project as it’s – as Labor framed it – they massively underestimated the cost, the complexity, and the time it would take to complete.




http://resources.news.com.au/files/2013/11/03/1226752/219012-meet-the-press-transcript.pdf


----------



## DB008

I like this bit...



> MALCOLM TURNBULL: Well, those householders were victims of Labor’s lies and spin
> about broadband. Labor invented all sorts of misleading metrics. Now, they had a metric
> which said that construction had commenced at the point plans were called for. So if I said to
> you, “I’ve started constructing my house,” you’d think there were actually builders on the
> site. This is the equivalent of saying you had started construction on a new house, from the
> moment you called your architect and asked her to do a sketch plan. So I’ll give you an
> example.
> *There was one area – about 3,000 premises in Prospect, in South Australia, in Kate
> Ellis’s electorate, in fact – where they said construction had commenced in April 2012.
> Well, it’s now November 2013. Nothing has happened. Nothing has happened. Not even the
> designs have been finalised.*
> So what we wanted to do, and what we will do, with the NBN is
> tell people the truth. We will build the NBN – we’ll construct it. Those – everyone will get
> access to the NBN. But I don’t want to have premises and areas on a map being promised a
> service when there is no – when we simply don’t know when it can be delivered. So, this –
> the whole culture at the NBN is changing. This is no longer about spin. It’s about fact. So we
> are stating where building work has actually commenced – where work is really being done.
> We’re speaking English, instead of Labor spin.


----------



## medicowallet

drsmith said:


> I wonder where Myths is ??




I wonder if he is riding around on trains with A/Prof Robots.

MW


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

drsmith said:


> I wonder where Myths is ??
> 
> 
> 
> http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/about/
> 
> Perhaps spring time is wedding season and business is booming,
> 
> http://www.australianimages.com.au/
> 
> It's good to see a small business thriving under a Coalition government.




He is gorne.



gg


----------



## drsmith

> A contract that was due to see the National Broadband Network (NBN) roll out across 190,000 premises in Tasmania is under review after *NBN Co revealed that the contractor, Visionstream, has been asking for more money to complete construction.*




Take that as it reads and it clear that like the rollout targets, the cost is going down the same path.

http://www.zdnet.com/au/visionstrea...t-terms-to-keep-tasmanian-rollout-7000022760/

My bolds.


----------



## So_Cynical

Probably time for a new thread to reflect the change of government.

NBN Rollout downsized and gutted.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> NBN Rollout downsized and gutted.



It was already that before the new government took office.


----------



## drsmith

The potential of what we knew was there,



> NBN Co has also said that asbestos-related delays could hit the financing arrangements for the nation's biggest infrastructure project.
> 
> "The presence - or potential presence of asbestos - could significantly increase network build costs as well as lead to potential litigation and related costs," NBN Co says.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...o-nbn-laid-bare/story-e6frgaif-1226753106046#


----------



## ghotib

drsmith said:


> I wonder where Myths is ??




http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/about/


> I’m a full-time professional firefighter, and I also run a photography business based in the Blue Mountains, west of Sydney.




Perhaps he's working a lot of overtime. Surely we haven't forgotten the most recent Blue Mountains fires already - they're not even out yet.


----------



## drsmith

ghotib said:


> http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/about/
> 
> Perhaps he's working a lot of overtime. Surely we haven't forgotten the most recent Blue Mountains fires already - they're not even out yet.



He could well have been holding the hose next to TA.

This though is interesting,

http://www.australianimages.com.au/opinion.php



> Whoops, something went wrong!
> 
> Sorry, but the page you requested doesn't exist. Please follow any of the links in the menu to navigate our site, or have a look at the site map below. If you still can't find what you're looking for, please feel free to contact us.




A few days ago, this opinion page on his photography business website had stuff about the NBN. Given the political nature of the NBN, it did cross my mind that mixing business and such an issue could potentially alienate a significant portion of his potential customer base to the extent they venture to that part of his business website.

Not any more. Perhaps he was reading my mind. 

EDIT: Although no longer directly through the opinion section, the prior NBN page on his business site though is still accessible.

http://www.australianimages.com.au/opinion/nbn.php


----------



## ghotib

drsmith said:


> This though is interesting,
> 
> http://www.australianimages.com.au/opinion.php
> 
> A few days ago, this opinion page on his photography business website had stuff about the NBN. Given the political nature of the NBN, it did cross my mind that mixing business and such an issue could potentially alienate a significant portion of his potential customer base to the extent they venture to that part of his business website.
> 
> Not any more. Perhaps he was reading my mind.




Perhaps his opinion responds to accurate information 

http://www.australianimages.com.au/opinion/index.php


----------



## drsmith

ghotib said:


> Perhaps his opinion responds to accurate information
> 
> http://www.australianimages.com.au/opinion/index.php



Perhaps it's a work in progress.


----------



## ghotib

drsmith said:


> Perhaps it's a work in progress.



The worthwhile ones usually are 

Just realised my previous response might have been more obscure than I intended. I meant that the opinion page seemed to be missing because the address in your post was incomplete.

Cheers


----------



## IFocus

So_Cynical said:


> Probably time for a new thread to reflect the change of government.
> 
> NBN Rollout downsized and gutted.




LOL wouldn't get a start, be claimed as a communist / socialist  plot

Excellent response by the way


----------



## IFocus

ghotib said:


> http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/about/
> 
> 
> Perhaps he's working a lot of overtime. Surely we haven't forgotten the most recent Blue Mountains fires already - they're not even out yet.





Thanks Ghotib your comments / thinking is / are a pleasant change from the usual dialogue in these threads


----------



## drsmith

ghotib said:


> Just realised my previous response might have been more obscure than I intended. I meant that the opinion page seemed to be missing because the address in your post was incomplete.



That address is what you get when you hit the Opinion option under the site title header.

It's a problem with the link in his site.


----------



## trainspotter

IFocus said:


> Thanks Ghotib your comments / thinking is / are a pleasant change from the usual dialogue in these threads




PM Ghotib next time. NBN is a grandiose scheme thought up by an inept MP on the back of a serviette at the tax payers expense. Ooooh dear ... asbestos in a Telstra communication pit. epic fail. Cant come to terms on a point of reference on a contract that will cost taxpayers 100 million $AUD. Brownfield layouts counted in as customer connections? Really is it that bad? Please people ... can we afford as a country to lay waste like this? All for high speed internet ... but at what cost ?


----------



## So_Cynical

trainspotter said:


> Really is it that bad? Please people ... can we afford as a country to lay waste like this? All for high speed internet ... but at what cost ?




I just finished a lovely HD video chat with my significant other in the Philippines...i should say HD from her end because the third world Fibre TTH connection she is using supports it.

From the Australian end the story is not so good, apparently we don't need common world standard internet...only in the developed world is basic infrastructure a political issue.


----------



## trainspotter

So_Cynical said:


> I just finished a lovely HD video chat with my significant other in the Philippines...i should say HD from her end because the third world Fibre TTH connection she is using supports it.
> 
> From the Australian end the story is not so good, apparently we don't need common world standard internet...only in the developed world is basic infrastructure a political issue.




All for the NBN So_Cynical at my end. It's got to be driven by rational economic criteria.

*THE Coalition has vowed to "depoliticise" the rollout schedule for the National Broadband Network after it emerged that NBN Co was instructed by Labor to make sure work was started in every federal electorate by the next election.*

The Australian can reveal that, earlier this year, the NBN Co received a letter from its then shareholder ministers - former communications minister Stephen Conroy and finance ministers Penny Wong - with the instruction to have started work in all electorates by mid-2016.

Yesterday new Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull said Senator Conroy "did have the electoral map" in mind when setting the design rules for Labor's network.

He also vowed that priority for the rollout under the Abbott government would be for areas with the worst services, following a review of broadband quality in all areas of Australia expected to be completed by the Department of Communications within the next 90 days.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...e-to-all-voters/story-e6frgaif-1226727265180#


----------



## trainspotter

Let's save 100 million now shall we?

*THE Coalition will consider a Tasmanian Labor government plan to pioneer a faster, cheaper rollout of the National Broadband Network using overhead cables, in a potential model for other states.*

Labor Premier Lara Giddings has pitched the scheme directly to Tony Abbott and Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull, who have agreed to consider a detailed proposal being prepared by the state-owned Aurora Energy.

The plan would complete the problem-plagued NBN rollout in Tasmania using Aurora's power poles, bypassing problems with asbestos in telecommunications pits and shaving an estimated $100 million from the $300m cost.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...heaper-nbn-plan/story-e6frgaif-1226753829038#


----------



## boofhead

During the initial annoucements of the fibre buildout it was said some could be above ground using power poles. Seems some officials have forgotten some things.

Some of the fibre deployment would have been a good time for a number of service suppliers and governments to better develop underground services - for example many powerlines are still above ground.


----------



## medicowallet

So_Cynical said:


> I just finished a lovely HD video chat with my significant other in the Philippines...i should say HD from her end because the third world Fibre TTH connection she is using supports it.
> 
> From the Australian end the story is not so good, apparently we don't need common world standard internet...only in the developed world is basic infrastructure a political issue.




I feel your pain.

May I ask how many $$ in exports you lost because of this travesty? 

Because really it is all about export dollars isn't it?

MW


----------



## drsmith

boofhead said:


> During the initial annoucements of the fibre buildout it was said some could be above ground using power poles. Seems some officials have forgotten some things.



Perhaps not quiet forgotten,



> THE Coalition will consider a Tasmanian Labor government plan to pioneer a faster, cheaper rollout of the National Broadband Network using overhead cables, in a potential model for other states.
> 
> Labor Premier Lara Giddings has pitched the scheme directly to Tony Abbott and Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull, who have agreed to consider a detailed proposal being prepared by the state-owned Aurora Energy.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...heaper-nbn-plan/story-e6frgaif-1226753829038#


----------



## drsmith

Malcolm Turnbull appoints internet entrepreneur Simon Hackett to NBN Co board,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-12/turnbull-announces-nbn-appointments/5085672

Simon Hackett was the author of the following,

http://simonhackett.com/2013/07/17/nbn-fibre-on-a-copper-budget/


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> Malcolm Turnbull appoints internet entrepreneur Simon Hackett to NBN Co board,
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-12/turnbull-announces-nbn-appointments/5085672
> 
> Simon Hackett was the author of the following,
> 
> http://simonhackett.com/2013/07/17/nbn-fibre-on-a-copper-budget/




WOW big move, the net community in general has a lot of respect for Simon.. i cant see him being a yes man to MT and i cant see him supporting FTTN, not after the fibre on a copper budget presentation...a simplified FTTP/H (without the dumbed down redundant systems) would be great.

-----------

Simon sold out of iinet about 3 months ago and pocketed something like 50m from memory...perhaps someone had already had a word with him about his future?


----------



## drsmith

This today in The Australian on fibre via the pole,



> ROLLING-OUT the National Broadband Network via overhead poles would be at least four to six times cheaper than the current underground method, according to a report sent to Malcolm Turnbull yesterday.
> 
> The brief - prepared by Tasmania's state-owned power company Aurora Energy - offers to set aside normal commercial objectives to provide NBN Co access to its poles under an existing agreement based largely on cost-recovery.
> 
> As well, the report rejects much of the criticisms of overhead rollout, being pushed as a faster, cheaper means of delivery fibre-optic cable nationally - the key aim of the Abbott government's NBN strategic review.
> 
> Aurora says there have been "little or no" complaints about the visual impact of the first stage of the rollout in Tasmania, composed of 90 per cent aerial cabling.
> 
> "It makes little difference to visual amenity," it says.
> 
> The report says this first stage has recorded no extra problems with service disruption due to the use of overhead infrastructure.
> 
> It explains that oft-cited downsides to aerial cabling, such as outages during bushfires and storms, cause an average disruption of three hours a year in the most vulnerable rural areas.
> 
> Labor Premier Lara Giddings, who commissioned the brief because she feared the trouble-plagued rollout would never be completed to the premise, yesterday sent it to Mr Turnbull, the federal Communications Minister.
> 
> "Aurora's opinion is that the NBN can be rolled out in Tasmania more quickly and at a lower cost through increased use of electricity power pole infrastructure," Ms Giddings told The Australian last night.
> 
> "It is estimated that a new underground build is at least four to six times the cost of an aerial build. Aurora has advised that this method of rollout could be facilitated under the existing commercial agreements in place between Aurora and NBN Co.
> 
> "I am encouraged by reports that Mr Turnbull is prepared to look favourably at the proposal. Aurora representatives are available to brief Mr Turnbull and NBN Co directly, should they require more information."
> 
> The 15-page report says by delivering fibre to the premises, rather than node, the aerial rollout would remove the $30 per-premise-per-year cost of maintaining old copper wiring.
> 
> Mr Turnbull has publicly accepted that aerial deployment is cheaper and simpler than underground, and has agreed to consider the Tasmanian proposal, being touted as potential national test-case for overhead rollout.
> 
> Last night, he forwarded the Aurora report to NBN Co for consideration.
> 
> "As Dr (Ziggy) Switkowski, NBN Co's executive chair, has said, there are no 'no-go' areas in the strategic review of the NBN," Mr Turnbull said through a spokesman.
> 
> The report says Aurora would not seek to takeover the rollout, which would continue to be completed by NBN Co's contractors, but rather make the poles and wires "rollout ready".




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...e-route-for-nbn/story-e6frgaif-1226760180929#


----------



## drsmith

On the rollout itself, approximately 8000 additional brownfields premises were passed on the week to Nov 3 and approximately 5000 in the week to Nov 10. Brownfields premises passed to Nov 10 is 242,211.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/weekly-progress-report.html

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco/documents/nbnco-rollout-metrics-10112013.pdf


----------



## Smurf1976

Aurora in Tasmania was building what became the NBN before the NBN as such existed and Aurora already has an operating fibre network serving a number of larger communications users.

They've had a few goes at the communications industry over the years, not always successful but things have been built and they work. It started out as a simple strategy to connect electrical sub-stations via a fibre network for electricity-related purposes and grew from there. If you're going to put a cable in, then most of the cost is getting that cable in place. So you might as well spend a bit more and get a bigger cable (more fibres) and go into the communications business as such. And so they did....

It turned into a bit of a moon shot aiming to compete with the big boys (Telstra) and the early network was built with a lot of goodwill and at low cost financially. I doubt we'll see any free labour on an actual NBN roll-out, but there's a bit of history to all of this and with a bit of luck it will happen.

Sure, it won't be perfect in some ways, but at least we might get an affordable working network installed before Telstra's copper falls in a heap. Aurora has a construction workforce, it has existing infrastructure both underground and overhead and it's government ownership gives it easy access to technical expertise and other resources within Transend (which also has potentially useful existing infrastructure) and Hydro / Entura as well so they have a good chance of actually completing the work in a sensible manner. 

There's also a currently unused underground conduit network owned by the Tas Govt in a few areas also. It was installed last decade when Tas Gas (a privately owned company, not government) was installing new gas pipes and follows the same route as the gas. The idea was always to use it for a "fibre to the home" project at a later date. It's limited in coverage, but it exists. Hobart City Council also has an empty underground network in parts of the city, installed during various roadworks with similar intentions regarding future use. There's also a fibre cable within the Vic-Tas power cable as well - it's privately owned but Hydro has a long term lease on it.

Put all that together and something might just happen....


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> When I was considering my business, I did due diligence, I worked out budgets, forecasts for potential circumstances, and took a conservative approach with my assumptions.
> 
> I thought I would break even between 1-3 years.
> 
> I happen to remember some people spruiking that the NBN will be fantastic with returns of blahblagblag, will rollout in whatever time, and with a takeup of humptydoo.
> 
> If Rudd hadn't made this up on the fly, perhaps proper planning would have been undertaken, and this bs waste of money wouldn't be such a cluster....
> 
> I do agree that it should have been rolled out in areas that would be most economically viable, you can blame Labor for that.
> 
> MW
> 
> Perhaps if you had ever achieved something of substance you would have less tolerance for incompetence?




The NBN has never been forecast to break even until 2021.

As Sydboy has stated, there is no similar project in history that could break even in 1-3 years. It takes a year before a started connection can be used, and generate any revenue whatsoever. A year 9 commerce student could understand that basic fact.




trainspotter said:


> PM Ghotib next time. NBN is a grandiose scheme thought up by an inept MP on the back of a serviette at the tax payers expense. Ooooh dear ... asbestos in a Telstra communication pit. epic fail. Cant come to terms on a point of reference on a contract that will cost taxpayers 100 million $AUD. Brownfield layouts counted in as customer connections? Really is it that bad? Please people ... can we afford as a country to lay waste like this? All for high speed internet ... but at what cost ?




The $100bn fantasy cost has long been debunked. While there are time delays, the NBN's fibre connection costs have come in on-budget. The only (minor) cost increase was lower revenue due to delays, not due to higher capex.




drsmith said:


> I wonder where Myths is ??
> 
> 
> 
> http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/about/
> 
> Perhaps spring time is wedding season and business is booming,
> 
> http://www.australianimages.com.au/
> 
> It's good to see a small business thriving under a Coalition government.






drsmith said:


> He could well have been holding the hose next to TA.
> 
> This though is interesting,
> 
> http://www.australianimages.com.au/opinion.php
> 
> 
> 
> A few days ago, this opinion page on his photography business website had stuff about the NBN. Given the political nature of the NBN, it did cross my mind that mixing business and such an issue could potentially alienate a significant portion of his potential customer base to the extent they venture to that part of his business website.
> 
> Not any more. Perhaps he was reading my mind.
> 
> EDIT: Although no longer directly through the opinion section, the prior NBN page on his business site though is still accessible.
> 
> http://www.australianimages.com.au/opinion/nbn.php





Have you been missing me?

Sorry, I don't get thread emails for some reason, and as someone suggested I've been a little busy for the last few weeks. My house is still standing, not so for ~half the street though.

I haven't deliberately changed the opinion page links on my site, although I did redo the CSS menu at the top a month back and perhaps put a broken link in there. I'll fix that for you ASAP.


----------



## NBNMyths

I suspect that (along with TA), Mal is discovering that criticising from opposition is far easier than actually getting something done.

Seems that British Telecom (who are currently rolling out FTTN) agree with my assessment that rolling out FTTN in Australia by 2016 will be an impossible task.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...-fttn-network-unlikely-start-rolling-out-2015



> The Coalition government’s planned Fibre to the Node (FttN) network is unlikely to start rolling out before 2015, potentially delaying its timetable of providing download speeds of between 25 and 100 megabits per second by the end of 2016 and 50 to 100 megabits per second by 2019.
> 
> The proposed FttN network will require the installation of approximately 50,000 to 60,000 nodes and a source told Technology Spectator that at best NBN Co could get 200 nodes rolled out a week.
> 
> With the rollout at scale expected to start around early 2015, *it could take NBN Co six years to roll the FttN network out at 200 nodes a week  *
> 
> It is understood that the 200 nodes a week figure was flagged by senior British Telecom executive Mike Galvin, who recently spent some time in Australia to advise NBN Co’s senior management and Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull.
> 
> NBN Co is currently conducting FttN trials (in lab) and field trials for Fibre to the Basement (FttB) services and the nodes won’t commence until next year.
> 
> Commencement of the actual rollout is dependent on a number of factors – the selection of the equipment (kit) vendor, the all-important Telstra renegotiation and the ACCC’s approval.




_(my bolds)_

And I repeat: There is not a snowball's chance in hell that Turnbull's promise of 100% of Australian premises having 25Mbps by end2016 will happen.

The question I have for you conservatives, is whether you will be as critical of the Coalition for their _poor management/fantasy timetable/lack of research/ignorance of professional opinion_ as you have been of the ALP? Or will all be forgiven?


----------



## medicowallet

Welcome back NBNMyths.

I note your attempt at a reply to one of my posts above. I wonder how this "break even" attempt is going.

I also would like your spin on

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...f-31bn-nbn-risk/story-e6frgaif-1226761478500#

Have a nice day

MW


PS   Also this has been out for ages, and I am sure you have watched this

BUT from 1:50 in this is the scary bit..  http://simonhackett.com/2013/07/17/nbn-fibre-on-a-copper-budget/


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Have you been missing me?



I have. 

It's also good to know your home survived intact. I also still think it's not a good idea to mix business and politics, but obviously what you do there is up to you.

Is your conclusion from the BS article above that it will take as long to roll out FTTN as it does FTTP ?


----------



## sails

NBNMyths said:


> ?..The question I have for you conservatives, is whether you will be as critical of the Coalition for their _poor management/fantasy timetable/lack of research/ignorance of professional opinion_ as you have been of the ALP? Or will all be forgiven?




Myths - glad to hear your house is standing...

I doubt the coalition would have started such an extravagant program in the first place but now they are left with the mess labor have given them to try and patch up. 

It's difficult to criticise them for trying to bring a better budget outcome while still attempting to complete a project somewhat already botched.

Never forget this was labor's extremely expensive hare-brained idea scratched out on a napkin in an aeroplane with a shocking price tag and cost benefit analysis kept secret from the public.  

So it is not a case of comparing apples with apples as much as you might want to paint it that way.


----------



## drsmith

sails said:


> I doubt the coalition would have started such an extravagant program in the first place but now they are left with the mess labor have given them to try and patch up.
> 
> It's difficult to criticise them for trying to bring a better budget outcome while still attempting to complete a project somewhat already botched.



This I suspect is what upsets Myths the most. He backed Labor's project to the hilt only to see it unravel.

Simply bagging the Coalition and those whom he regards as its supporters though isn't going to change that. In the end politically, it's not going to come down the exact parameters each party said they would deliver, but a comparison and on that, Labor's project has already stumbled at many hurdles. 

It wouldn't surprise me if the Coalition's end of 2016 date for 25mbps is revised down, but how many downward revisions did we have on the rollout targets with Labor's FTTP since it was announced ?

There's also the question of how the precise detail of the Coalition's rollout will look post its various reviews. Given his long and deep interest in the overall subject, it would be interesting to know Myths's views on Simon Hackett's appointment to the NBN Co. board.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> This I suspect is what upsets Myths the most. He backed Labor's project to the hilt only to see it unravel.




Unravel? huh WTF you talkin about?

The Noalition is unravelling it, destroying it with their half ass ideas and agendas.


----------



## drsmith

With the broader rollout currently proceeding as FTTP, we might still get some idea of how quickly it could have been delivered in this form.

The past two weeks have seen brownfields premises passed at the rate of approximately 8,000 and 5,000 per week respectively. That's an average of about 6,500 per week or 338,000 per year.

The past two weeks have also seen brownfields premises become serviceable at the rate of approximately 6,000 and 2,000 per week respectively. That's an average of about 4,000 per week or 208,000 per year.

The difference is service class zero which is described as follows,



> Service Class Zero refers to premises passed by the active network, but for which a service cannot currently be ordered from a telephone or internet service provider because additional work is required, for example because there is cabling required for an apartment block.




A question though is the extent to which apartment blocks passed in the above stats will ultimately get FTTP.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco/documents/nbnco-rollout-metrics-10112013.pdf

It will be interesting to see how these figures vary in the weeks ahead.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> I have.
> 
> It's also good to know your home survived intact. I also still think it's not a good idea to mix business and politics, but obviously what you do there is up to you.
> 
> Is your conclusion from the BS article above that it will take as long to roll out FTTN as it does FTTP ?




From a zero starting point, FTTN would be faster. But FTTP is already underway, and there will be considerable time lost to changing technologies, contracts etc. I suspect that from the current starting point, there would be little difference in time taken.



sails said:


> Myths - glad to hear your house is standing...
> 
> I doubt the coalition would have started such an extravagant program in the first place but now they are left with the mess labor have given them to try and patch up.
> 
> It's difficult to criticise them for trying to bring a better budget outcome while still attempting to complete a project somewhat already botched.
> 
> Never forget this was labor's extremely expensive hare-brained idea scratched out on a napkin in an aeroplane with a shocking price tag and cost benefit analysis kept secret from the public.
> 
> So it is not a case of comparing apples with apples as much as you might want to paint it that way.




You're missing the point. One of the coalition's key planks was that they would deliver the NBN faster, specifically 25mbps by 2016. Anyone with even the vaguest idea of the tech knew well before the election that such a promise was undeliverable, and said so. Why let him off that hook?

The ridiculous claims about the "plane flight" origin of the FTTP plan from conservatives must just sound good, because they are easily (and regularly) debunked. There have been many reports and studies presented to Government about going with FTTP. Even dating back to the Howard years. Once Telstra refused to play ball with FTTN in 2007, the govt were left with little choice but to go with the FTTP recommendations of all those experts and panels.

And despite what you may have read in The Australian, the NBN is hardly botched. The only real thing that's off-plan is the fibre rollout rate. The cost, performance, takeup, arpu are all going very well.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> This I suspect is what upsets Myths the most. He backed Labor's project to the hilt only to see it unravel.
> 
> Simply bagging the Coalition and those whom he regards as its supporters though isn't going to change that. In the end politically, it's not going to come down the exact parameters each party said they would deliver, but a comparison and on that, Labor's project has already stumbled at many hurdles.
> 
> It wouldn't surprise me if the Coalition's end of 2016 date for 25mbps is revised down, but how many downward revisions did we have on the rollout targets with Labor's FTTP since it was announced ?
> 
> There's also the question of how the precise detail of the Coalition's rollout will look post its various reviews. Given his long and deep interest in the overall subject, it would be interesting to know Myths's views on Simon Hackett's appointment to the NBN Co. board.




My point is that the Coalition and its supporters have loudly criticised the NBN for not meeting targets, yet the coalition's targets are even more unrealistic. Rather hypocritical.

I have said before that I didn't think the NBN was perfect. I believe I even provided a list of things that could be changed. The big one of those currently is FTTB for MDUs. I'm quite happy for that, and NBN co should have embraced it faster, because the distance issues of FTTN don't apply. But for detached houses, FTTP should continue. Installing 60,000 ugly, fridge size cabinets on footpaths, to install an obsolete, slow, power-hungry FTTN network is a Very Bad Idea, which we will regret in coming years.

I think Simon will be a good addition to the NBN board.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> My point is that the Coalition and its supporters have loudly criticised the NBN for not meeting targets, yet the coalition's targets are even more unrealistic. Rather hypocritical.
> 
> I have said before that I didn't think the NBN was perfect. I believe I even provided a list of things that could be changed. The big one of those currently is FTTB for MDUs. I'm quite happy for that, and NBN co should have embraced it faster, because the distance issues of FTTN don't apply. But for detached houses, FTTP should continue. Installing 60,000 ugly, fridge size cabinets on footpaths, to install an obsolete, slow, power-hungry FTTN network is a Very Bad Idea, which we will regret in coming years.
> 
> I think Simon will be a good addition to the NBN board.




I have little expertise in what you presently discuss.

Read the Australian today for a forensic account of this brainfart by Rudd and one of his ministers on the birth of the NBN.

It lacked startegic planning and proper governance and an adequate risk/benefit analysis from it's birth.

I see you as an apologist, attemting to confound members of ASF with technical jargon, when it is the business case that is moot.

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I have little expertise in what you presently discuss.
> 
> Read the Australian today for a forensic account of this brainfart by Rudd and one of his ministers on the birth of the NBN.
> 
> It lacked startegic planning and proper governance and an adequate risk/benefit analysis from it's birth.
> 
> I see you as an apologist, attemting to confound members of ASF with technical jargon, when it is the business case that is moot.
> 
> gg




It's a highly technical project. "Technical jargon" is at the crux of the debate. That's why it should be technical people making the decisions, not Australian journos. If you don't know the difference between FTTP, FTTB and FTTN, and you have no desire to learn the differences, advantages and disadvantages of each, then this is not a debate you should be participating in, any more than you'd participate in a debate of what type of asphalt the RTA are using to resurface the freeway.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> It's a highly technical project. "Technical jargon" is at the crux of the debate. That's why it should be technical people making the decisions, not Australian journos. If you don't know the difference between FTTP, FTTB and FTTN, and you have no desire to learn the differences, advantages and disadvantages of each, then this is not a debate you should be participating in, any more than you'd participate in a debate of what type of asphalt the RTA are using to resurface the freeway.




Your argument is similar to Coles deciding to sell exotic fruit, devoting 15% of sales area to exotic fruit, no ifs nor buts, without looking at the business case, risk, reward, dangers, opportunities.

You are arguing the succulence of Davondus Fruit versus Pinkallilly Pear.

It just ain't a goer, dollar wise.

OK.

gg


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> I have said before that I didn't think the NBN was perfect. I believe I even provided a list of things that could be changed. The big one of those currently is FTTB for MDUs.



With that and your approval of Simon Hackett on the board, there's perhaps a growing common ground between the Coalition and yourself.

As for FTTB, you might want to change the commentary on your site to better reflect where you now stand. 



> Why not FTTN?
> 
> Following the failure of the coalition broadband policy at the 2010 Federal Election, opposition spokesperson Malcolm Turnbull has begun strongly advocating a Fibre To The Node (FTTN) / Fibre To The Cabinet (FTTC) / *Fibre To The Basement (FTTB) alternative*, which he claims would be cheaper than the Fibre To The Premises (FTTP) NBN, but just as good. So, why not?




http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/why-not-fttn/

My bolds.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> With that and your approval of Simon Hackett on the board, there's perhaps a growing common ground between the Coalition and yourself.
> 
> As for FTTB, you might want to change the commentary on your site to better reflect where you now stand.
> 
> 
> 
> http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/why-not-fttn/
> 
> My bolds.



Perhaps I need to be clearer. My stance hasn't changed. I have always said that frustrated MDUs should get FTTB, because a stubborn body corporate shouldn't stand in the way of tennants getting decent broadband. But FTTP should be the primary objective, and made available if the body corporate doesn't stand in the way. While FTTB isn't as much of an issue as FTTN, it will still one day be the bottleneck. But giving them FTTN is better than nothing. The body corporate issue isn't an issue outside MDUs though, so there's no need to 'settle' for an inferior system. There's no legal impediment to connecting FTTP to detached dwellings, just as there's no legal impediment to running fibre into the basement of an mdu.

The "why not FTTN" page speaks about the plans as a whole, and I think I'll leave it as is.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Your argument is similar to Coles deciding to sell exotic fruit, devoting 15% of sales area to exotic fruit, no ifs nor buts, without looking at the business case, risk, reward, dangers, opportunities.
> 
> You are arguing the succulence of Davondus Fruit versus Pinkallilly Pear.
> 
> It just ain't a goer, dollar wise.
> 
> OK.
> 
> gg




I note NBNMyths you are unable, or choose not, to reply to my post.

You are too close to the Pinkallilly Pear.

Too far from the lack of a business case.

Suck on, brother.

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Your argument is similar to Coles deciding to sell exotic fruit, devoting 15% of sales area to exotic fruit, no ifs nor buts, without looking at the business case, risk, reward, dangers, opportunities.
> 
> You are arguing the succulence of Davondus Fruit versus Pinkallilly Pear.
> 
> It just ain't a goer, dollar wise.
> 
> OK.
> 
> gg






Garpal Gumnut said:


> I note NBNMyths you are unable, or choose not, to reply to my post.
> 
> You are too close to the Pinkallilly Pear.
> 
> Too far from the lack of a business case.
> 
> Suck on, brother.
> 
> gg




I didn't think it deserved a reply, but since you seem upset by that, here you go:

It's a ridiculous analogy.

The NBN has a business case.

Australia is near the bottom of the OECD broadband table. Numerous studies showed (and show) that Australians want better broadband, and support the NBN.

There are numerous studies from around the World as to the economic benefits of a super fast broadband network.

The takeup of the NBN is ahead of expectations, ahead of any similar project here or overseas. 10x higher than the takeup of ADSL was after a similar period of availability.

Takeup of the high-end NBN plans is about 3x higher than forecast, leading to the NBN having a higher ARPU (average revenue per user) than predicted, or required by the business case.


....suck on, brother....


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Perhaps I need to be clearer. My stance hasn't changed. I have always said that frustrated MDUs should get FTTB, because a stubborn body corporate shouldn't stand in the way of tennants getting decent broadband. But FTTP should be the primary objective, and made available if the body corporate doesn't stand in the way. While FTTB isn't as much of an issue as FTTN, it will still one day be the bottleneck. But giving them FTTN is better than nothing. The body corporate issue isn't an issue outside MDUs though, so there's no need to 'settle' for an inferior system. There's no legal impediment to connecting FTTP to detached dwellings, just as there's no legal impediment to running fibre into the basement of an mdu.
> 
> The "why not FTTN" page speaks about the plans as a whole, and I think I'll leave it as is.



Sitting on the fence with one leg either side doesn't become a valid stance after you've been seen in both paddocks.

There's nothing wrong with adjusting your point of view as new information comes to light. It might also help to understand that the view can be different in the absence of the prism of political bias.


----------



## sydboy007

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Your argument is similar to Coles deciding to sell exotic fruit, devoting 15% of sales area to exotic fruit, no ifs nor buts, without looking at the business case, risk, reward, dangers, opportunities.
> 
> You are arguing the succulence of Davondus Fruit versus Pinkallilly Pear.
> 
> It just ain't a goer, dollar wise.
> 
> OK.
> 
> gg




Sounds more comparable to the Coalition 88 pages of relatively useless information on their proposed FTTN.

No mention of maximum cable distance to support proposed speeds, no estimate of how many nodes would be required, no details on if nodes will need active cooling, heck not even a proposed audit of the copper network to see if it's actually feasible to use it for FTTN in the majority of locations.

I don't understand how you can say the Coalition plan is better when you freely admit you have no idea about the whole technology being proposed.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Sitting on the fence with one leg either side doesn't become a valid stance after you've been seen in both paddocks.
> 
> There's nothing wrong with adjusting your point of view as new information comes to light. It might also help to understand that the view can be different in the absence of the prism of political bias.




I think he's explained himself well enough.  He's always said fibre is the best way forward, but acknowledges that a majority of body corps are unable / unwilling to get their act together to enable fibre to be installed into the apartments, so FTTB is a reasonable compromise as it will likely be able to provide 100Mbs due to the short copper run.  Once NBN have the node installed in the basement, any delays are the body corps, not NBNs.  Gets them out of the stupid politics that seems to rule a lot of body corps these days.

I've come to the same conclusion.  You can lead a horse to water...


----------



## drsmith

In relation to MDU's, the following is perhaps worthy of review and in particular, Simon Hackett's response to a question at the end.

http://simonhackett.com/2013/07/17/nbn-fibre-on-a-copper-budget/


----------



## drsmith

NBN Co interim satellite service nearing capacity,



> NBN Co’s interim satellites are reaching full capacity and the government-owned company has started turning away new customers in rural Victoria. These customers must rely on existing broadband infrastructure until NBN Co launches two custom-made satellites in 2015.
> 
> Satellite beams covering NSW, Tasmania and Queensland were also close to capacity, while those covering central and western Australia had some space left.
> 
> NBN Co only has enough space for 48,000 customers nationally on its interim satellite and has already connected 42,044 premises, according to figures released this week.




http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/government-it/nbn-satellites-near-full-capacity-20131115-hv2m5.html


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> NBN Co interim satellite service nearing capacity,
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/government-it/nbn-satellites-near-full-capacity-20131115-hv2m5.html




That was always going to be the case, I think. NBN said long ago that they'd purchased as much capacity as they could do economically.

The interesting thing is that it was only 18 months ago that Turnbull was whinging about NBN co buying/launching their own satellites, because "there was no need", saying they could lease enough space on existing sats. Now here we are less than half way to the new sat launches, and the capacity he thought would be adequate for decades is almost gone.

Who could have predicted that people would make more use of the internet.....


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> NBN Co interim satellite service nearing capacity,
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/government-it/nbn-satellites-near-full-capacity-20131115-hv2m5.html




Just remembered this from April:
http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_co_admits_satellite_limits_vP1IRqqloKsyyQz4LrAlZL

I expect given Hartsuyker's comments at the time, that the Coalition will insist NBN co fund more (expensive) interim bandwidth to keep the interim sat service open? He said at the time: _“Quite clearly the demand for the service is there and you shouldn’t be discriminated against by virtue of where you live in the interim rollout,” Mr Hartsuyker said. “They should be able to access it and the NBN Co and the government should acquire the necessary capacity to keep the program open until the satellite service is operational.”_


Or will this be another case of gum-flapping in opposition failing to translate to doing something in Government?


----------



## drsmith

Perhaps Myths you can also remind us as to the rollout targets from the various past NBN Co's Corporate Plans and how well they've correspond to what's actually happened.

More realistically though, there comes a point where it's just time to move on.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Perhaps Myths you can also remind us as to the rollout targets from the various past NBN Co's Corporate Plans and how well they've correspond to what's actually happened.
> 
> More realistically though, there comes a point where it's just time to move on.




I will (and have previously) acknowledged that they had delays in the rollout, for assorted reasons.

But your point is a red herring. I am moving on. Moving on to the new Government's policy, their promises while in opposition and their ability to deliver on them. Perhaps you should do the same.

You insisted that Labor's NBN rollout be held to account. You should now do the same for the coalition's version. You should demand that they honour their pre-election commitments, and that they deliver on their targets. Excusing Turnbull based on claims of alp failure does you no good. He should be judged against his own policies and promises.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> I will (and have previously) acknowledged that they had delays in the rollout, for assorted reasons.
> 
> But your point is a red herring. I am moving on. Moving on to the new Government's policy, their promises while in opposition and their ability to deliver on them. Perhaps you should do the same.
> 
> You insisted that Labor's NBN rollout be held to account. You should now do the same for the coalition's version. You should demand that they honour their pre-election commitments, and that they deliver on their targets. Excusing Turnbull based on claims of alp failure does you no good. He should be judged against his own policies and promises.



Moving on to the new Government's policy ??

You started going on about it when it was initially released.

In the end, it wont be about me or you. The Coalition's delivery will ultimately be compared to Labor's and the final chapter on their rollout is yet to be written. That's the comparison that will matter in the eyes of the electorate.

What possible changes (if any) do you think Simon Hackett might bring ?


----------



## infamous

> *Coalition's FttN network unlikely to start rolling out before 2015*
> 
> The Coalition government’s planned Fibre to the Node (FttN) network is unlikely to start rolling out before 2015, potentially delaying its timetable of providing download speeds of between 25 and 100 megabits per second by the end of 2016 and 50 to 100 megabits per second by 2019.
> 
> The proposed FttN network will require the installation of approximately 50,000 to 60,000 nodes and a source told Technology Spectator that at best NBN Co could get 200 nodes rolled out a week.
> 
> With the rollout at scale expected to start around early 2015, it could take NBN Co six years to roll the FttN network out at 200 nodes a week
> 
> It is understood that the 200 nodes a week figure was flagged by senior British Telecom executive Mike Galvin, who recently spent some time in Australia to advise NBN Co’s senior management and Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull.
> 
> NBN Co is currently conducting FttN trials (in lab) and field trials for Fibre to the Basement (FttB) services and the nodes won’t commence until next year.
> 
> Commencement of the actual rollout is dependent on a number of factors – the selection of the equipment (kit) vendor, the all-important Telstra renegotiation and the ACCC’s approval.



www.businessspectator.com.au/news/2...-fttn-network-unlikely-start-rolling-out-2015


----------



## NBNMyths

And what's happened to "Mr Transparency"? Remember when he likened the NBN to the Kremlin, compaining about the lack of information?

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po.../gag-on-turnbull-briefing-20131116-2xnw4.html



> The department led by Malcolm Turnbull - who last year said NBN Co was more secretive than the Kremlin - has refused to release its briefing to the new government under freedom of information laws.





http://delimiter.com.au/2013/11/18/delimiter-appeal-turnbulls-blue-book-censorship/



How the mighty have fallen.


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> And what's happened to "Mr Transparency"? Remember when he likened the NBN to the Kremlin, compaining about the lack of information?
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po.../gag-on-turnbull-briefing-20131116-2xnw4.html
> 
> http://delimiter.com.au/2013/11/18/delimiter-appeal-turnbulls-blue-book-censorship/
> 
> How the mighty have fallen.




aAAAAAHHHHHHHHH It was not "Mr Transparency" that blocked the release. it was this fellow:-

Andrew Madsen, Assistant Secretary of the Department’s Governance Branch.

This is his reason:-

“Disclosure of the confidential briefs would undermine the ability to develop and build an effective and productive working relationship between the Department and the Government in accordance with the long-standing conventions ofresponsible parliamentary government. The incoming government briefing represents the first exchange of advice between a department and an incoming Minister and as such, it has a unique status in forming the relationship oftrust and confidence between the Department and Minister.”

“The potential for this particular advice to be disclosed could result in the Department being drawn into public controversy and potential conflict with the Minister early in the term ofthe new government. Such an outcome could cause lasting damage to the relationship between the Department and the Minister, which could be detrimental to the effective operation ofthe government.”

Still I have to agree with you NBNMyths ...... looks like a duck, walks like a duck, must be a duck !


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> aAAAAAHHHHHHHHH It was not "Mr Transparency" that blocked the release. it was this fellow:-
> 
> Andrew Madsen, Assistant Secretary of the Department’s Governance Branch.
> 
> This is his reason:-
> 
> “Disclosure of the confidential briefs would undermine the ability to develop and build an effective and productive working relationship between the Department and the Government in accordance with the long-standing conventions ofresponsible parliamentary government. The incoming government briefing represents the first exchange of advice between a department and an incoming Minister and as such, it has a unique status in forming the relationship oftrust and confidence between the Department and Minister.”
> 
> “The potential for this particular advice to be disclosed could result in the Department being drawn into public controversy and potential conflict with the Minister early in the term ofthe new government. Such an outcome could cause lasting damage to the relationship between the Department and the Minister, which could be detrimental to the effective operation ofthe government.”
> 
> Still I have to agree with you NBNMyths ...... looks like a duck, walks like a duck, must be a duck !




Oh, I see. It's all the bureaucrats' fault now, but it wasn't back in the ALP days? Back then it was the Ebil Gubment blocking "all the info"? Except that they did release the 2010 book though.

Riiiiiiight.


1. You think "his fellow" has been sitting on the FOI request for 2 months, and has not once discussed its prospective release with his boss?

2. There's nothing stopping Turnbull from releasing it with or without an FOI request. So why doesn't he?


I suspect given the "reason" for not releasing it is that the brief will contain some rather damaging advice to Mr Turnbull. Something along the lines of _"You plan is crap, and it cannot be delivered as you have promised"_.


----------



## trainspotter

NBNMyths said:


> Oh, I see. It's all the bureaucrats' fault now, but it wasn't back in the ALP days? Back then it was the Ebil Gubment blocking "all the info"?
> 
> Riiiiiiight.
> 
> 1. You think "his fellow" has been sitting on the FOI request for 2 months, and has not once discussed its prospective release with his boss?
> 
> 2. There's nothing stopping Turnbull from releasing it with or without an FOI request. So why doesn't he?
> 
> 
> I suspect given the "reason" for not releasing it is that the brief will contain some rather damaging advice to Mr Turnbull. Something along the lines of _"You plan is crap, and it cannot be delivered as you have promised"_.




Ermmmmmmm you seem to be missing the point here a tad. The "Blue Book" in question was requested PRIOR to the Liberal government taking office. This was rejected.

The "NEW" request now that he is in government is still being considered.



> Delimiter’s FoI request on this issue ”” funded by readers through a crowdfunding request on Pozible ””* is still progressing*. However, last week the Department made a separate decision on a separate FoI request with relation to the same document ”” Turnbull’s Blue Book. That application was received before Delimiter’s,* in the caretaker period before the election*, and so has been processed earlier.




Possible due to the amount of information required (545 pages of it) a considered approach is justifiable rather than a bull at a gate stampede? 2 months compared to 6 YEARS is a BIG difference.

Riiiiiiight.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> Ermmmmmmm you seem to be missing the point here a tad. The "Blue Book" in question was requested PRIOR to the Liberal government taking office. This was rejected.
> 
> The "NEW" request now that he is in government is still being considered.
> 
> 
> 
> Possible due to the amount of information required (545 pages of it) a considered approach is justifiable rather than a bull at a gate stampede? 2 months compared to 6 YEARS is a BIG difference.
> 
> Riiiiiiight.




Perhaps you don't understand.

It was _requested_ during the caretaker mode, but _rejected_ last week.

The next request in line is the same as the rejected one, and is expected to be rejected on the same grounds. We shall see. Perhaps the negative publicity around the first rejection will change his mind, but given our new Govt's aversion to releasing information on anything, I'm not hopeful.


----------



## trainspotter

Since when has it been a governments policy to release information under the FoI PRIOR to them even obtaining office? Malcolm Turnbull asked for transparency from the previous government for 6 years and not much was released if in fact anything of consequence at all?

Mebbe Andrew Madsen, Assistant Secretary of the Department’s Governance Branch, might change his mind now the blowtorch of "transparency" is arced up? Like you said ... we will have to wait and see on this matter. Much ado about nothing much thus far IMO.

IF the "Blue Book" is continued to remain in the vault, THEN let's release the hounds.


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> Moving on to the new Government's policy ??
> 
> You started going on about it when it was initially released.
> 
> *In the end, it wont be about me or you. The Coalition's delivery will ultimately be compared to Labor's and the final chapter on their rollout is yet to be written. That's the comparison that will matter in the eyes of the electorate.*
> 
> What possible changes (if any) do you think Simon Hackett might bring ?




Ultimately this will take 15+ years to gauge.  IMO considering the intended dates and costings Labor's NBN would have been considered a failure because of the blowouts, it would be many years later when all though still considered a failure it would be the failure we had to have.

Given the rapid expansion of the internet and bandwidth requirements it's inevitable that in the not to distant future that FTTN will be insufficient.  By this stage a large digital divide will have occurred and most regional areas won't receive FTTH that their metropolitan counterparts will have due to the economic viability to the private sector.  Now people such as yourself will never support a tax payer funded infrastructure project to upgrade these homes because it will now be even more unviable as there will be no profitable areas left to hedge the project like there is today. What is your solution for when this time comes? Are you banking on wireless or some other cheap alternative to be suitable by then?


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> Ultimately this will take 15+ years to gauge.  IMO considering the intended dates and costings Labor's NBN would have been considered a failure because of the blowouts, it would be many years later when all though still considered a failure it would be the failure we had to have.
> 
> Given the rapid expansion of the internet and bandwidth requirements it's inevitable that in the not to distant future that FTTN will be insufficient.  By this stage a large digital divide will have occurred and most regional areas won't receive FTTH that their metropolitan counterparts will have due to the economic viability to the private sector.  Now people such as yourself will never support a tax payer funded infrastructure project to upgrade these homes because it will now be even more unviable as there will be no profitable areas left to hedge the project like there is today. What is your solution for when this time comes? Are you banking on wireless or some other cheap alternative to be suitable by then?



People such as myself ??

What about people such as Simon Hackett ?

You quoted the question in your response. Do you wish to offer any insight or just be another that condemns the Coalition from the outset ?


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> People such as myself ??
> 
> What about people such as Simon Hackett ?
> 
> You quoted the question in your response. Do you wish to offer any insight or just be another that condemns the Coalition from the outset ?




Sorry I didn't mean anything personal by that just rather that you have been quite the critic of the FTTH NBN and in my scenario if you don't support the business model now where the city funds regional NBN that will eventually pay itself off then I can't see how you will support the roll out of the last mile in 15+ years to the remainder of the country that has been deemed economically unviable by the private sector but requires an upgrade.

Simon Hackett already has many idea's to reduce the cost of FTTH "*Removing the so-called NBN connection boxes are one of the many ways Internode founder Simon Hackett believes the NBN could be rolled out cheaper*."  http://www.zdnet.com/direct-fibre-could-make-nbn-cheaper-hackett-7000018165/

 If the board were able to make a few compromises here and there to reduce the cost of the roll out while still maintaining FTTH then I guess everyone could be somewhat satisfied as it appears a compromise needs to be made. 

I can't speak for everyone but it's not that I have a problem with the Coalition but I have a fundamental problem with their infrastructure project that uses the aging copper.  Considering the position I believe the internet will be in 15+ years in Australia I'm sure you can appreciate my pessimism regarding their NBN as I believe its shortsighted.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> Sorry I didn't mean anything personal by that just rather that you have been quite the critic of the FTTH NBN and in my scenario if you don't support the business model now where the city funds regional NBN that will eventually pay itself off then I can't see how you will support the roll out of the last mile in 15+ years to the remainder of the country that has been deemed economically unviable by the private sector but requires an upgrade.
> 
> Simon Hackett already has many idea's to reduce the cost of FTTH "*Removing the so-called NBN connection boxes are one of the many ways Internode founder Simon Hackett believes the NBN could be rolled out cheaper*."  http://www.zdnet.com/direct-fibre-could-make-nbn-cheaper-hackett-7000018165/
> 
> If the board were able to make a few compromises here and there to reduce the cost of the roll out while still maintaining FTTH then I guess everyone could be somewhat satisfied as it appears a compromise needs to be made.
> 
> I can't speak for everyone but it's not that I have a problem with the Coalition but I have a fundamental problem with their infrastructure project that uses the aging copper.  Considering the position I believe the internet will be in 15+ years in Australia I'm sure you can appreciate my pessimism regarding their NBN as I believe its shortsighted.



My criticism has not been so much one of FTTH but rather, its deliverability under Labor's model anywhere remotely within the specified parameters. Over time, this criticism has been borne out with the ongoing delays that have occurred in the rollout schedule in particular. What the Coalition in government ultimately achieve in my view needs to be seen in that light. Labor gave hope and in that context and in a purely technological sense, the Coalition's solution is lacking. The problem though with the hope Labor gave is that it was false.

The basic element of the Labor model (NBN Co) however will remain and at that level, their proposition will be preserved. Whilst obviously not unimportant, the rest is detail. In that sense, the Coalition's policy response released earlier this year needs to be seen not as a final end point to the last detail, but rather as a foundation to what they think should be built and that is the foundation of broader technological consideration than Labor was prepared to consider. An opposition does not have the resources of government to formulate policy detail to the detail that a government does.

Simon Hackett's appointment to the board of NBN Co is a sign to me that The Coalition and Malcolm Turnbull are genuinely technology agnostic. If not, why would he join ?

Whilst looking through the front flap of the Coalition's tent, I would suspect Simon Hackett has seen that it won't be full FTTP as he would prefer, but has seen enough to want to go in. At the same time, The coalition has seen fit to welcome him in. While there's obviously not a lot of common ground between the opposing viewpoints on this thread, there's obviously a common ground between Simon Hackett and the Coalition and that's an encouraging sign in my view. Myths, despite his otherwise staunch criticism of the Coalition on this issue also sees this as a positive and looking forward has much that is positive to offer this discussion given his technological interest. Much more than I could in that specific area I would say.


----------



## NBNMyths

trainspotter said:


> Since when has it been a governments policy to release information under the FoI PRIOR to them even obtaining office? Malcolm Turnbull asked for transparency from the previous government for 6 years and not much was released if in fact anything of consequence at all?
> 
> Mebbe Andrew Madsen, Assistant Secretary of the Department’s Governance Branch, might change his mind now the blowtorch of "transparency" is arced up? Like you said ... we will have to wait and see on this matter. Much ado about nothing much thus far IMO.
> 
> IF the "Blue Book" is continued to remain in the vault, THEN let's release the hounds.




Everything you've written in that post is utterly false.

Nobody is suggesting they release info prior to gaining office. But they're now in office, and the decision to refuse the FOI request was done well after they assumed power (~7 weeks). They didn;t get the blue book until they came into power. That's the whole point of the book!


The NBN is the most scrutinised GBE in Australia, being subject to Senate Estimates hearings and its own dedicated parliamentary committee. It was also legislated to be subjected to FOI laws (even though GBEs are usually exempt).

There are numerous FOI documents on the NBN Co website from the last several years, if you care to look.

The "red book" (ie the 2010 version of the Blue Book) was released under FOI.


----------



## drsmith

Under the contract with Telstra, the copper is cut but the NBN still can't be connected.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-18/nbn-areas-in-limbo/5100668


----------



## So_Cynical

Hate to keep banging on about this but 

This is the speed test of my Third world FTTH connection  2.91 on a 3 Mbps connection, with 0 ping to boot...more than 5 times faster than my DSL2 inner suburban Sydney connection.
~


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Your argument is similar to Coles deciding to sell exotic fruit, devoting 15% of sales area to exotic fruit, no ifs nor buts, without looking at the business case, risk, reward, dangers, opportunities.
> 
> You are arguing the succulence of Davondus Fruit versus Pinkallilly Pear.
> 
> It just ain't a goer, dollar wise.
> 
> OK.
> 
> gg






sydboy007 said:


> Sounds more comparable to the Coalition 88 pages of relatively useless information on their proposed FTTN.
> 
> No mention of maximum cable distance to support proposed speeds, no estimate of how many nodes would be required, no details on if nodes will need active cooling, heck not even a proposed audit of the copper network to see if it's actually feasible to use it for FTTN in the majority of locations.
> 
> I don't understand how you can say the Coalition plan is better when you freely admit you have no idea about the whole technology being proposed.




My point was that the very birth of the NBN was a brainfart between Conroy and Rudd on a plane, designed on the back of a coaster.

There was very poor governance in it's inception, and that continues. 

It was rolled ot too quickly without a cost benefit analysis taking in to account risks and benefits.

A political decision to spend taxpayers money on a grand scheme does never give me a sense that if it was their money, would they have spent it.

The progress of this pup of a project merely gives weight to my argument.

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Under the contract with Telstra, the copper is cut but the NBN still can't be connected.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-18/nbn-areas-in-limbo/5100668




Well, that's stupid. Obviously if there are people on a migration waiting list, then the copper should remain active until they are switched over.

Having said that though, why did the example in the story wait until "the last minute" to call and switch over? As I understand it, the only areas currently being switched are the three trial areas which have now been active for almost 3 years. They were warned over a year ago that the copper switchoff would occur this year.


----------



## medicowallet

Garpal Gumnut said:


> It was rolled ot too quickly without a cost benefit analysis taking in to account risks and benefits.
> 
> gg




Careful GG.  People who like to theorise rather than do will be all over that comment.  However, as people with experience know, actions/results speak louder than words.

MW


----------



## drsmith

Dr Ziggy Switkowski, executive chairman of NBN Co, during Budget Estimates at Parliament House,



> NBN Co is unlikely to switch construction to a fibre-to-the-node model until late 2014 due to the complexity of changing the network architecture, the company’s executive chairman told a Senate estimates committee.
> 
> Getting every premises connected to speeds of at least 25 megabits per second [Mbps] by the end of 2016, as promised by the Coalition during the last election, was a "very, very tight timetable", Ziggy Switkowski said on Tuesday night. Meanwhile, NBN Co would keep installing fibre all the way into households throughout 2014.
> 
> "One key advantage of fibre to the node is that the network can be built and completed more quickly and less intrusively and less expensively than an all fibre network," Dr Switkowski said.
> 
> "So yes, fibre-to-the-node should see us provide [broadband] access to Australians at the 25 Mbps level faster than virtually any other fixed network option. The transition ... to a fibre-to-the-node architecture will take most of next calendar year to execute. So we will be fibre-to-the-premises from now well into next year, and then you could say the starting date for fibre-to-the-node at scale will be quite late next year. So to have until to the end of 2016 is a very, very tight timetable."
> 
> Mr Switkowski added that changes to NBN Co's construction maps since the change of government did not mean households previously slated for a fibre to the home connection would no longer receive one. The government-owned company recently changed its maps by removing premises where construction was due to start within one or three years, and now only shows premises where services were available or construction was physically underway
> 
> "That is just a way of presenting data. Nothing changed. The only thing that changed was the way in which we were reporting the roll out," Dr Switkowski said.
> 
> Changing the maps also did not "create expectations that NBN Co struggled to meet".
> 
> "Rather than making promises to pass as many houses as possible with an operational model that has clearly struggled, my priority is to fix the model itself," Dr Switkowski said.
> 
> Under questioning from Labor Senator Kate Lundy, Dr Switkowski defended recent arrival of several former Telstra executives at NBN Co, including himself, saying Telstra was one of the few organisations in Australia that "produce the range of skills that building this network requires".
> 
> There had been too few ex-Telstra executives working under former NBN Co chief executive Mike Quigley, Dr Switkowski said later in the hearing, and too few people with knowledge of Australia’s construction industry.
> 
> Senator Lundy and Greens Senator Scott Ludlam also questioned NBN Co about the of state Telstra’s copper network and whether this infrastructure was fit for use in a fibre-to-the-node network. The node-based network uses up to several hundred metres of existing copper wires running from each premises up to the node, rather than replacing the entire copper wire with fibre optic cable.
> 
> Dr Switkowski said there were already millions of people using Telstra’s copper network for broadband and the fault rate on its network this year was "maybe higher than it was when I was at Telstra, but not materially".  He added that many faults in 2013 were caused by wetter than usual weather and if individual copper wires were unusable they would be replaced with fibre.
> 
> Dr Switkowski refused to say what potential copper network remediation costs would be because this was "commercially sensitive" information that would be part of NBN Co’s renegotiations of its deal with Telstra.
> 
> NBN Co's new chief operating officer Greg Adcock confirmed NBN Co would test parts of Telstra's copper underground network before it made any definite moves to a fibre to the node network.
> 
> "The current thinking is that there would be testing done. Whether it informs the strategic review or whether the strategic review makes some assumptions to be then tested, I think that is the way we would frame it at this point," Mr Adcock said.
> 
> Meanwhile, Dr Switkowski warned the committee about over-estimating Australians' need for faster download and upload speeds.
> 
> "I would be very careful about making decisions today that have associated with them enormous costs and enormous execution challenges because we think that in ten years time there are going to be particular applications that will require just that form of delivery," he said.




http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...timetable-very-very-tight-20131119-hv3lt.html


----------



## drsmith

Rollout update for the week to November 17,



> A total of 4217 additional lots/premises were passed/covered by the network during the week, of which 2566 were in Brownfield and 1152 were in Greenfield areas. Fixed wireless coverage increased by 499 premises. There was an increase of 4506 in the number of serviceable premises in Brownfield areas. During the week an additional 2,498 premises had services activated on the network, including 1942 on fixed line services and 556 using satellite and fixed wireless technologies.




In the past 3 weeks, a total of 15,379 brownfield premises were passed (ave 5,126/week) and 12,536 (ave 4,179/week) became serviceable. Totals now are 244,777 brownfields passed and 171,248 serviceable. At the present rate (averaged over the last 3 weeks), we would see approximately 410,000 brownfield premises passed by June 30 2014. 5,126/week equates to approximately 270,000 per year.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/weekly-progress-report.html

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco/documents/nbnco-rollout-metrics-17112013.pdf


----------



## drsmith

Rollout update for the week to November 24,



> A total of 6760 additional lots/premises were passed/covered by the network during the week, of which 5198 were in Brownfield and 865 were in Greenfield areas. Fixed wireless coverage increased by 697 premises. During the week an additional 2988 premises had services activated on the network, including 2111 on fixed line services and 877 using satellite and fixed wireless technologies.




In the past 4 weeks, a total of 20,577 brownfield premises were passed (ave 5,144/week) and 14,284 (ave 3,571/week) became serviceable. Totals now are 249,975 brownfields passed and 172,996 serviceable. At the present rate (averaged over the last 4 weeks), we would see approximately 410,000 brownfield premises passed by June 30 2014. 5,144/week equates to approximately 270,000 per year.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/weekly-progress-report.html

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco/documents/nbnco-rollout-metrics-24112013.pdf


----------



## IFocus

Looks like the Coalition wrecking ball will work wonders on the NBN




> Leaked NBN Co document downgrades revenue projections by up to 30pc
> 
> Leaked internal analysis from the NBN Co downgrades revenue projections for the Government's broadband policy by up to 30 per cent by 2021, Fairfax newspapers report.
> 
> The draft document identifies problems with the rollout of the Coalition's network to provide fibre to the street corner.
> 
> The document says the change from Labor's fibre-to-the-home plan will affect the rollout timetable and the promised speeds for users.
> 
> It says it is unlikely NBN Co will meet the 2016 deadline, promised before the election for voters to have minimum download speeds of 25 megabits per second.


----------



## NBNMyths

Gee, who could have seen this coming? I guess now we know why Turnbull didn't want the Blue Book released....



> The Coalition’s national broadband network model will prove *inadequate for many businesses*, is *poorly planned* and is *unlikely to be completed on time*, according to NBN Co’s internal analysis for the incoming Abbott government.
> 
> Obtained by Fairfax Media, the analysis casts doubts over the timing and cost-effectiveness of the government’s proposed fibre-to-the-node model, highlighting numerous legislative, construction and technical challenges likely to blow out the Coalition’s 2016 and 2019 delivery deadlines.
> 
> The draft document also *slashes revenue projections important for the project’s commercial viability* by up to 30 per cent by 2021.




More details:
http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...-meet-coalitions-deadline-20131128-hv3tp.html


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Gee, who could have seen this coming? I guess now we know why Turnbull didn't want the Blue Book released....
> 
> More details:
> http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...-meet-coalitions-deadline-20131128-hv3tp.html



That 30% revenue difference to 2021 is in accordance with the Coalition's own projections associated with the release of its FTTN plan earlier this year when compared to NBN Co's 2012 corporate plan. 

The above Blue Book analysis was also prepared under Mike Quigley's stewardship. We all know how accurate his corporate plans for NBN Co itself have been.  

Of interest, I recently had the chance to have a chat with a Telstra technician repairing a broken copper line across the road. His view on the copper network is that some of it is good that some of it isn't. That I suppose we know. Where it became more interesting was where he talked about some sort of glue that had been used in some pits several years ago to repair leaks. What was interesting was that he said that if the glue itself continuously came into contact with water, it would turn to acid and that was, well, not good. He also commented that in relation to asbestos remediation of Telstra's pits, there are now 5 people on site instead of two previously and that as a result, there's a significant additional cost, some of which at least is at NBN Co's expense.

As part of his repair, he also inspected a Telstra pit on the street. It's in a location where regular inundation occurs after heavy rain and upon lifting the top, it was clear that the pit itself was not watertight and judging by the dirt stain inside, water had in the past entered the pit. The wires though were further sealed inside the pit itself and upon inspection of that, the seal appeared effective (surfaces inside were clean and neat). He said the contents therein were in good condition. What struck me was how quickly the pit could be inspected for water damage at the very least.

My conclusion from the above discussion is that it's not all beer and skittles with the state of the copper network, but then it's not all gloom and doom either.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> That 30% revenue difference to 2021 is in accordance with the Coalition's own projections associated with the release of its FTTN plan earlier this year when compared to NBN Co's 2012 corporate plan.
> 
> The above Blue Book analysis was also prepared under Mike Quigley's stewardship. We all know how accurate his corporate plans for NBN Co itself have been.
> 
> Of interest, I recently had the chance to have a chat with a Telstra technician repairing a broken copper line across the road. His view on the copper network is that some of it is good that some of it isn't. That I suppose we know. Where it became more interesting was where he talked about some sort of glue that had been used in some pits several years ago to repair leaks. What was interesting was that he said that if the glue itself continuously came into contact with water, it would turn to acid and that was, well, not good. He also commented that in relation to asbestos remediation of Telstra's pits, there are now 5 people on site instead of two previously and that as a result, there's a significant additional cost, some of which at least is at NBN Co's expense.
> 
> As part of his repair, he also inspected a Telstra pit on the street. It's in a location where regular inundation occurs after heavy rain and upon lifting the top, it was clear that the pit itself was not watertight and judging by the dirt stain inside, water had in the past entered the pit. The wires though were further sealed inside the pit itself and upon inspection of that, the seal appeared effective (surfaces inside were clean and neat). He said the contents therein were in good condition. What struck me was how quickly the pit could be inspected for water damage at the very least.
> 
> My conclusion from the above discussion is that it's not all beer and skittles with the state of the copper network, but then it's not all gloom and doom either.




I've heard about that glue/sealant before.

There shouldn't be any additional cost to NBN Co for the extra people, because as part of the Telstra deal, it is Telstra (and Telstra alone) responsible for the remediation of the pits to make them suitable for NBN use. If the additional personnel story is true, then one may assume it's costing Telstra more than they budgeted for remediation. I would hypothesise that if FTTP continues, then Telstra would have to wear that cost. But if the deal is renegotiated for FTTN, then Telstra would try to recoup that additional cost during the negotiations. 

No doubt there are sections of the copper network that are fine. Particularly newer sections. But you can bet there is a _lot_ that's in very poor condition. I think I've mentioned before that my line speed doubled when Telstra were forced to replace the copper in my street last year after it was melted by a power line fall. And my subdivision was only developed in the '70/80s, has excellent drainage and the line to my house is 10yrs old. what of the areas 40-50 years older, in flood-prone, clay or corrosive environments?

A friend who lives 5km from me (same exchange, but in the other direction) rang me last night to ask if my internet was OK, because his (and his neighbours) has slowed to a crawl since the rain 2 weeks ago. His house (and infill subdivision) is only 2 years old.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> There shouldn't be any additional cost to NBN Co for the extra people, because as part of the Telstra deal, it is Telstra (and Telstra alone) responsible for the remediation of the pits to make them suitable for NBN use.



The Telstra contractor was quiet adamant that where the remediation work was in relation to the NBN, the NBN will bare some of the additional cost. Is this particular element of the contract publically available? It would be interesting to see. 

He also offered some other overall insights. He advised that schools in the area were already connected by fibre and in relation to where I am, an FTTN node would be installed where there is currently a Telstra pillar (between the exchange and a school) where the fibre is already present. I didn't think to ask at the time, but perhaps the above kind of site makes the ideal FTTN test site.

The suburb I'm in was developed from about 1970. The Telstra tech dated the pit as being from the 1960's.

In relation to the current Senate hearing is the following article on costs,

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...witkowski-admits/story-e6frgaif-1226771322297


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> That 30% revenue difference to 2021 is in accordance with the Coalition's own projections associated with the release of its FTTN plan earlier this year when compared to NBN Co's 2012 corporate plan.
> 
> The above Blue Book analysis was also prepared under Mike Quigley's stewardship. We all know how accurate his corporate plans for NBN Co itself have been.
> 
> Of interest, I recently had the chance to have a chat with a Telstra technician repairing a broken copper line across the road. His view on the copper network is that some of it is good that some of it isn't. That I suppose we know. Where it became more interesting was where he talked about some sort of glue that had been used in some pits several years ago to repair leaks. What was interesting was that he said that if the glue itself continuously came into contact with water, it would turn to acid and that was, well, not good. He also commented that in relation to asbestos remediation of Telstra's pits, there are now 5 people on site instead of two previously and that as a result, there's a significant additional cost, some of which at least is at NBN Co's expense.
> 
> As part of his repair, he also inspected a Telstra pit on the street. It's in a location where regular inundation occurs after heavy rain and upon lifting the top, it was clear that the pit itself was not watertight and judging by the dirt stain inside, water had in the past entered the pit. The wires though were further sealed inside the pit itself and upon inspection of that, the seal appeared effective (surfaces inside were clean and neat). He said the contents therein were in good condition. What struck me was how quickly the pit could be inspected for water damage at the very least.
> 
> My conclusion from the above discussion is that it's not all beer and skittles with the state of the copper network, but then it's not all gloom and doom either.




The sealant issue has been well know for many years.  What's really bad is that the watered down sealant can work it's way a long way through a sealed cable, where bacteria will eat it and the by product is an acid that corrodes the copper.  This kind of damage is very hard to get repaired.  it can also cause intermittent problems which are even harder to get fixed.

Telstra management basically threatened techs with job losses if they didn't use the sealant, even though they had been advised many times that it was causing major issues.

So much of it was used over so much of the copper that it would be hard to not find damage due to it in most suburbs Australia wide.

As for your pit inspection, it's a major component of the copper network, but if you could see the cable details from Telstra systems you'd be amazed at how many joints a run can have.  I was working on a 2KM ULL yesterday and it had around 9 or 10 "segments" in it, some just 6-16 meters long.

Ziggy has been doing his best to talk up the value of the copper network.  It's going to be an interesting 2014 to see  how much the Government is going to have to pay for it.  Till then, no FTTN rollout is likely to occur.  

Since this Government considers everything is now a state secret, I doubt we'll ever know.


----------



## Smurf1976

sydboy007 said:


> TTelstra management basically threatened techs with job losses if they didn't use the sealant, even though they had been advised many times that it was causing major issues.
> 
> So much of it was used over so much of the copper that it would be hard to not find damage due to it in most suburbs Australia wide.



This is what happens when "manager" managers get involved in engineering. 

In any technical organisation (communications, power, anything like that) you have basically three types of managers. Those who are former techs / engineers and who move into manangement. Those who are career mangers but who focus on management as such. Those who are career managers and who poke their noses into practically everything in order to "put their mark on it". 

Suffice to say that the first two both have thier merits and there's a place for both in such an organisation. But the latter type tend to be brilliant at making the (financial) books look good in the short term whilst leaving a disastrous legacy of technical and workforce capability destruction in their wake which costs a fortune to fix when the inevitable happens.

For reasons I've never really understood, these micro-manager types seem to love grabbing hold of anything that someone outside the organisation promotes as a good idea. A salesman turns up, offers something, and they insist that it be implemented across the entire asset base as quickly as possible. They seem to see it as some sort of goal to be adopting whatever is the latest trend, regardless of whether it's any good or not.

I've never worked for Telstra, but I've worked under all 3 manager types on various occasions. Been there, seen what happens and it never turns out well when those who don't know anything about technical aspects start calling the shots right down to the finest detail. I mean seriously, you have a manager specifying the type of sealant to be used? That's likely a symptom of some far bigger problems within Telstra I'd expect.

The whole NBN project has essentially become subject to this style of management via the political process. It's not being built based on sound engineering in order to deliver some specified outcome. Rather, it's a case of non-technical people deciding the major engineering elements, and the actual engineers and techs then being left to make the best of it.

Politics aside, the best and most sensible approach would be to put a group of engineers etc in charge of the whole project. Get them to come up with cost estimates for various specified outcomes (connection speed and % of population covered) and leave them to decide the technical means of achieving it with government making a final decision based on cost, speed and coverage only without reference to the means of delivery.

For what it's worth, such a group of engineers would most likely end up deciding to build a fibre network but to do so over a longer timeframe which itself would achieve significant economies. In any of these projects, it's basically a tradeoff between time, quality and cost. So long as government is focused on almost impossibly short times, it then ends up as a tradeoff between quality and cost. Labor wanted high quality and high cost, Liberal seems to prefer lower quality and lower cost. But there's nothing to prevent us building a high quality, lower cost network if we take a more realistic view of the time required.

Personally, I'd do a proper job (fibre network) and build it to the majority of the population over roughly 7 years with the rest ("difficult" sites) being picked up over the following 3 years. Some pain in the short term, it takes a bit longer, but we end up with a world class network as opposed to one that will be second rate and the cost wouldn't be that much different.


----------



## drsmith

For anyone interested, there's 10 hours of video from Senate hearings on the NBN from Thursday and Friday.

http://parlview.aph.gov.au/browse.php?tab=senate

Obviously not what everyone would regard as essential viewing, but I've watched some of Friday's with Ziggi effectively in the dock. The questions from that session initially are quiet anal, but it does get more interesting, both in terms of the questions and the answers. There's food for thought there in relation to both models although the Senators themselves are pursuing from a somewhat partisan perspective. 

There's also no ads but there's the occasional 10-minute intermission to have a pee and top up the caffeine.


----------



## drsmith

Food for thought in terms of projections and rollout rates for both sides but in particular for Labor's FTTP.

http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...t-dose-of-rollout-reality-20131202-hv3xi.html

At the present rate of premises passed (averaged over the past 4-weeks), FTTP wouldn't be complete until at least 2040.

--------------------------------------------------------------

On the strategic review, the AFR this morning has this,



> Sources close to a strategic review being prepared for Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull by NBN Co say it will push for wider use of the *copper network, a change that would provide slower internet access to millions of Australians than foreseen in the Coalition’s original plan. By limiting more fibre to “nodes”, or cabinets on street curbs, instead of direct to buildings, NBN could deliver big financial savings for the project, which is now budgeted at around $20 billion.
> 
> “They want to bring the fibre down, not up,” a source said. “They’re aware that doing 2.8 million homes directly with fibre is still a huge project.”




In light of the Telstra tech suggesting a node at the pillar in my local area, How many pillars are there in Telstra's network Australia wide ?

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_review_expected_to_push_for_ULqXPzh5MZDnxHaPzxiCcN


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> In light of the Telstra tech suggesting a node at the pillar in my local area, How many pillars are there in Telstra's network Australia wide ?
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_review_expected_to_push_for_ULqXPzh5MZDnxHaPzxiCcN




From memory there's around 100,000 though not all will get a node.

Current best estimates are 50-75K nodes required.  So far the Coalition have not released the maximum cable length used in their costings document pre election for either 25Mbs or 50Mbs.

I don't envy whoever has to fight the local councils and electricity companies to get each one sited and connected to the power.  BT has complained that it can cost anywhere between 2000 and 25000 pounds to get a node connected to the power.  I'm sure similar issues will occur here.

Then we have the issue where you might think you're 200M from the pillar but your cable run is in fact 800M.  There's going to be lots of mini nodes required, which will bump up the cost yet again, or might be installed in lieu of replacing poor quality copper if it's cheaper in the short term.


----------



## Calliope

Smurf1976 said:


> Personally, I'd do a proper job (fibre network) and build it to the majority of the population over roughly 7 years with the rest ("difficult" sites) being picked up over the following 3 years. Some pain in the short term, it takes a bit longer, but we end up with a world class network as opposed to one that will be second rate and the cost wouldn't be that much different.




Opinions vary on what is a "proper job".




> A FIBRE-ONLY NBN would face greater data congestion during peak load periods than a copper, fibre-to-the-node network promoted by the Coalition, a key proponent of DSL technology told The Australian yesterday.
> 
> *John Cioffi, an electrical engineer, is credited with original DSL designs and the new vectored VDSL that offers fast internet over twisted-pair cabling. He is referred to in some circles as "the father of DSL".
> 
> "There's no argument anywhere in the world" against Australia embracing fibre-to-the-node, he said.*
> 
> *Dr Cioffi, a speaker at the NBN: Rebooted conference in Sydney, firmly advocates vectored DSL technology and fibre-to-the-node models for handling peak load needs.
> 
> Dr Cioffi is chief executive and chairman of ASSIA, which develops software management for DSL and WiFi. He predicts that the typical family of four will have around 50 devices in their home in 2022 compared with the current 10.
> 
> But fibre-to-the-premises may not cope with an influx of devices as the signal was carried on a PON (passive optical network).
> 
> He said PON fibre cables in the street carried the data traffic of a group of residents and when you tapped into that network, the data in your cable included neighbours' traffic.*
> 
> "They branch off the fibre to your home and connect that way. And basically you receive all of your neighbour's signals as well as your own, and that raises security issues, because it is possible to decode if you have their passwords and so forth and it's not encrypted," Dr Cioffi said.
> 
> Your fibre installation was "supposed to pick off yours and only your signal and deliver it to you inside the home", he said.
> 
> In contrast, FTTN and high-speed vectored DSL over copper offered "individual connections".
> 
> "The good news is when you do that, you have individual connections now from the presumably higher-speed fibre driven to the cabinet, and you don't run into the data sharing problems that you do with fibre PONs today, when they have as many as 32 - sometimes in some case more than that - residences sharing the PON."
> 
> *Dr Cioffi said vectored DSL technology offered 100 megabits per second reliably over copper for 600m to 1km in ideal conditions. Faster speeds of up to 1 gigabit over 200m would be possible in future with the G.Fast protocol, but it wasn't standardised yet.
> 
> Dr Cioffi said United Arab Emirates was the only country to fully connect by fibre. It cost $8000 per customer.
> 
> "There is no other country that has more than 10 per cent."
> 
> NBN Co yesterday wouldn't buy into which technology better handled peak load situations.
> 
> "Both fibre and advances in copper are capable of delivering large amounts of data to people's homes," a spokesman said.*




- See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/tec...y-fn4iyzsr-1226762786837#sthash.ZQg4FwLx.dpuf


----------



## So_Cynical

You wont see this on the news, in question time today TA called the NBN a white Elephant..seriously.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

It is my firm opinion that the only people to have benefited from the NBN Mark 1 , would it have been spotty teenage boys downloading pr0n.

The speeds are way above what we need for Commerce or Education.

It was a thought bubble from the worst ever ALP administration ever in our history.

Rudd and Co. will be haunted by the launch of the NBN, and its' demise.

It is being scrapped, and it is proper that it should be.

gg


----------



## sydboy007

Calliope said:


> Opinions vary on what is a "proper job".




I have issue with 

_Dr Cioffi said vectored DSL technology offered 100 megabits per second reliably over copper for 600m to 1km in ideal conditions. Faster speeds of up to 1 gigabit over 200m would be possible in future with the G.Fast protocol, but it wasn't standardised yet._

* I've yet to see any real world trials in Australia showing these speeds.

* Pretty much everything I've read so far seems to indicate 100Mbs is achievable to about 600M, though most talk around 500M maximum cable length.  Results from the UK and NZ have so much variability in them I don't know how you're supposed to advertise a product.

* Upload speeds of FTTN will limit the ability to work from home, and especially for small business that need a decent  10Mbs+ upload speed to successfully integrate into the supply lines of the large companies.

* If we exclude MDUs, since they will most likely get FTTB, the number of dwellings within a 200M cable run - note this is the FULL cable run all the way to the wall socket - would be rather small.  The current FTTN offers this service to all fibre connected customers.  How much extra does it cost to upgrade nodes to G.Fast?  Vendors will likely charge an upgrade fee, that's IF the hardware can be upgraded via software.  How many years before it's a global standard and commercial product?  How well does it work on degraded copper?  Most of the  results you hear about are in ideal lab conditions with new copper.


----------



## sydboy007

Garpal Gumnut said:


> It is my firm opinion that the only people to have benefited from the NBN Mark 1 , would it have been spotty teenage boys downloading pr0n.
> 
> The speeds are way above what we need for Commerce or Education.
> 
> It was a thought bubble from the worst ever ALP administration ever in our history.
> 
> Rudd and Co. will be haunted by the launch of the NBN, and its' demise.
> 
> It is being scrapped, and it is proper that it should be.
> 
> gg




http://www.zdnet.com/the-12-labours...n-18-months-to-meet-2019-deadline-7000023789/

From what I can tell Abbott and Turnbull didn't think about any of these issues while they had 3 odd years to formulate their node fridge plan.

2014 will be node fridge policy on the run.


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> I have issue with
> 
> _Dr Cioffi said vectored DSL technology offered 100 megabits per second reliably over copper for 600m to 1km in ideal conditions. Faster speeds of up to 1 gigabit over 200m would be possible in future with the G.Fast protocol, but it wasn't standardised yet._




Of course you do, it doesn't match your anti-Turnbull ideology. But I think Dr Cioffi has more credibility in this field than you.


----------



## drsmith

NBN strategic review to be released by year end.

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/coalition_to_release_nbn_review_Ikw4y5dtQ4olVOhwfE06SN


----------



## drsmith

Malcolm Turnbull has advised in Parliament today that the strategic review will be released next week. He also advised that the fibre rollout by June 30 2014 will be approximately 20% of that forecast in the 2010 corporate plan.

The 2010 Corporate plan forecast a total 2,711,000 premises passed with fibre by the above date.


----------



## So_Cynical

More industry opinion that the combination of Telstra, Nodes, Copper, Fibre and the NBN =  a dogs breakfast.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/12/03/junior_telcos_tie_knot_in_nbn_co_copper_plan/


----------



## sptrawler

More evidence that most don't give a rats ar$e about it.

http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/nbn-connections-available-but-take-up-slow-20131205-hv4kg.html


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> More evidence that most don't give a rats ar$e about it.
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/nbn-connections-available-but-take-up-slow-20131205-hv4kg.html




Considering a lot of internet customers are on 2 year contracts you might have to wait 12 months from active promotion of NBN in a particular area before you start to see people being able to sign up for an NBN plan.

The take up rates in the early areas seem to have been quite high.  My parents were in the first release of Kiama Downs / Minnamurra and the take up rate is well over 50% now.  Wilunga has a similar profile.  The avg is around a third of premises in each live NBN that's been active for at least 12 months.  Seems a reasonable rate of consciously choosing to get onto the NBN.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> More evidence that most don't give a rats ar$e about it.
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/nbn-connections-available-but-take-up-slow-20131205-hv4kg.html




Evidence of what?


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> Considering a lot of internet customers are on 2 year contracts you might have to wait 12 months from active promotion of NBN in a particular area before you start to see people being able to sign up for an NBN plan.
> 
> The take up rates in the early areas seem to have been quite high.  My parents were in the first release of Kiama Downs / Minnamurra and the take up rate is well over 50% now.  Wilunga has a similar profile.  The avg is around a third of premises in each live NBN that's been active for at least 12 months.  Seems a reasonable rate of consciously choosing to get onto the NBN.




Even at a 50% uptake it shows that the general public aren't breaking their necks to get it on. 
You can talk it up as much as you like, however most will only put it on if it is cost neutral and or there is no alternative, i.e greenfield sites.
If the general population were desperate to get the NBN, they would pay for the connection. But as can be seen by the takeup, the majority aren't putting it on even when it is a free connection.
Meanwhile we scratch around to find money for health, education and infrastructure.


----------



## overhang

sptrawler said:


> Even at a 50% uptake it shows that the general public aren't breaking their necks to get it on.
> You can talk it up as much as you like, however most will only put it on if it is cost neutral and or there is no alternative, i.e greenfield sites.
> If the general population were desperate to get the NBN, they would pay for the connection. But as can be seen by the takeup, the majority aren't putting it on even when it is a free connection.
> Meanwhile we scratch around to find money for health, education and infrastructure.




Well we're not building the NBN for today we are building it for the 10+ years when it will be required.  And the 50% figure seems quite a subjective matter of judgement, bit of a glass half full half empty. If you consider the amount of people that would be under existing contracts then it seems a respectable figure.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Even at a 50% uptake it shows that the general public aren't breaking their necks to get it on.
> You can talk it up as much as you like, however most will only put it on if it is cost neutral and or there is no alternative, i.e greenfield sites.
> If the general population were desperate to get the NBN, they would pay for the connection. But as can be seen by the takeup, the majority aren't putting it on even when it is a free connection.
> Meanwhile we scratch around to find money for health, education and infrastructure.




The takeup of the NBN is higher than any similar project worldwide, including the takeup of the internet (dialup), ADSL and cable broadband. It's faster than the take-up of iPods, smart phones, 3G broadband, 4G broadband.

Like absolutely every technology, the takeup of the NBN follows the standard bell curve, and it's currently well ahead of that curve.

So I'm not sure how you think that story is evidence of any sort of NBN failure. There is nothing in the history of industry that has enjoyed instant take-up, from the automobile to the computer. There is *always* a curve.

I'm curious..... If you'd been the boss of Telstra spending a few billion rolling out ADSL nationwide in the early 2000's, would you have continued the rollout upon being told that less than 2% of eligible customers had taken up a service after 12 months? Because that's what the takeup was back then. Makes the NBN look rather spectacular by comparison. Yet where would we be today if the Telstra people hadn't understood the adoption curve?

The test of the NBN will be the takeup in ~10 years. And just like the internet, broadband and smart phones, I suspect that you'll be wondering in 10 years time how you ever did without 50Mbps+ broadband speeds.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> The takeup of the NBN is higher than any similar project worldwide, including the takeup of the internet (dialup), ADSL and cable broadband. It's faster than the take-up of iPods, smart phones, 3G broadband, 4G broadband.
> 
> Like absolutely every technology, the takeup of the NBN follows the standard bell curve, and it's currently well ahead of that curve.
> 
> So I'm not sure how you think that story is evidence of any sort of NBN failure. There is nothing in the history of industry that has enjoyed instant take-up, from the automobile to the computer. There is *always* a curve.
> 
> I'm curious..... If you'd been the boss of Telstra spending a few billion rolling out ADSL nationwide in the early 2000's, would you have continued the rollout upon being told that less than 2% of eligible customers had taken up a service after 12 months? Because that's what the takeup was back then. Makes the NBN look rather spectacular by comparison. Yet where would we be today if the Telstra people hadn't understood the adoption curve?
> 
> The test of the NBN will be the takeup in ~10 years. And just like the internet, broadband and smart phones, I suspect that you'll be wondering in 10 years time how you ever did without 50Mbps+ broadband speeds.




As I've said endlessly, there is nothing wrong with the ideology of the NBN, however in my humble opinion there are more pressing infrastructure projects that require the money.
Obviously you feel the introduction of ultra high speed internet to the home, is in some way going to transition our economy to a new era.
I feel we are going to be caught between a rock and a hard place, as resource based construction slows and manufacturing declines, our lifestyle is going to be difficult to fund.
You throw up the examples of the ipad, smart phone 3g 4g, how wonderfull, yet it is just a consumable that requires the user to pay for usage. It doesn't add anything to the economy, it produces nothing, just uses up a section of the consumer pie.
Unless we start and think about making money with what we have to sell, we are going to find ourselves a third world economy with a great internet system.
Somewhat like the Phillipines, one of our members says they have a great internet system. I would rather have our living standard , than their internet speed. 
I also don't see their living standard improving, despite having a high speed internet in place.
By the way, you would probably find our take up of fast food has been faster than anywhere else in the world also.lol


----------



## So_Cynical

Speedtest.net results show *Australia in 48th* and 96th spot for download and upload speed, respectively



			
				speedtest.net said:
			
		

> Internet metrics company, Ookla, has ranked Australia 48th for download speed and 96th for upload speed in its most recent Net Index which covers tests recorded on Speedtest.net from June 3, 2011, to December 2, 2013.
> 
> Based on the tests, the average Australian download speed is 14.36 megabits per second (Mbps), equivalent to 1.795 megabytes per second (MBps). *This places Australia on par with Slovenia* and the Isle of Man.




http://www.arnnet.com.au/article/533403/ookla_net_index_delivers_verdict_australian_internet_speed/

Pathetic.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> Pathetic.



That's what you get from 6 years of Labor in office.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> That's what you get from 6 years of Labor in office.




Seriously a decade of Howard's nothingness...and you know it, like everyone knows it...a decade of dithering followed by 6 years of Labor catchup that led to an over reach.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> Seriously a decade of Howard's nothingness...and you know it, like everyone knows it...a decade of dithering followed by 6 years of Labor catchup that led to an over reach.



As much as you would like to, you can't blame the Howard government for the problems Labor had in office. They covered the full spectrum, from warped ideology, broad scale policy failure and of course the internal problems within the party itself that led to two leadership changes while on office.


----------



## IFocus

So_Cynical said:


> Seriously a decade of Howard's nothingness...and you know it, like everyone knows it...a decade of dithering followed by 6 years of Labor catchup that led to an over reach.




I think with a bit of effort the Coalition should get us down to carrier pigeons, sure to attract  business capital with those.


----------



## drsmith

Rollout update for the week to December 1,



> A total of 8270 additional lots/premises were passed/covered by the network during the week, of which 5278 were in Brownfield and 860 were in Greenfield areas. Fixed wireless coverage increased by 2132 premises. During the week an additional 2887 premises had services activated on the network, including 2147 on fixed line services and 740 using satellite and fixed wireless technologies.




In the past 5 weeks, a total of 25,855 brownfield premises were passed (ave 5,171/week). The past two weeks have each been steady at around 5,250 per week.

Since June 30 2013 (22 weeks), a total of 91,738 brownfield premises were passed (ave 4,170/week).

The rollout has passed approximately 255,253 brownfield premises. At 5,171 brownfields per week from now, it will pass approximately 410,000 by June 30 2014.

Greenfields passed is 27,516 since June 30 for an average of 1,251 per week. Total greenfields is now 71,544 and the total fibre passed footprint is now 326,797. At 6,500 per week, the fibre passed footprint will reach approximately 522,000 by June 30 2014.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/weekly-progress-report.html

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco/documents/nbnco-rollout-metrics-01122013.pdf


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> Malcolm Turnbull has advised in Parliament today that the strategic review will be released next week. He also advised that the fibre rollout by June 30 2014 will be approximately 20% of that forecast in the 2010 corporate plan.
> 
> The 2010 Corporate plan forecast a total 2,711,000 premises passed with fibre by the above date.



For comparison with above figures, that 20% would represent 542,200 premises.

In its FTTN plan earlier this year, the Coalition forecast 565,000 brownfields and 134,000 greenfields passed by June 30 2014 so the outcome looks like being even worse than that forecast.


----------



## sptrawler

drsmith said:


> For comparison with above figures, that 20% would represent 542,200 premises.
> 
> In its FTTN plan earlier this year, the Coalition forecast 565,000 brownfields and 134,000 greenfields passed by June 30 2014 so the outcome looks like being even worse than that forecast.




My property and the two next door still aren't connected. Actually the person next door asked "what is the new box on my house" lol
I said "it's the nbn"
She said "I don't want gas, it's dangerous".lol
Really this is as GG would say, a thought bubble.
Not everyone, is as enarmoured with the internet as some would have us believe. At this point in time.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> As much as you would like to, you can't blame the Howard government for the problems Labor had in office. They covered the full spectrum, from warped ideology, broad scale policy failure and of course the internal problems within the party itself that led to two leadership changes while on office.




No, but that's not what he was blaming on Howard. He was blaming him for the pathetic state of our broadband, and on that he's 100% correct.

From the inept privatisation of Telstra as a vertical monopoly, through the appointment of the "three amigos" and letting them get away with their ADSL2 rort and attempted FTTN rorts, through to the umpteen failed broadband policies over their time in office. The Howard Govt is totally responsible for the current atrocious state of the country's broadband networks, which Labor had to try and fix.

From the late 90's and through the 2000's as developed countries around the World rolled out FTTP and FTTN networks, we did absolutely nothing. If the Howard Govt had done the right thing in office, then we'd already have FTTN (or better), and we'd be looking towards an FTTP upgrade like so many in the OECD.


----------



## drsmith

Myths,

From where we stand now, what's your judgement on Labor's performance in this area ?


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Myths,
> 
> From where we stand now, what's your judgement on Labor's performance in this area ?




I'd think I'd give them a B.

Going back to where this all began in 2007....

They went in with a policy of FTTN. But that was scuttled by Telstra's left-over management, leaving them few options to go forward with. They could go with FTTP, or stick to FTTN at what probably would have been around the same cost ($35bn), based on the $20bn figure to buy the copper (quoted in the 4 corners report).

So FTTP it was, along with wireless and satellite.

On the implementation of the NBN....


The choice of technologies:
Fibre is still the undisputed king of capability for urban/suburban areas, and is the preferred choice worldwide for greenfields, and in many countries for brownfields too (with FTTN being chosen in other countries by incumbent carriers for cost reasons). Let's not forget that NBN Co is not an incumbent carrier, and does not own a copper network with which to build FTTN. I'm pretty sure that there's nowhere in the World where a non-incumbant is rolling out FTTN. It remains to be seen how much (an admittedly friendlier) Telstra will charge NBN Co for access to their copper network. I would have liked Labor/NBN Co to be more open to FTTB for frustrated MDUs. Despite the wireless fanbois vocal opposition to fibre, there's still no country on the planet proposing to deploy wireless in lieu of fixed in metro areas.

LTE has won the global 'war' with WiMax (The coalition's previous selection) for wireless broadband deployments in semi-rural areas. Their choice of Ericsson LTE has been successful, with download speeds now double those promised in 2009, and uploads 5x higher than promised.

The decision to order new high capacity Ka-band satellites has been proven wise, with the Coalition's policy of using space on existing sats already shown to be near impossible, with the interim sat service almost full after just two years of operation.​
On the build:
It's disappointing that the fibre rollout is behind schedule. The Telstra deal was responsible for a decent chunk of the delay, but once that was done and delays became apparent, I would have liked to see NBN Co take steps to speed up the rollout, such as implementing their own workforce and/or bringing in additional construction contractors. On the upside, it appears that the capital cost of the rollout is on-budget, and the network performance/reliability is excellent. Takeup is well ahead of forecast, especially top-end speeds, leading to higher than forecast ARPU.

The transit network is ahead of schedule and on budget.

As far as I know, the wireless portion is going fine, with the exception of the odd council failing to approve wireless towers, which is beyond the control of NBN Co or any carrier. As mentioned, the delivered speeds are above those promised.

The satellite portion is going well. The interim service has proven slightly too popular, with capacity set to be reached a year ahead of schedule. The new sats are ordered and on-schedule. The launch program is ordered and the orbit slot application is proceeding on schedule with the ITU. The ground stations are progressing on schedule. The sats will also offer speeds above those initially promised. If Turnbull had his way, NBN Co would not have ordered the launches until the slots were finalised, despite it being standard international practise. This would have delayed the launches by ~2 years, leading to people being stuck on the (full) interim sat for 2 more years, and others missing out all-together for 2 years.​


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> I'd think I'd give them a B.



The strategic review to be released this week I suspect won't be quiet so kind.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> The strategic review to be released this week I suspect won't be quite so kind.




Probably not, but considering it's being prepared by Turnbull's political appointees with his policy in mind, such an outcome it won't come as any surprise, will it?

Interesting to read Delimiter's article from later today, which mirrors many of my own comments about the successes of the NBN:
http://delimiter.com.au/2013/12/09/captain-titanic-turnbull-mocks-quigleys-nbn-tenure/

Malcolm Turnbull is probably my favourite Coalition MP, but his attitude towards Mr Quigley over the last few years has sullied my opinion of him, and apparently those of many in the Australian tech sector. I'll paste Delim's summary, which is well worth reading, and which I agree with wholeheartedly:



> The difference between Mike Quigley and Malcolm Turnbull could not have been be more starkly displayed last week.
> 
> The politely spoken and dignified Quigley laid out, in extreme technical detail, what he thought NBN Co had accomplished over his time leading the company. He did so to a technical audience, who he no doubt hoped to pass on some lessons to. He acknowledged NBN Co’s mistakes. And he exhorted NBN Co’s team to support the Coalition’s Fibre to the Node-based policy.
> 
> In response, Minister Turnbull mocked Quigley in Federal Parliament, using the highest-profile venue available to him, comparing the respected executive to the Captain of the Titanic and accusing him of naivity when it came to the NBN project. Turnbull further did not acknowledge any of Quigley’s accomplishments in virtually single-handedly setting up the NBN Co that exists today. You know. The NBN Co which will be delivering Turnbull’s NBN policy.
> 
> None of this is a surprise. Turnbull’s behaviour towards Quigley over the past three years has been nothing short of appalling. He has slandered the executive at every opportunity, tried to embarrass and discredit him, put him under extreme amounts of pressure, and even threatened to have him removed, should he not resign of his own accord under a Coalition Government. It’s probably a good thing Quigley retired when he did.
> 
> In response, Quigley has gotten on with the job and offered Turnbull nothing but politeness. Never once, that I’ve seen, has he grown angry towards the Member for Wentworth or lost his temper. Instead, he offered Turnbull private briefings on the NBN (which Turnbull never took up) and even pushed NBN Co’s staff to support Turnbull’s rival policy in Government.
> 
> Well, the proof is in the pudding. Let’s see who can deploy the NBN better. Quigley had four years to set up the project. He failed on some fronts but succeeded on many others. In the process, he kept his dignity intact and earned the undying respect of most of Australia’s technology community. Whether you agree that it’s justified or not, Quigley’s name is always spoken in my hearing by technical people with respect. Almost universally, those same people speak Turnbull’s name with frustration and anger … sometimes contempt.
> 
> Let’s see whether Turnbull can do better than Quigley over the next four years and earn that respect back. He better get hopping. As NBN Co’s own internal evaluation of the Coalition’s NBN policy has shown, the Minister has a job of work ahead of him. And there will be many of us who will be writing mini-report cards for the Duke of Double Bay along the way. Karma’s a bitch; I hope Turnbull expects much of the same vitriol coming his way that he dealt out to Quigley, if he fails to live up to his NBN promises in turn.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Probably not, but considering it's being prepared by Turnbull's political appointees with his policy in mind, such an outcome it won't come as any surprise, will it?



I thought you might say that and to some extent that's likely to be true. It won't necessarily be without value though in its judgement on the state of the current rollout.

Let's also not forget though that the rollout targets in NBN Co's strategic plans under Labor were ultimately clearly much more political than they were practical.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Let's also not forget though that the rollout targets in NBN Co's strategic plans under Labor were ultimately clearly much more political than they were practical.




But Malcolm's 2016 and 2019 targets were based purely on technical analysis


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> But Malcolm's 2016 and 2019 targets were based purely on technical analysis



That's Malcolm's first crack.

How many did Labor and NBN Co have while Labor was in office, only to ultimately have the last one (draft 2013 corporate plan) sat upon till after the election and then only released somewhat unofficially ?

As a side note to the above, it was amusing to watch Stephen Conroy in a Senate hearing today try and fail to nail NBN Co's current executives on that draft 2013 corporate plan that itself wasn't "officially" made public.

Tomorrow is Strategic Review day.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> That's Malcolm's first crack.
> 
> How many did Labor and NBN Co have while Labor was in office, only to ultimately have the last one (draft 2013 corporate plan) sat upon till after the election and then only released somewhat unofficially ?
> 
> As a side note to the above, it was amusing to watch Stephen Conroy in a Senate hearing today try and fail to nail NBN Co's current executives on that draft 2013 corporate plan that itself wasn't "officially" made public.
> 
> Tomorrow is Strategic Review day.




Well, the review certainly did no favours to either party.

I'm waiting for how the no excuses Govt is going to spin breaking their non core promise of the 2016 upgrade to 25Mbs.

I'm expecting them to use many excuses about issues that were highlighted to them months before the election.


----------



## Bill M

Here I am on the Central Coast unable to get broadband.... oh ok except for wireless. So Aldi comes along and makes a deal with Telstra to use their 3G network. It's called ALDImobile, provided by MEDIONmobile.

Wow what a great deal for ALDI customers. Only one problem, people are jumping on big time and the service for current Telstra customers is declining. Why? Because of overload from the ALDI customers, I think.

So here it is, Central Coast, big population, no NBN where I am, and competing for quick broadband with everyone else (including those pesky ALDI customers).

I don't give a rats ar$e who's in charge or who stuffed up what. We were on the path of high speed broadband and now my service is declining. 

I don't expect any of the current clowns to fix this, sorry. The NBN was a good idea, the current government seems intent on destroying this, another I can't believe it.:dunno:

Oh, forgot to mention, 3 reboots today, must be all that congestion. Arrhh yes an Australia with real internet is what I dream for.


----------



## sydboy007

Bill M said:


> I don't give a rats ar$e who's in charge or who stuffed up what. We were on the path of high speed broadband and now my service is declining.
> 
> I don't expect any of the current clowns to fix this, sorry. The NBN was a good idea, the current government seems intent on destroying this, another I can't believe it.:dunno:
> 
> Oh, forgot to mention, 3 reboots today, must be all that congestion. Arrhh yes an Australia with real internet is what I dream for.




I just can't believe after all the problems to be overcome for an FTTN, and most are reasonably sorted now, the current Govt wants to totally change the architecture of the network, and required skills to roll it out, and spend 2 or 3 years overcoming a host of costly new issues.

It's just amazing that in September members of the current Govt saw nothing that would impede an FTTN network from providing 25Mbs in 2016.  Roughly 3 months later and they're backtracking on a what a lot of voters would consider a core election promise.  If that's supposed to be rock solid commitment in Government, i hate to see what a wobbly will be like.


----------



## overhang

Quite an interesting day, the report read quite as expected as Turnbull stacked the deck to ensure Ziggy would find FTTN suitable.  What a mess this looks to be as we are now building a national infrastructure network with a mixture of technology and speeds.  I can't believe that this is a selling point *"The NBN would not need to upgraded sooner than five years of construction of the first access technology,"* Ziggy, oh great so we wont need to upgrade quite as soon as many update their cars.

Tonight the report Turnbull was given by NBN Strategic Review in his first few weeks of government was leaked.  This is the same review that was denied a FOI request.
Key points



1.    Building the NBN in two stages to achieve minimum speeds of 25mbps by 2016 and 50mbps by 2019 is the wrong approach and "not recommended". It says that taking this approach will cost more and take longer.

2.    Achieving the Coalition's election commitment that all Australians will have access to minimum speeds of 25mbps by 2016 is "unlikely".

3.    A fibre-to-the-node network will result in lower revenues of up to 30 percent and this will impact on the ability of NBN Co to raise debt.

4.    The cost of fixing Telstra's old copper network is unknown to NBN Co, the Government and perhaps even Telstra.

5.    The cost of operating and maintaining the copper network is estimated to between $600 million and $900 million per year.

6.    A managed lease arrangement with Telstra for access to the copper could create structural separation issues.

7.    Fibre-to-the-premise should continue to rollout at current volumes until the second rate fibre-to-the-node can be rolled out at full capacity.

8.    A minimum speed of 50 megabits per second can't be guaranteed using copper.

9.    A fibre-to-the-node network will need to be upgraded in the future (by deploying fibre closer to the end user premises) to meet demand for higher speeds. This will drive higher capital expenditure costs in the future.

10.    NBN Co will not be able to offer the same products on a fibre-to-the-node network that they were offering on the fibre-to-the-premises network. Lower upload speeds and lack of guaranteed bandwidth will impact business, healthcare and education. Videoconferencing and cloud services will be reduced.

11.   There may be community concerns over placement of the nodes. The cabinets are larger than any equipment required for a fibre-to-the-premises rollout and they need to be connected to a power supply. Community concern over the placement of these nodes may impact council approvals and impact the timeframe of a fibre-to-the-node rollout.

12.    Some medium-sized businesses and all large enterprises will need to buy their own fibre internet connections as the fibre-to-the-node network will be unable to support many business-class features offered under a fibre-to-the-premise model.


----------



## overhang

I've said this before on here but at this point I'd rather us either build FTTP now or not build anything at all and wait until its obvious that we require the expensive upgrade, it just seems such a waste of money to only do half the job when you're spending that sort of outlay anyway (41 billion).  What we know is that at some point in time it will need to be upgraded and at that time it will cost a lot more than 30 billion to do assuming we upgrade to FTTP.  So either spend the 71 billion now or not at all.


----------



## sptrawler

Bill M said:


> Here I am on the Central Coast unable to get broadband.... oh ok except for wireless. So Aldi comes along and makes a deal with Telstra to use their 3G network. It's called ALDImobile, provided by MEDIONmobile.
> 
> Wow what a great deal for ALDI customers. Only one problem, people are jumping on big time and the service for current Telstra customers is declining. Why? Because of overload from the ALDI customers, I think.
> 
> So here it is, Central Coast, big population, no NBN where I am, and competing for quick broadband with everyone else (including those pesky ALDI customers).
> 
> I don't give a rats ar$e who's in charge or who stuffed up what. We were on the path of high speed broadband and now my service is declining.
> 
> I don't expect any of the current clowns to fix this, sorry. The NBN was a good idea, the current government seems intent on destroying this, another I can't believe it.:dunno:
> 
> Oh, forgot to mention, 3 reboots today, must be all that congestion. Arrhh yes an Australia with real internet is what I dream for.




Yeh, Bill M, you want the taxpayer to pay for the NBN, so you have better internet.
Holden workers want the taxpayer to susidies G.M, so they keep their jobs.
Ford workers want the tax payer to subsidies Ford.
Steel and Iron furnace workers want taxpayers to subsidies their product to save jobs.
Farmers want subsidies to stay in business.
Everyone wants the National Dissability scheme.
Everyone wants Gonski spending increases.
Everyone wants the unemployment benefit lifted.
Everyone wants the pension lifted.
Wow 3 reboots today. I bet when you were a young bloke, most people would have thought you had changed your shoes three times.lol
How did you manage back then.


----------



## sptrawler

overhang said:


> I've said this before on here but at this point I'd rather us either build FTTP now or not build anything at all and wait until its obvious that we require the expensive upgrade, it just seems such a waste of money to only do half the job when you're spending that sort of outlay anyway (41 billion).  What we know is that at some point in time it will need to be upgraded and at that time it will cost a lot more than 30 billion to do assuming we upgrade to FTTP.  So either spend the 71 billion now or not at all.




I would rather see the government spend the money on port and rail infrastructure, to offload the resources more efficiently. 
Then use the money generated to put in social infrastructure, like fibre to the house.
Better to use taxpayers money, to install infrastructure that generates external income. Not just install infrastructure that becomes another household cost, with minimal benefit to the net wealth.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> I would rather see the government spend the money on port and rail infrastructure, to offload the resources more efficiently.
> Then use the money generated to put in social infrastructure, like fibre to the house.
> Better to use taxpayers money, to install infrastructure that generates external income. Not just install infrastructure that becomes another household cost, with minimal benefit to the net wealth.




Exporting our "knowledge" may be the best way to source foreign revenue to pay for the lifestyle we feel entitled to.  fast and reliable broadband certainly makes that easier than what we currently have.

Businesses will certainly be stuck paying a lot more for high speed business grade broadband.

No FTTN in HFC areas, but no mention of the people in MDUs who can't access it.  They'll just have to hope the likes of TPG / IINet decide to do FTTB into the apartment block, or just accept being stuck on current ADSL technologies for at least another decade.

Denmark and Norway are showing what's possible via broadband and telemedicine to cut health care costs, while improving health outcomes, especially in their rural areas that have high levels of older people.  Even the stacked report clearly shows most telemedicine options will not be feasible with FTTN.


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> Exporting our "knowledge" may be the best way to source foreign revenue to pay for the lifestyle we feel entitled to.  fast and reliable broadband certainly makes that easier than what we currently have.
> 
> Businesses will certainly be stuck paying a lot more for high speed business grade broadband.
> 
> No FTTN in HFC areas, but no mention of the people in MDUs who can't access it.  They'll just have to hope the likes of TPG / IINet decide to do FTTB into the apartment block, or just accept being stuck on current ADSL technologies for at least another decade.
> 
> Denmark and Norway are showing what's possible via broadband and telemedicine to cut health care costs, while improving health outcomes, especially in their rural areas that have high levels of older people.  Even the stacked report clearly shows most telemedicine options will not be feasible with FTTN.




Like I've said endlesly, the idea is great, but we are facing globalisation, were we compete to maintain our lifestyle. I'm not happy about it but it is a fact of life.
Currently our advantage is resources, not IT, if we pour money into IT at the expense of resources, we are missing an opportunity.
I know resources are finite, but at this stage of our economic development, they are producing the money.
If taxes are used to maximise this income, it can then be used to develop sustainable industries, including IT.
To me, we are buying all the furniture before we have the house, actually before we have a job.:1zhelp:
We are on the same song sheet, just a case of timing, who knows who has it right.


----------



## NBNMyths

_"In the government's first major broken promise on the NBN since the election, NBN Co has said that it will be unable to deliver 25Mbps to all Australians by the end of 2016, instead stating that approximately *43 percent of premises will have access to 25Mbps download speeds at the end of 2016*, and 91 percent of premises will have access to 50Mbps by the end of 2019"_

http://www.zdnet.com/turnbull-breaks-nbn-promise-less-than-half-to-get-25mbps-in-2016-7000024202/

I'm not one to say I told you so. But, well, I told you so: 
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...21778&page=101&p=765320&viewfull=1#post765320

*....and it's actually slightly worse than it looks, because it's 43% of premises within the fixed line footprint, not 43% of all premises.*



I'm just reading through the review at present. It seems rather vague and optimistic, and there is some very suspicious redacting.

For example, it states that *there has not been any testing of vectored VDSL in Australia, and that the 50Mbps figure is just an estimate* based on the 25% thicker copper used in the UK.

It also says that they have *no data on how much copper remediation will be required*, as Telstra have not provided them with any information for the review. They have redacted the number of lines they guestimate will have to be remediated in the first year, and in subsequent years (why?). They have also redacted the estimated cost of that remediation, although is is in the $billions.

There's no mention of budgeting for _any_ cost to access the copper network in order to build FTTN, or any budgeted cost for accessing the HFC networks....Although perhaps they have, but redacted that section.


----------



## overhang

Page 100 of the review is really the icing on the cake.  It states that after 30 years to upgrade to FTTP from FTTN will save 4 billion than building FTTP now.  Now i imagine this figure will be taken from the completion of FTTN which is 2021 and that it would be 2051 until we begin the upgrade, any sooner would work the other way because they rely on the revenue from FTTN to hedge the difference.  So lets just say some how the network lasts out till then, all this to save just 4 billion.... one hell of a gamble to assume the network will last till 2051 before an upgrade. 

The review s here for anyone interested 
http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco/documents/NBN-Co-Strategic-Review-Report.pdf


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> The review s here for anyone interested
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco/documents/NBN-Co-Strategic-Review-Report.pdf



Definitely lots of reading in there for the interested.

Having a quick look at your point above, I suspect CY30 in that table on page 100 is a reference to calendar year 2030, not 30 years from now or from some future date.

Something that someone's bound to latch on at some going is the heavy reliance on the HFC network under scenario 6, both at the end of 2016 and 2020 (Exhibit 4.2 on page 98). Of particular interest is the total FTTN (FTTN/FTTdip/B) coverage by the end of 2016. At that point, it's only 5% of the overall network.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> _"In the government's first major broken promise on the NBN since the election, NBN Co has said that it will be unable to deliver 25Mbps to all Australians by the end of 2016, instead stating that approximately *43 percent of premises will have access to 25Mbps download speeds at the end of 2016*, and 91 percent of premises will have access to 50Mbps by the end of 2019"_
> 
> http://www.zdnet.com/turnbull-breaks-nbn-promise-less-than-half-to-get-25mbps-in-2016-7000024202/
> 
> I'm not one to say I told you so. But, well, I told you so:
> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...21778&page=101&p=765320&viewfull=1#post765320
> 
> *....and it's actually slightly worse than it looks, because it's 43% of premises within the fixed line footprint, not 43% of all premises.*
> 
> 
> 
> I'm just reading through the review at present. It seems rather vague and optimistic, and there is some very suspicious redacting.
> 
> For example, it states that *there has not been any testing of vectored VDSL in Australia, and that the 50Mbps figure is just an estimate* based on the 25% thicker copper used in the UK.
> 
> It also says that they have *no data on how much copper remediation will be required*, as Telstra have not provided them with any information for the review. They have redacted the number of lines they guestimate will have to be remediated in the first year, and in subsequent years (why?). They have also redacted the estimated cost of that remediation, although is is in the $billions.
> 
> There's no mention of budgeting for _any_ cost to access the copper network in order to build FTTN, or any budgeted cost for accessing the HFC networks....Although perhaps they have, but redacted that section.




One would think that if FTTP is shown to be a more appropriate installation to adopt the government would pursue it. 
For god sake it couldn't cause any more flack than they are already copping, just read any Fairfax paper, apparently they are backflipping on everything anyway.
It all appears like a child like fascination with another lost Labor government and their dream.
Everything I've read just makes reference to the FTTN anyone got any links to how the FTTP was working out.
Meanwhile they are trucking B quads on public roads 300klms to port facilities in WA.
Then when they get there, 30 ships are at anchor offshore.
At the same time my holiday house and the two next door have NBN fibre, but no one has connected.lol
I'll let you know when one of the three gets connected, it should be interesting.
Like that's money well spent. 
Keep spending money to fix up the roads that the trucks destroy and throw money at fibre to the home where people don't use it.lol


----------



## Bill M

sptrawler said:


> Yeh, Bill M, you want the taxpayer to pay for the NBN, so you have better internet.





Yes I and millions of others do as well. And as it is a key infrastructure project I do expect taxpayers to pay for it. I am quite happy to pay my share in Monthly broadband bills if *I could get it.*


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> One would think that if FTTP is shown to be a more appropriate installation to adopt the government would pursue it.



Why would Governments start doing the most appropriate thing now?



> For god sake it couldn't cause any more flack than they are already copping, just read any Fairfax paper, apparently they are backflipping on everything anyway.



Well they are, aren't they? There have been more Coalition backflips in the last 3 months than at an acrobats convention.



> Everything I've read just makes reference to the FTTN anyone got any links to how the FTTP was working out.




The report says that FTTP would be completed by 2023-4 (2-3 years late). They say cost if unchanged would be $56bn capex and $73bn peak funding (assuming $30bn equity and the rest debt) or $63bn (all equity). 

But they also say they could do FTTP cheaper, and that NBN Co had already started making changes to do so. Under that scenario (still 93% FTTP), it would be $44bn capex ($4bn over Labor's estimate) and peak funding of $64bn (equity+debt) or $54bn (all equity). 

I'm pretty sure they are assuming debt without a Govt guarantee, meaning debt costs would be higher.

I wonder what happened to Turnbull's "conservative" pre-election cost of $94bn with a 40 year timeframe?


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> The report says that FTTP would be completed by 2023-4 (2-3 years late). They say cost if unchanged would be $56bn capex and $73bn peak funding (assuming $30bn equity and the rest debt) or $63bn (all equity).
> 
> But they also say they could do FTTP cheaper, and that NBN Co had already started making changes to do so. Under that scenario (still 93% FTTP), it would be $44bn capex ($4bn over Labor's estimate) and peak funding of $64bn (equity+debt) or $54bn (all equity).
> 
> I'm pretty sure they are assuming debt without a Govt guarantee, meaning debt costs would be higher.
> 
> I wonder what happened to Turnbull's "conservative" pre-election cost of $94bn with a 40 year timeframe?




So to sum up, the report says the cost for FTTP would cost $73, isn't that about double what Labor projected?


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> So to sum up, the report says the cost for FTTP would cost $73, isn't that about double what Labor projected?




No. Did you actually read my last post?

It says the capex for FTTP could be $44bn ($5bn more than Labor projected), with a peak funding of $54bn (assuming 100% equity or Govt guarantee debt) which is $10bn more than Labor projected. Both assuming the rollout was done with identified efficiency gains.

The $73bn figure is a "worst case" combination of the Coalition's lower equity injections, combined with no Govt guarantee on the debt, combined with no improvements in the efficiency of the FTTP rollout (even though those efficiencies have already started).


----------



## NBNMyths

http://www.zdnet.com/its-time-for-turnbull-to-swallow-his-nbn-pride-7000024263/

_Summary: It's not too late for Malcolm Turnbull to do the right thing – and not just the cheapest thing – for Australia. First, he'll have to accept the Strategic Review's damning indictment of Coalition NBN policy – and its suggestion that it will cost just $800m more per year to build a network that will last 100 years, not five._


----------



## sydboy007

lets not forget the Coalition costs do not include access to the copper network.

It also reuses the HFC network which has been under invested in for years by Optus and Telstra.  There's not mention of how MDUs in the HFC footprint will get upgraded broadband unless the private sector steps in, but then the cost will likely be noncompetitive.

The current costing comparisons are not apples to apples because the current Govt is not upgrading a significant proportion of the network.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> No. Did you actually read my last post?
> 
> It says the capex for FTTP could be $44bn ($5bn more than Labor projected), with a peak funding of $54bn (assuming 100% equity or Govt guarantee debt) which is $10bn more than Labor projected. Both assuming the rollout was done with identified efficiency gains.
> 
> The $73bn figure is a "worst case" combination of the Coalition's lower equity injections, combined with no Govt guarantee on the debt, combined with no improvements in the efficiency of the FTTP rollout (even though those efficiencies have already started).



Well I will sit on the sideline and watch the outcome.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> It says the capex for FTTP could be $44bn ($5bn more than Labor projected), with a peak funding of $54bn (assuming 100% equity or Govt guarantee debt) which is $10bn more than Labor projected. Both assuming the rollout was done with identified efficiency gains.



That scenario though was not Labor's FTTP NBN rollout.

I thought the strategic review was quiet generous to the schedule on Labor's model bearing in mind the delays thus far.


----------



## drsmith

*Rollout update for the week to December 8*

Approximately 5000 brownfields and 1000 greenfields passed in the past week. Brownfields now passed is approximately 255,000. 

http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/weekly-progress-report.html

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco/images/nbnco-rollout-metrics-08122013.pdf

The Strategic Review estimates 357,000 brownfields will be passed by June 30 2014.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/media/news/strategic-review.html


----------



## IFocus

With out getting too political 

The return on the Coalition plan is a serious threat long term along with the need for upgrade in the short term.

Having been in the Electrical / Instrument game for 40 years its mind boggling the thought of installing, powering and maintaining 60,000 node cabinets.


The inconvenient truth for the Coalition's NBN



> We knew before today that the Coalition's NBN plan would cost much more than claimed, and that the odds were stacked against its easy implementation, writes David Braue.
> 
> After six years of attacking Labor's National Broadband Network (NBN) rollout in opposition, the reality check handed to the Coalition about its own alternative policy has substantially rephrased the entire conversation about the future of broadband in Australia.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-12-12/braue-the-inconvenient-truth-for-the-coalition-nbn/5152800

To be fair to Turnbull Abbott instructed him to destroy the NBN remember that (what a disgrace) so Turnbull has actually taken the Coalition form no NBN (carrier pigeon / pony express) to some NBN and dodgy very slow limited NBN.

Remains to be seen how and if he can drag them (Neanderthals / Abbott)to NBN.


----------



## drsmith

IFocus said:


> With out getting too political



Could you please repeat.

The laughter generated from that line has drowned out most of the rest of what you said.



IFocus said:


> Remains to be seen how and if he can drag them (Neanderthals / Abbott)to NBN.




On second thought, ..............


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> That scenario though was not Labor's FTTP NBN rollout.
> 
> I thought the strategic review was quiet generous to the schedule on Labor's model bearing in mind the delays thus far.




Not sure what you're basing this on considering all the relevant figures as to how FTTP has gone from 44 to 72 billion have been redacted.  I would think logically this is actually based on the worst possible scenario that hasn't accounted for the efficiency that is only beginning to be achieved due to the many delays and blowouts, Ziggy also said they have been conservative with figures.  You should wonder how the coalition estimate of 94 billion is so far out.

Perhaps the question you should be asking is how review has made no allowance for the use of Telstra's copper or the use of HFC, it seems Turnbull somehow thinks this will be given up for free even though Telstra have been on the record stating that 11 billion would be a good starting point just for the copper.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> Not sure what you're basing this on considering all the relevant figures as to how FTTP has gone from 44 to 72 billion have been redacted.  I would think logically this is actually based on the worst possible scenario that hasn't accounted for the efficiency that is only beginning to be achieved due to the many delays and blowouts, Ziggy also said they have been conservative with figures.  You should wonder how the coalition estimate of 94 billion is so far out.
> 
> Perhaps the question you should be asking is how review has made no allowance for the use of Telstra's copper or the use of HFC, it seems Turnbull somehow thinks this will be given up for free even though Telstra have been on the record stating that 11 billion would be a good starting point just for the copper.



Myth's figures are from the cost optimised FTTP plan (scenario 2), not Labor's NBN rollout upon which the 72bn is based.

I haven't as yet reviewed the financials of the HFC component from either a capital or revenue perspective or the broader perspective of the existing overall agreements between Telstra/Optus and NBN Co.


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> Myth's figures are from the cost optimised FTTP plan (scenario 2), not Labor's NBN rollout upon which the 72bn is based.
> 
> I haven't as yet reviewed the financials of the HFC component from either a capital or revenue perspective or the broader perspective of the existing overall agreements between Telstra/Optus and NBN Co.




Yes true, my point still stands though that the 72 billion would seem the worst case scenario.  Not sure how Turnbull can possibly call this an open review when we cant even see the working out.  How is the Coalition can overestimate Labors FTTP by 22 billion but yet underestimate their own by 12 billion?  

Given what we know I can't see how the conservative minded can possibly see that the coalition NBN would be the best option on any scale.  I respect that many of you would agree it shouldn't be built at all which is fair enough but to actually suggest that their NBN is a more suitable alternative is just illogical.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> Yes true, my point still stands though that the 72 billion would seem the worst case scenario. Not sure how Turnbull can possibly call this an open review when we cant even see the working out.  How is the Coalition can overestimate Labors FTTP by 22 billion but yet underestimate their own by 12 billion?
> 
> Given what we know I can't see how the conservative minded can possibly see that the coalition NBN would be the best option on any scale.  I respect that many of you would agree it shouldn't be built at all which is fair enough but to actually suggest that their NBN is a more suitable alternative is just illogical.



That the 72bn is some sort of worst case scenario is an assumption on your part. IIRC, the redacted portion of the SR were requested by NBN Co, not the government. A sceptic might conclude that the government had influence over this aspect of the review and that could be right, but it is still an assumption. We know Labor's went wrong ultimately to the extent that they could only hide it by sitting on 2013 draft corporate plan till after the election.

As for the $94bn cost of Labor's NBN from the Coalition's pre-election costings, it was made clear in those documents that it represented a worst case scenario should all four of the specific elements outlined all go wrong.

I think what's clear from the SR is that the Coalition's NBN structure is still very much a work in progress which in my view is a good thing. I would also suggest your statement that many of us would agree it (an upgraded internet network) shouldn't be built at all is incorrect and hence commentary like that in no way advances the substance of your argument. The Coalition is at least showing flexibility in its technological approach to the fixed line rollout which is something Labor failed to do and part of the reason why the project is in the state it is in.

On an earlier point about the upgrade path to fibre from scenario 6, are you happy that CY30 is a reference to the 2030 calendar year or do you still feel it represents 30 years from some point in the future ?


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> That the 72bn is some sort of worst case scenario is an assumption on your part. IIRC, the redacted portion of the SR were requested by NBN Co, not the government. A sceptic might conclude that the government had influence over this aspect of the review and that could be right, but it is still an assumption. We know Labor's went wrong ultimately to the extent that they could only hide it by sitting on 2013 draft corporate plan till after the election.
> 
> As for the $94bn cost of Labor's NBN from the Coalition's pre-election costings, it was made clear in those documents that it represented a worst case scenario should all four of the specific elements outlined all go wrong.
> 
> I think what's clear from the SR is that the Coalition's NBN structure is still very much a work in progress which in my view is a good thing. I would also suggest your statement that many of us would agree it (an upgraded internet network) shouldn't be built at all is incorrect and hence commentary like that in no way advances the substance of your argument. The Coalition is at least showing flexibility in its technological approach to the fixed line rollout which is something Labor failed to do and part of the reason why the project is in the state it is in.
> 
> On an earlier point about the upgrade path to fibre from scenario 6, are you happy that CY30 is a reference to the 2030 calendar year or do you still feel it represents 30 years from some point in the future ?





Well considering as we've said in the past how Turnbull has stacked the deck with his own mates on the panel then the 72 billion would seem like a worst case scenario and combining that with the fact Ziggy also said they have been conservative with these figures then it would seem 72 billion isn't on the light side.

I can't see how one can possibly support their plan that uses a mixture of technology's and speeds and misses 28% of the country via fibre as the superior plan.  Your calendar year 2030 makes sense and I agree with your judgement there but looking at that if we upgrade to FTTP in 2030 then we will have only saved 4 billion dollars over building FTTP now.  Considering the fundamental risks and unknowns we have with the state of the copper then that 4 billion is not a good risk to reward investment.  

Solike Turnbull you believe that Telstra will give the copper to NBN Co for free as well as allowing them to utilize their HFC network as well as Optus?  I don't think Telstra shareholders would be too impressed with that.  

Is this a fundamental position you have due to your distaste in the ALP or do you genuinely believe given the amount of unknowns in the Coalition plan and given the insignificant savings building such a network would make that it is the best option?  At least with FTTP you know what you're getting, we know the speeds are 1gbps, we know that this will be upgradable without the need to dig anything up in the future, the time and cost are the contentious issue as they are with the FTTN.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> Is this a fundamental position you have due to your distaste in the ALP or do you genuinely believe given the amount of unknowns in the Coalition plan and given the insignificant savings building such a network would make that it is the best option?  At least with FTTP you know what you're getting, we know the speeds are 1gbps, we know that this will be upgradable without the need to dig anything up in the future, the time and cost are the contentious issue as they are with the FTTN.



The SR doesn't describe the overall financial difference as insignificant but if you wish to discount those parts of the report that are not favourable to your point of view, the conclusion you've reached is not going to be surprising. 

I'm not wedded to any specific technological outcome, but what I do know is that with 6-years in office, Labor had its chance and botched it.

The first big test for the coalition as a government will be the practicality (and hence deliverability) of the technological mix outlined the first NBN Co corporate plan under their tenure next year. It's then a question of how well they deliver.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> The SR doesn't describe the overall financial difference as insignificant but if you wish to discount those parts of the report that are not favourable to your point of view, the conclusion you've reached is not going to be surprising.
> 
> I'm not wedded to any specific technological outcome, but what I do know is that with 6-years in office, Labor had its chance and botched it.
> 
> The first big test for the coalition as a government will be the practicality (and hence deliverability) of the technological mix outlined the first NBN Co corporate plan under their tenure next year. It's then a question of how well they deliver.




Interesting that The Liberals have removed Tony's speech from their NBN policy released in April at the Liberal party web site.

Tony was "very proud" of all the research behind their 80 pages of "policy" and claimed _"It is very high quality work indeed. It’s work of a quality to surpass just about anything that an Opposition has previously done."_ * months later and it turns out they were very wrong.

Yet the LN+P continue to claim they can gain full access to the copper and HFC networks for FREE.  They also ignore the issues of copper remediation.  Not once have they put a $ figure to how much it will cost to replace bad copper.  How can you claim to be able to do a network rollout cheaper by reusing current infrastructure, yet not bother to do even a small audit of the infrastructure to get some real world statistics on how suitable that infrastructure is?  It could quite easily lead to a massive costs blowout if the "bagdad" network is as bad as some of the pictures from Telstra line techs make it look like.

Not once has a $ figure been calculated for OPEX of the FTTN and compared to FTTP over a 10 year period - the longer the time frame the worse it looks for FTTN OPEX, especially as further copper remediation is required.  No acknowledgment of how difficult it will be to get 60,000+ nodes connected to the electricity network.  No acknowledgement of community anger over the placement of the nodes.  Just look at people's anger over the HFC cables when they were being rolled out, and I'd say they are less of an eye sore than a node.

The LN+P have done a major policy backflip mainly based on issues that were highlighted to them since their policy launch in April.  What's worrying is that they are still to face up to a host of major issues for the FTTN rollout.

As yet no mention of who will pay the billions to upgrade the HFC network to cope with around 3 times the current number of customers.  Optus pretty much doesn't sign up new customers, and Telstra seems to refuse new connections in areas suffering from high congestion, of which there's quite a few.  Just checkout whirlpool postings about cable internet speeds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amG62Yar1fI   sums up the issues of cable internet in a humorous way.   To resolve the current congestion issues, and ensure a reasonable service in the future a lot of new nodes will have to be installed.  It nearly feels like the LN+P are hoping people will assume the HFC served areas can get high speed internet for no extra CAPEX.


----------



## NBNMyths

What a difference 3 months makes....

On Sept 6, Tony described their NBN plan costings as "bulletproof".... 

http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2013/09/tony-abbott-says-coalition-nbn-plan-is-absolutely-bulletproof/

Now here we are in December before any work has even commenced, and the costs have already blown out by 33% while simultaneously the size of the FTTN network has shrunk by ~30%.


I look forward to all the conservative commenters on this thread denouncing the Coalition's apparent financial incompetence. :


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Tony was "very proud" of all the research behind their 80 pages of "policy" and claimed _"It is very high quality work indeed. It’s work of a quality to surpass just about anything that an Opposition has previously done."_ * months later and it turns out they were very wrong.
> 
> Yet the LN+P continue to claim they can gain full access to the copper and HFC networks for FREE.



We could go back to what happened to Labor's first policy attempt attempt at this from government. We could then look at their second policy in practice and perhaps give them some credit for trying. It's the current government though that has to clean up this mess.

Under current contracts NBN Co don't gain effective customer access to the copper and HFC networks for free.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/assets/medi...nd-optus-sign-binding-agreement-23-jun-11.pdf

It's within that framework I would suggest that negotiations will take place. 

As for information regarding FTTN and HFC costs, it's there from page 85 although some of the actual numbers are redacted.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> I look forward to all the conservative commenters on this thread denouncing the Coalition's apparent financial incompetence. :



For your amusement Myths, I'll just say nothing is bullet proof when ultimately confronted with the reality of a Labor disaster.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> For your amusement Myths, I'll just say nothing is bullet proof when ultimately confronted with the reality of a Labor disaster.




Sorry, but it is impossible to blame Labor for the cost blowout of rolling out FTTN. The coalition knew how much had been injected into NBN Co up to now, and they knew that they would continue FTTP until 2015ish.

There is nothing the ALP have done to date which makes FTTN any more expensive than Turnbull knew it would be months ago. We all said they were dreaming with regards to their cost and timetable, and it turns out we were right.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> We could go back to what happened to Labor's first policy attempt attempt at this from government. We could then look at their second policy in practice and perhaps give them some credit for trying. It's the current government though that has to clean up this mess.




Under Captain Sol Telstra played hard ball and didn't put in a tender to help with their initial broadband plans.  Advise provided to the Govt basically told them you can't do FTTN unless you're the owner of the copper, so FTTP NBN was their answer to Telstra's intransigence, along with removing the massively degraded copper and associated costs.



drsmith said:


> Under current contracts NBN Co don't gain effective customer access to the copper and HFC networks for free.
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/assets/medi...nd-optus-sign-binding-agreement-23-jun-11.pdf
> 
> It's within that framework I would suggest that negotiations will take place.




Under the current agreements the HFC and copper networks have pretty much $0 value.

In a FTTN network the copper is EXTREMELY valuable, and to reuse the HFC network also makes it economically valuable.  Shareholder class actions will occur if either of these networks is given away for free.



drsmith said:


> As for information regarding FTTN and HFC costs, it's there from page 85 although some of the actual numbers are redacted.




So much of the information needed to understand the LN+Ps policy costings have not been provided to the voters because..?  If this is the transparency promised by MT then he needs a dictionary to learn what the term actually means.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Sorry, but it is impossible to blame Labor for the cost blowout of rolling out FTTN. The coalition knew how much had been injected into NBN Co up to now, and they knew that they would continue FTTP until 2015ish.
> 
> There is nothing the ALP have done to date which makes FTTN any more expensive than Turnbull knew it would be months ago. We all said they were dreaming with regards to their cost and timetable, and it turns out we were right.



The Coalition's pre-election policy announcement was always a political document. It had to be because what we were seeing on rollout projections and cost of the NBN while Labor was in office was misleading at best and in the end was hidden when the lie could no longer be sustained.

This is an unfortunate symptom of a broader fundamental problem with our political culture as a whole.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> The Coalition's pre-election policy announcement was always a political document




While everything a politician says publicly can in some way be considered political...statements of fact like the 25 Mbps minimum by the end of the first term etc are also promises to be kept.
~


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> While everything a politician says publicly can in some way be considered political...statements of fact like the 25 Mbps minimum by the end of the first term etc are also promises to be kept.



Like the ever diminishing rollout schedule under Labor's administration ? 

One cannot judge the current government NBN policy statement from opposition in isolation. It needs to be considered through the prism of achievement from the time of the previous government vs the forecasts.


----------



## Smurf1976

According to the neighbours, Visionstream (NBN contractor) was poking around outside my house (and others nearby) last week. 

I'm in an area supposedly missing out on fibre to the home, but I won't be complaining if it goes in that's for sure. Only downside is that apparently there's a pit buried somewhere under my garden so it may need to be dug up (I'm going to locate the pit myself in order to prevent any unnecessary digging and damage etc).


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Like the ever diminishing rollout schedule under Labor's administration ?
> 
> One cannot judge the current government NBN policy statement from opposition in isolation. It needs to be considered through the prism of achievement from the time of the previous government vs the forecasts.




So if I may translate that from political speak into normal English. You're actually saying:

_"It's perfectly OK for the Coalition to fail on their promises on NBN progress (+2yrs), coverage (-30%) and cost (+33%), because the ALP 'failed' as well"._

My question then, is how far back can we take that attitude?

The Howard Government had 13-odd failed attempts at broadband policy over 11 years in office. Leaving Labor to "clean up the mess" they were left in the form of a hostile, powerful vertical monopoly in Telstra, and a broadband network near the bottom of the OECD. Does that not excuse the ALP from any and all failures on their NBN? Or does your excuse theory only work one-way?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

The NBN was never properly costed and lacked proper governance from it's inception.

A back of envelope birth via Rudd and Conroy on a government flight, does not make for a sustainable venture.

It has been plagued since it's inception as a result.

Any outcome which is costed and has proper governace would be satisfactory.

gg


----------



## sydboy007

Garpal Gumnut said:


> The NBN was never properly costed and lacked proper governance from it's inception.
> 
> A back of envelope birth via Rudd and Conroy on a government flight, does not make for a sustainable venture.
> 
> It has been plagued since it's inception as a result.
> 
> Any outcome which is costed and has proper governace would be satisfactory.
> 
> gg




Yet the Coalition has failed less than 9 months after their policy launch that Tony said he was "proud" of.

If the FTTP NBN was written down on a coaster during a flight, then you would have to think the LN+P FTTN + HFC + ??? noodle network was a purely political exercise designed to make voters believe they could vote for the coalition and get an upgrade to their broadband speeds by the end of 2016.  it would seem the LN+P had no intention of honoring their "rock solid" promise to deliver the upgrade by 2016.

You seem very supportive of a Government that has backtracked on a major policy they took to the electorate, it even passes the Abbott political "honesty" test because it wasn't off the cuff remarks given in an interview, it was written down which Abbott has told us is the only stuff we can trust from him.

You support a Government that claims they can reuse the copper network, yet has been unwilling / unable to provide even basic audits to confirm this is possible, nor are they willing to provide a $ figure on how much they estimate it will cost to remediate the copper network, nor how much it will cost to upgrade the HFC network, which will be a similar undertaking as to their FTTN rollout.

Your support a Government that has said they believe Telstra, and now Optus, will hand over their copper and HFC networks for FREE.  In the words of Darryl kerrigan _"tell them they're dreaming."_

I've got no problem with your criticism of the Labor NBN rollout, but please use the same standards when talking about the LN+P proposal.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> Like the ever diminishing rollout schedule under Labor's administration ?
> 
> One cannot judge the current government NBN policy statement from opposition in isolation. It needs to be considered through the prism of achievement from the time of the previous government vs the forecasts.




That's spin ^

They made promises that they couldn't keep, promises that they should never have made, stupid promises that now make them (The Noalition) look stupid.


----------



## IFocus

drsmith said:


> Like the ever diminishing rollout schedule under Labor's administration ?
> 
> One cannot judge the current government NBN policy statement from opposition in isolation. It needs to be considered through the prism of achievement from the time of the previous government vs the forecasts.




You're just getting smashed here, perhaps the ABC could help you out with the facts.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> So if I may translate that from political speak into normal English. You're actually saying:
> 
> _"It's perfectly OK for the Coalition to fail on their promises on NBN progress (+2yrs), coverage (-30%) and cost (+33%), because the ALP 'failed' as well"._
> 
> My question then, is how far back can we take that attitude?
> 
> The Howard Government had 13-odd failed attempts at broadband policy over 11 years in office. Leaving Labor to "clean up the mess" they were left in the form of a hostile, powerful vertical monopoly in Telstra, and a broadband network near the bottom of the OECD. Does that not excuse the ALP from any and all failures on their NBN? Or does your excuse theory only work one-way?



What I'm saying is that politics is a game of relativities. 

This government's record is that it has scaled back its commitment from before the election while the previous government has delivered very little from 6-years in office and through their rigid ideology, wasted vast sums of taxpayer money.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> What I'm saying is that politics is a game of relativities.
> 
> This government's record is that it has scaled back its commitment from before the election while the previous government has delivered very little from 6-years in office and through their rigid ideology, wasted vast sums of taxpayer money.




Wasted? What money spent on the NBN so far has been wasted? Most has gone into the transit network, satellites and wireless (all of which are also required by -and part of- the Coalition NBN).

Even the money spent on FTTP to date hasn't been "wasted". It's just been used to build a more capable and longer-lasting network than what the Coalition are doing.

It's like saying "The ALP wasted money building a concrete-foundation freeway", when the coalition are instead building a 2-pack seal road (being generous).

Let's see which technology history judges to be the "wasted investment" in 20 years time.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Let's see which technology history judges to be the "wasted investment" in 20 years time.



And in the meantime, we'll pretend the rollout delays and cost blowouts have never happened.


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> The NBN was never properly costed and lacked proper governance from it's inception.
> 
> ....
> 
> Any outcome which is costed and has proper governace would be satisfactory.
> 
> gg




So, does a plan for which the cost increased by 33% (three months after the "bulletproof" costings were released by Tony and Malcolm) fit that criteria?

...How about a plan that requires access to infrastructure owned by another company, for which no access has been negotiated and no access or purchase cost has been included in (even the blown-out) costings?

...How about a plan which promises certain speeds using that infrastructure, when the plan happily admits that there has not been a single test done to see if those speeds are actually achievable, nor any data received on what the condition of that infrastructure is?

...How about a plan which was developed by a bloke who owns half of the Minister's yacht?

...How about a plan for a project in which the overlooking joint parliamentary committee has been dissolved?


Doesn't sound like a good start for a "properly costed, properly governed" outcome to me.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> Wasted? What money spent on the NBN so far has been wasted?




Myths, you are just an old-fashioned socialist.



> SO Labor's National Broadband Network rollout would have cost taxpayers $73 billion -- about the value of 73 base hospitals. Not $4.7bn with completion this year -- the fantasy floated by Kevin Rudd in 2007. Not the $37bn peddled by former communications minister Stephen Conroy on the many occasions he castigated this newspaper for arguing for a cost-benefit analysis because we believed the project would cost far more than his spin-meisters claimed. And not the $44bn predicted by the NBN Co. For $73bn, it would have been completed three years late, by 2024. And to meet Labor's targeted rate of return, internet bills would have had to rise by 80 per cent.
> 
> Such breathtaking incompetence and unconscionable waste dwarfs the school halls ($16bn), pink batts ($2.45bn) and set-top boxes ($300 million) debacles combined -- almost four times over.* It places the Rudd and Gillard governments in a pantheon of their own -- far beyond the Whitlam government -- for extravagance and old-fashioned socialism.*






> *Already, as Mr Turnbull said, the inefficient rollout has cost taxpayers $20bn.* Shamefully, Labor even insisted fibre-optic cables had to be dug through walls into every flat and bedsit in multi-dwelling units. Running the cable into the basement and connecting it to existing copper wiring would have saved vast amounts of time, money and disruption



.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...r-to-be-repeated/story-e6frg71x-1226783603660


----------



## sails

NBNMyths said:


> ...Doesn't sound like a good start for a "properly costed, properly governed" outcome to me.




Myths, you will clearly never be happy with anything a coalition government does.


----------



## sydboy007

Calliope said:


> Myths, you are just an old-fashioned socialist.




How can $20 billion be wasted on the NBN when no where near that amount of spending has occurred?

Are you saying that all the current infrastructure that has been deployed for the NBN has a negative value ie you would have to PAY someone to take ownership of it?

Remmeber Turnbuull was saying the NBN was going to cost $94B pre election, and that figure has fallen by about as much as the node fridge next work costs have increased.

Do you believe that Telstra and Optus will provide the copper and HFC networks for free?  If not, how much will it cost?  The Coalition has turned what were going to be near worthless assets into very valuable core components of their proposed node fridge network and cable network.

- - - Updated - - -



sails said:


> Myths, you will clearly never be happy with anything a coalition government does.




More like use the same criteria to criticise the Coalition as you do Labor.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> And in the meantime, we'll pretend the rollout delays and cost blowouts have never happened.




There's no disputing the rollout delays, but that doesn't make for "wasted money".

I disagree that there have been substantial cost blowouts, but even if (for argument's sake) there had been, and the cost of FTTP is substantially higher than forecast, that still doesn't necessarily mean the money has been wasted. If we assume that FTTP is the eventual "end game" (which pretty much everyone in the know says it is), then at worst they have spent money now rather than spending it later. And since the majority of the cost of FTTP is in the form of labour (not equipment), it will cost less money to do it now than in 15 years (inflation). 

Thus it's a highly dubious statement to say any money has been wasted, and if it has then it's certainly not "vast sums", if we assume we will eventually get to FTTP in any case. At worst, if FTTP isn't required for ~20 years, then you could probably say a few million dollars has been wasted in opportunity cost.

Conversely, how many billions will be spent buying/leasing/fixing/maintaining the old copper network, and will that be considered "wasted" in 10 or 15 years when (in all likelihood) it's thrown away?


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Myths, you are just an old-fashioned socialist.
> 
> .
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...r-to-be-repeated/story-e6frg71x-1226783603660




Oh noes, a quote from Malcolm Turnbull in the Australian. There's some accurate objectivity right there. 

I notice that Turnbull fails to mention that most of the $20bn so far committed to (not spent on) the NBN is also required for his policy (Transit, Wireless, sat) and so would be spent in any case.

Even the MDU statement is rubbish, since few have been done and the contracts to do those installations only come to $90m nationwide. Again, even if MDUs were not to be done with fibre, there would still be 10s of millions spent doing them with FTTB.


----------



## orr

drsmith said:


> What I'm saying is that politics is a game of relativities.
> 
> This government's record is that it has scaled back its commitment from before the election while the previous government has delivered very little from 6-years in office and through their rigid ideology, wasted vast sums of taxpayer money.



'
Dear Doctor I'm with you and 'good-ol' Howard era communications Minister, Richard Alston. The whole 'fandango's' only good for pornography and gambling. What's all the fuss.
For others the future seems only shrouded in mist. For you and me it's as impenetrable as concrete.


----------



## drsmith

orr said:


> '
> Dear Doctor I'm with you and 'good-ol' Howard era communications Minister, Richard Alston. The whole 'fandango's' only good for pornography and gambling.



That stereotype has never been my position.


----------



## orr

drsmith said:


> That stereotype has never been my position.




 That's good to know. But if you want to bring up past government preformance with regard to communications infrastructure, the period in which Alston was in-charge, a  lost period in developing community understanding of what was on the horizon, all for the Ideological privatisation mantra. This is the reason we're stumbling, years late, toward a National 'Class A Solution" , That was  only  ever  possible, to begin with at least, as; A socially provided platform.

The coalition has offered up some duds... It's a tradition set to continue. Thanks and congratulations to the good voter's  of 'Indi' who saved us  from a truly awful prospect,  who'd done nothing to forward the communication interests of her constituents and bugger all of anything else as well. Viva a Democratic meritocracy free from 'Pre selected Plonkers'


----------



## drsmith

orr said:


> That's good to know..



It was wrong of you to suggest otherwise in the first place.



orr said:


> But if you want to bring up past government preformance with regard to communications infrastructure, the period in which Alston was in-charge, a  lost period in developing community understanding of what was on the horizon, all for the Ideological privatisation mantra. This is the reason we're stumbling, years late, toward a National 'Class A Solution" , That was  only  ever  possible, to begin with at least, as; A socially provided platform.



The current government is no more responsible for the Howard government than the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd government was for Hawke/Keating or Hawke/Keating for Whitlam. A new government's starting point though is the legacy of what the previous government has left.

Labor had 6-years in office to bring a policy platform to effective fruition and failed.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> Oh noes, a quote from Malcolm Turnbull in the Australian. There's some accurate objectivity right there.




The Australian's objectivity certainly infuriates you, as it did your NBN guide and mentor, Stephen Conroy. 

The Oz certainly couldn't exist in Russia.  



> Reuters) - President Vladimir Putin tightened his control over Russia's media on Monday by dissolving the main state news agency and replacing it with an organization that is to promote Moscow's image abroad.
> 
> The move to abolish RIA Novosti and create a news agency to be known as Rossiya Segodnya is the second in two weeks strengthening Putin's hold on the media as he tries to reassert his authority after protests against his rule.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> The Australian's objectivity certainly infuriates you, as it did your NBN guide and mentor, Stephen Conroy.
> 
> The Oz certainly couldn't exist in Russia.




No, it doesn't infuriate me. I perfectly understand that they feel the need to push an agenda that ties with the opinions of their ever-declining readership. The last thing they want to do is start printing stories that upset their readers, so why start with the NBN?

I am confident however, that the NBN will be sending its 1s and 0s down the line long after The Australian has passed into the annals of history.

Oh, and this: http://www.zdnet.com/advance-australian-fair-1339306784/

and this http://delimiter.com.au/2012/03/27/oops/

On the upside, the Oz will indeed be compulsory reading in a few decades.... "wrong side of history" stories always make for great comedy for future generations.


----------



## sydboy007

Calliope said:


> The Australian's objectivity certainly infuriates you, as it did your NBN guide and mentor, Stephen Conroy.
> 
> The Oz certainly couldn't exist in Russia.




_Objectivity is a central philosophical concept, related to reality and truth.  A broad meaning of the term refers to the ability in any context to judge fairly, without bias or external influence (see journalistic objectivity); this second meaning of objectivity is sometimes used synonymously with neutrality._

It seems you don't understand the word so I though I'd help clear up your misunderstanding.

I'd argue the Oz would do very well in Russia as Rupert does not rock the boat when it's not good for business.  I dare say Rupert would be quite capable of running Russia Today broadly along the lines of Fox News.


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> _Objectivity is a central philosophical concept, related to reality and truth.  A broad meaning of the term refers to the ability in any context to judge fairly, without bias or external influence (see journalistic objectivity); this second meaning of objectivity is sometimes used synonymously with neutrality._
> 
> It seems you don't understand the word so I though I'd help clear up your misunderstanding.




Another Whiskers!


----------



## sydboy007

http://www.sortius-is-a-geek.com/fudged-numbers-abound-review/

an interesting read.  major points are

_..the review rewrites history by stating that only 66 000 and 82 000 total premises had been passed by June 30 2011 & 2012, even though BOTH NBN Co Corporate Plans (2012-15 and 2013-16) show that in 2011 183 000 premises had been passed in total. The 2013-16 Corporate Plan shows that 213 000 premises had been passed as of June 30 2012.

This is where much of the assumptions of a 2024 finish for an FTTP NBN come from. The worst part is that they don’t even try to hide the fact they are removing premises already passed from the figures, to the tune of 120 000 and 130 000 respectively.

The next thing fudged is the take-up rates. This would drastically affect any predictions on revenue, and we can clearly see that Turnbull’s flying monkeys have done him proud here.

Not only did they fudge the total take up rates, but also the speed tiers. Claiming that 19% of people in an area serviced by FTTP were taking up the service (overall, this is closer to 37%, and over 60% in some areas), and revising down figures for the higher plans._

_...with Henry Ergas being appointed to head up the Cost/Benefit Analysis. Why? This is the same Henry Ergas who claimed we’d all have to pay $215 a month to get returns that NBN Co predicted and that any costs over $17b was unacceptable for the NBN._

I'm sure Calliope will see the Strategic review and CBA as totally objective, even though a recent Tweet has confirmed Turnbull and Russelot are "partners in brine"

I'm starting to think Don Randall didn't get a fair shake of the stick considering what Turnbull has been up to.  Just standard political behaviour of jobs for mates that the ASF right only seem to think the Labor party engages in.

nb The highest cost data only NBN plans currently sit at around $130 / month for 100/40 with 1TB (terra byte) of downloads which is EXCEPTIONAL value.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> That stereotype has never been my position.




Doc here's a news flash...your a stereotype.


----------



## sydboy007

So_Cynical said:


> Doc here's a news flash...your a stereotype.




I actually find the Doc about the only centre right ASFer on here.  He at least has an understanding of the NBN plans from Labor and and the LN+P which is more than I can say for most of the other right ASFers who post on this topic even though they have no knowledge of it, but feel knowledgeable enough to comment on based mostly on their ideological biases.

Lets play the ball, not the man when we comment.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Whoa everyone.

Going Troppo usually occurs after Xmas.

Let's get back to the topic.

The NBN Rollout has been scrapped. 

Why is the question, and the follow on, what will replace it?

It was a silly brainfart by a government drunk on unearned money, with a need to make an impression.

It was never a goer in it's original iteration, uncosted, unfunded, no governance, with an unfair distribution to luvvie ABC suburbs, bypassing workers houses and units. 

Mundingburra, in Townsville, full of hairy legged Greens of both sexes, got it first up north.

Disgraceful.

gg


----------



## sydboy007

http://www.sortius-is-a-geek.com/hybrid-fibre-farce/

_If we look at the review’s “findings”, even without taking into account the technological problems, we can’t go past the redaction of prices. We cannot believe the “$100 per premises” figure earlier in the document when the actual upgrade cost and the actual cost per premises has been redacted.

One can only assume this cost is far higher than the Liberal party would wish us to see. This is all without including ANY cost of the actual network. In fact, the review clearly states that only renegotiation would be required to get this HFC farce off the ground.

One can only assume this cost is far higher than the Liberal party would wish us to see. This is all without including ANY cost of the actual network. In fact, the review clearly states that only renegotiation would be required to get this HFC farce off the ground.

One would assume that Foxtel aren’t just going to shut their pay TV network down to accommodate this new and unimproved NBN for free. Something that is a real possibility when we look at the review’s claims that they will attempt to open up another 70+ channels for data on the cable network.

What’s troubling is that peak speeds aren’t actually being quoted. There are examples of 3:1 ratios, minimum speeds (the 4-7Mbps figure), but no actual figures on what speeds would be offered through the HFC network.

A bigger problem is that they intend to move from 64-QAM to 256-QAM AND increase the number of channels available for HFC. Both these actions alone present some large risks, and high costs to NBN Co.

Firstly, QAM doesn’t tend to play nice once pushed into the higher numbers. Essentially, the larger your QAM constellation, the more susceptible to radio frequency interference (RFI) the system is. While HFC’s cable does actually have great shielding, the weak points in the network (notably the Optical Node and the HFC modem) that can suffer greatly from interference, especially if not shielded well.

There’s many frequency ranges that overlap with HFC, and any attempt to move from DOCSIS 3.0 (the current standard used by Telstra) to DOCSIS 3.1 pushes the top end frequencies deeper into the 3G/4G sphere (topping out at 1750Mhz). There’s cases of LTE phones distorting cable TV and causing drop outs for users.

The key with HFC networks is that they were designed to cover as many premises as possible between nodes. The current split is around 1 node to every 600 premises on the Telstra network, although much higher in areas that have Multi-Dwelling Units (MDUs). Redesigning this network will make deploying FTTN look like child’s play.

All this review is designed to do is line Rousselot’s mates at Telstra’s pockets. There is no logical reason to buy a network that the current owners don’t even want people signing up on (have you tried to sign up for Bigpond Cable or Optus Cable recently?), that one even had plans to fully dismantle by 2018 with Singtel-Optus’ Australian CEO citing:

This decision enables Optus to focus on delivering better service standards and more choice for customers through the NBN.
_


----------



## Calliope

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Whoa everyone.
> 
> Going Troppo usually occurs after Xmas.
> 
> Let's get back to the topic.
> 
> The NBN Rollout has been scrapped.
> 
> Why is the question, and the follow on, what will replace it?
> 
> It was a silly brainfart by a government drunk on unearned money, with a need to make an impression.
> 
> It was never a goer in it's original iteration, uncosted, unfunded, no governance, with an unfair distribution to luvvie ABC suburbs, bypassing workers houses and units.
> 
> Mundingburra, in Townsville, full of hairy legged Greens of both sexes, got it first up north.
> 
> Disgraceful.
> 
> gg




You are right GG, although some on these pages are still in denial. However in the Xmas spirit we should forgive them their trespasses.


----------



## So_Cynical

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Whoa everyone.
> 
> Going Troppo usually occurs after Xmas.
> 
> Let's get back to the topic.
> 
> The NBN Rollout has been scrapped.
> 
> Why is the question, and the follow on, what will replace it?
> 
> It was a silly brainfart by a government drunk on unearned money, with a need to make an impression.
> 
> It was never a goer in it's original iteration, uncosted, unfunded, no governance, with an unfair distribution to luvvie ABC suburbs, bypassing workers houses and units.
> 
> Mundingburra, in Townsville, full of hairy legged Greens of both sexes, got it first up north.
> 
> Disgraceful.
> 
> gg






Garpal Gumnut said:


> (5th-February-2011) I have it on good opinion from one of my Queensland ALP contacts , that the NBN is to be "modified".
> 
> gg




Have to hand it to you gg, almost 2 years later and your right...the NBN rollout as we knew it has been pretty much been scrapped, most likely to be replaced with a half arsed assortment of mostly dated technology and a dogs breakfast of connections, nodes and anything else that's not fibre.

That's the true disgrace.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

So_Cynical said:


> Have to hand it to you gg, almost 2 years later and your right...the NBN rollout as we knew it has been pretty much been scrapped, most likely to be replaced with a half arsed assortment of mostly dated technology and a dogs breakfast of connections, nodes and anything else that's not fibre.
> 
> That's the true disgrace.




I can hear your pain about a venture not achieved S_C , and respect your opinion.

I just don't believe it was ever affordable.

gg


----------



## drsmith

Simon Hackett on HFC in the NBN.

http://simonhackett.com/2013/12/14/hfc-in-the-nbn/


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> Simon Hackett on HFC in the NBN.
> 
> http://simonhackett.com/2013/12/14/hfc-in-the-nbn/




That certainly clears up many of the concerns with the HFC but still doesn't answer at all how much NBN Co intend on purchasing the HFC network for.  This is critical as we're talking billions of dollars that would actually leave FTTP as the economically viable option as well as the common sense option. 

On another note you're right that this is Labors fault, they had 6 years to get this network up to a position that Turnbull and the coalition couldn't make a mess of.  They have now provided a cash cow for LNP mates.  

What happened to Turnbull's transparency? * “Plainly the NBN Co should not release the unredacted document,” Mr Turnbull said in the letter to NBN Co.* 
http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...tails-of-strategic-review-20131217-hv60v.html


----------



## sydboy007

overhang said:


> What happened to Turnbull's transparency? * “Plainly the NBN Co should not release the unredacted document,” Mr Turnbull said in the letter to NBN Co.*
> http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...tails-of-strategic-review-20131217-hv60v.html




I get the feeling they have maybe been honest in what they're forecasting / willing to pay in the redacted sections, which probably means the figures we've been shown don't add up.

It will be interesting to see how hardball Telstra and Optus play next year.  They don't have to be as bad as Sol T, but if negotiations take over a year it's going to be further delays that the LN+P will likely try to blame on Labor.


----------



## sydboy007

http://www.zdnet.com/nbn-vdsl-trials-a-success-nbn-co-cto-7000023290/

MT will be happy.

Shame it was for a single user connection.

Maybe it should read "Single user VDSL trial via 3 to 4 year old internal copper a resounding success"

I also like how Ziggy and the NBN board are now trying to weasel out of the minimum speed guarantees.

They are obfuscating by interchanging line / sync speeds and data throughput speeds.

NBN should be able to provide minimum sync speeds easily enough.  In theory these speeds should be obtainable to any server on the RSPs network ie not out onto the real internet.  Most ISPs / RSPs have their own speedtest servers to show if this speed is being delivered.

NBN are trying to argue that they can't guarantee internet minimum speeds, but then no ISP does either.  I may not be able to get my full line speed to 1 particular site, but I should be able to use the full line speed across multiple sites, which in a share is easy enough to do.

So the NBN should be able to guarantee minimum sync speeds, but it sounds like they are not going to even do this, whereas the current FTTP and Wireless NBN are providing guarantees of 12 / 25 / 50 / 100 depending on the plan purchased.


----------



## sydboy007

how does the lower quality copper in Australia compare to that used by BT in the UK?

To say it's a bit like the current ashes series (in reverse) sums it up quite nicely.

Late 1015 or early 2016 will se either further minimum speed backflips OR an explosion in the number of nodes and cost of the network rollout


----------



## drsmith

*Rollout update for the week to December 15*

8043 brownfields and 2117 greenfields passed in the past week. Brownfields now passed is 267,991.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/weekly-progress-report.html

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco/documents/nbnco-rollout-metrics-15122013.pdf

The Strategic Review estimates 357,000 brownfields will be passed by June 30 2014.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/media/news/strategic-review.html

Meanwhile on costs,

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/contractors_seek_more_money_from_0qr6R0dCDvpRHtFuKoDeZM


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> *Rollout update for the week to December 15*
> 
> 
> Meanwhile on costs,
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/technology/contractors_seek_more_money_from_0qr6R0dCDvpRHtFuKoDeZM




Quigley said in his speech a few weeks back that they knew contractors were seeking more, and that those cost increases had been offset by other efficiencies in the rollout.

I noticed something else in the review too.....They have doubled the contingency, adding $3bn to the 'cost'. Taking away the added contingency fund drops the capex of the "revised" FTTP (scenario 2) down to $41bn, and the peak funding to ~$48.6bn.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Quigley said in his speech a few weeks back that they knew contractors were seeking more, and that those cost increases had been offset by other efficiencies in the rollout.



Well, like the rollout schedules produced under Quigley's administration, that's obviously not the case.

IIRC, the strategic review left the contingency was unchanged for the rollout in its current form (scenario 1), but doubled it for all remaining scenarios.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Well, like the rollout schedules produced under Quigley's administration, that's obviously not the case.
> 
> IIRC, the strategic review left the contingency was unchanged for the rollout in its current form (scenario 1), but doubled it for all remaining scenarios.




Why is it obviously not the case? I've not heard Ziggy (or anyone else) deny that statement.

Yes, the scenario I was talking about was #2, which was still 93% FTTP.


----------



## Calliope

*Blowout? What Blowout? - It's Just Another NBN Myth!*


----------



## sails

Calliope said:


> View attachment 55879
> 
> 
> *Blowout? What Blowout? - It's Just Another NBN Myth!*





 - but where are his red underpants???


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> *Blowout? What Blowout? - It's Just Another NBN Myth!*




Are you talking about the blowout in your beloved Coalition's policy?

You know, the "bulletproof" costings that went up 33% in 3 months?


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> Are you talking about the blowout in your beloved Coalition's policy?




No. He is blowing on about your beloved Rudd/Gillard/Conroy/Quigley policy (or lack of). Like you he is still in denial. I suggest you move on. Nothing to see here.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> No. He is blowing on about your beloved Rudd/Gillard/Conroy/Quigley policy (or lack of). Like you he is still in denial. I suggest you move on. Nothing to see here.




Nothing indeed. You are absolutely hilarious. I'd suggest a university study you, but with education funding on the chopping block, they probably couldn't afford it.

I think you'll find it's the Tony and Mal show that don't have a policy.... After promising 25Mbps to 100% by 2016, their review has just found it's impossible... Like we said all along.

Let me summarise what's happened to the Coalition's NBN policy since the election for you:

- Their promised coverage by end 2016 has dropped by 57%

- The cost has increased by 33%

- It has been revealed that zero testing has been done on the copper network.

- It has been revealed that they have received zero data on the condition of the copper network.

- It has been revealed that even the 33% blown-out costs doesn't include any money to buy the copper network.​
If that was an ALP policy, you'd be screaming "incompetance" from the rooftops.


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> If that was an ALP policy, you'd be screaming "incompetance" from the rooftops.




Being apparently better educated, I  would be screaming "incompetence".


----------



## sydboy007

NBNMyths said:


> Nothing indeed. You are absolutely hilarious. I'd suggest a university study you, but with education funding on the chopping block, they probably couldn't afford it.




Best to not engage the guy Myths.  He fully acknowledges he has no understanding of the technicalities of the IT world, has no interest in improved broadband in the country, yet he feels compelled to regularly comment.

But don't worry, every problem that occurs, especially the ones high lighted BEFORE the election, will be Labors' fault, especially the cost blowouts Malcolm has already admitted too.

Just wait to see how he blames Labor for the cost to buy / lease back the copper Howard sold off on the cheap.


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Being apparently better educated, I  would be screaming "incompetence".




HaHa. That's the best you can come up with? Perhaps you could actually comment on the failures and issues with the Coalition's policy?




sydboy007 said:


> Best to not engage the guy Myths.  He fully acknowledges he has no understanding of the technicalities of the IT world, has no interest in improved broadband in the country, yet he feels compelled to regularly comment.
> 
> But don't worry, every problem that occurs, especially the ones high lighted BEFORE the election, will be Labors' fault, especially the cost blowouts Malcolm has already admitted too.
> 
> Just wait to see how he blames Labor for the cost to buy / lease back the copper Howard sold off on the cheap.




Yes, I've already obtained 3 years worth of popcorn.


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> Best to not engage the guy Myths.  He fully acknowledges he has no understanding of the technicalities of the IT world, has no interest in improved broadband in the country, yet he feels compelled to regularly comment.




Sorry to intrude on the preserve of ideological technical experts like you and Myths, but i am surprised that I have copped this tirade merely because I depicted your beloved Conroy as a puffed-up idiot.:screwy:

I don't feel "compelled to regularly comment" as you put it. I post here only occasionally to add a little satire..

It's ironic that you are both stooping to _ad hominem_. Why?


----------



## boofhead

You're confused. It isn't about it being Conroy/Rudd idea. It's about the technology. You seem to keep coming back to Labor/Coalition when for many it isn't. If Abbott had an understanding of it and in 2010 wanted to do the FTTP build then he would have likely been voted in to power 3 years ago.

Go back and read most of your responses in this thread - you're interested in the Labor vs Coalition thing whereas a number of FTTP aren't interested in party politics but the network and technology.


----------



## Calliope

boofhead said:


> You're confused. It isn't about it being Conroy/Rudd idea. It's about the technology. You seem to keep coming back to Labor/Coalition when for many it isn't. If Abbott had an understanding of it and in 2010 wanted to do the FTTP build then he would have likely been voted in to power 3 years ago.
> 
> Go back and read most of your responses in this thread - you're interested in the Labor vs Coalition thing whereas a number of FTTP aren't interested in party politics but the network and technology.




Yes boof, I'm confused.  I inadvertently trespassed on to a leftist sacred site. It won"t happen again.


----------



## Macquack

Calliope said:


> Yes boof, I'm confused.  I inadvertently trespassed on to a *leftist sacred site*. It won"t happen again.




Boofhead makes a valid point and you trivialise it by insinuating he is a leftie.

Is that the best response you can come up with?


----------



## NBNMyths

Calliope said:


> Being apparently better educated, I  would be screaming "incompetence".






Calliope said:


> It's ironic that you are both stooping to _ad hominem_. Why?


----------



## boofhead

Calliope said:


> Yes boof, I'm confused.  I inadvertently trespassed on to a leftist sacred site. It won"t happen again.




There you are again. You want it to be a left vs right debate. You call anyone that supports FTTP as a Conroy supporter. Some FTTP supporters despise Conroy. Maybe I understand why - a number of the right really don't care about it or don't want the government to be involved. That's a different thing. It may explain why the Coalition are a mess on the subject.


----------



## Calliope

Macquack said:


> Boofhead makes a valid point and you trivialise it by insinuating he is a leftie.
> 
> Is that the best response you can come up with?




I'm afraid so Mac... and you are :topic

- - - Updated - - -



NBNMyths said:


>




:topic


----------



## H C

NBNMyths said:


> I think you'll find it's the Tony and Mal show that don't have a policy.... After promising 25Mbps to 100% by 2016, their review has just found it's impossible... Like we said all along.



yeah, I remember before the election they were making a big deal about how FttN was the way to go because it can be rolled out "quicker" than FttP. Turns out they were either misleading us or just incompetent...




NBNMyths said:


> - Their promised coverage by end 2016 has dropped by 57%
> 
> - The cost has increased by 33%
> 
> - It has been revealed that zero testing has been done on the copper network.
> 
> - It has been revealed that they have received zero data on the condition of the copper network.
> 
> - It has been revealed that even the 33% blown-out costs doesn't include any money to buy the copper network.​



Also those in HFC areas get shafted. It'll be interesting to see how this part turns out for Turnbull and GimpCo. I got my 3 years supply of popcorn too


----------



## sydboy007

Calliope said:


> I'm afraid so Mac... and you are :topic
> 
> - - - Updated - - -
> 
> 
> 
> :topic




Just to humour me, does the information in the below diagram worry you as to how much can potentially go wrong with the current LN+P plans for broadband?

Malcolm keeps referencing the UK as a model rollout that Australia can replicate, even though:

* the lower quality copper in Australia will require a significantly increased amount of nodes

* there has never been an FTTN rollout done by a non infrastructure owner

* there is a $0 cost assumption to accessing the copper and HFC networks and an assumption that access to the infrastructure will occur in the next 6-12 months.

* within 3 months the cost of the LN+P network rollout has increased by 33% from the rock solid costings provided pre election

* Malcolm has appointed ex Telstra employees to the NBN board who have no rollout or infrastructure experience but who are very much recognised Liberal supporters, has also appointed a strident critic of the FTTP rollout to do the technology "agnostic" CBA, and co owns a boat with one of the new appointees.  Oh, and it looks like they can continue to hold their Telstra shares.

* the LN+P have decided FTTN is cheaper than FTTP, even though they have not audited, and have no plans to audit, the quality of the copper network and have no legitimate way to estimate the remediation costs to provide a non guaranteed level of broadband speed.

* take up rates of FTTP in Australia are at 30%+ rates - some areas over 50% VOLUNTARILY, whereas FTTN in the UK has been at around 10% VOLUNTARILY.

Hopefully you can answer the questions rather than a personal jibe / attack.


----------



## sydboy007

H C said:


> It'll be interesting to see how this part turns out for Turnbull and GimpCo.




GimpCo just shows the level of bias you have _/sarcasm_

It is now the MTM(N) - Malcolm Turnbull Mess Network


----------



## sydboy007

The LN+P vision for broadband, proudly brought to you by TPG - cheap at just over $12K on a 24 month contract


----------



## sydboy007

Compared to FTTP NBN Business fibre, proudly brought to you by iiNet for under $3.8K and free calls thrown in.

Hmm, 5K install with TPG or $79.95 with iiNet


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> Just to humour me, does the information in the below diagram worry you as to how much can potentially go wrong with the current LN+P plans for broadband?




Anything to humour you sydboy...no I couldn't give a stuff.


----------



## H C

sydboy007 said:


> GimpCo just shows the level of bias you have _/sarcasm_
> 
> It is now the MTM(N) - Malcolm Turnbull Mess Network




Indeed and sadly this is what happens to all important communications infrastructure projects when you let clowns run them and then roll out a network based on outdated and obsolete technologies.


----------



## sydboy007

Calliope said:


> Anything to humour you sydboy...no I couldn't give a stuff.




:topic

Then could you just refrain from posting in this thread?  You add no value to the discussion except to present a biased point of view that has no understanding of the relevant technologies or implementation plans, and seems to have no interesting in gaining any understanding?

You criticise Labor for what you believe was a plan thought up on a plane flight, yet have complete faith in the current LN+P policy that was only launched in April and has seen cost blowouts, broken election commitments and a seemingly naive belief that Telstra and Optus will handover over assets of high economic value for free.

You can't even grasp that the SME market is currently faced with accessing fast broadband based on rates similar to what TPG are charging, where as the NBN is allowing them to gain access to similar high speed services for a 70% discount in line with what iiNet are offering.  Funny a Government supposedly firmly out to support the SME sector is happy to consign them to either 3rd rate infrastructure, or forces them pay exorbitant rates to gain access to world class infrastructure.

I get it you don't care about the topic.  I do.  If we're truly heading towards being a post industrial economy then probably the only way we'll manage to compete in a world full of poor and far hungrier workers is by having some of the best communications infrastructure in the world that encourages companies to set up in Australia to take advantage of that economic advantage.  Singapore and Korea are practically there, China will most likely be there in 10 years, and we'll be stuck on the infrastructure they moved on from or bypassed all together.

So if you don't give a stuff then don't waste our time with your posts that add no value to the discussion.


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> :topic
> 
> Then could you just refrain from posting in this thread?  You add no value to the discussion except to present a biased point of view that has no understanding of the relevant technologies or implementation plans, and seems to have no interesting in gaining any understanding?
> 
> You criticise Labor for what you believe was a plan thought up on a plane flight, yet have complete faith in the current LN+P policy that was only launched in April and has seen cost blowouts, broken election commitments and a seemingly naive belief that Telstra and Optus will handover over assets of high economic value for free.
> 
> You can't even grasp that the SME market is currently faced with accessing fast broadband based on rates similar to what TPG are charging, where as the NBN is allowing them to gain access to similar high speed services for a 70% discount in line with what iiNet are offering.  Funny a Government supposedly firmly out to support the SME sector is happy to consign them to either 3rd rate infrastructure, or forces them pay exorbitant rates to gain access to world class infrastructure.
> 
> I get it you don't care about the topic.  I do.  If we're truly heading towards being a post industrial economy then probably the only way we'll manage to compete in a world full of poor and far hungrier workers is by having some of the best communications infrastructure in the world that encourages companies to set up in Australia to take advantage of that economic advantage.  Singapore and Korea are practically there, China will most likely be there in 10 years, and we'll be stuck on the infrastructure they moved on from or bypassed all together.
> 
> So if you don't give a stuff then don't waste our time with your posts that add no value to the discussion.




:topic

For your information the topic is not about me. It is about the failure of NBN Co. I can understand your reluctance to stick to the topic when you would rather play the man.


----------



## H C

Calliope said:


> It is about the failure of NBN Co.




Good point. So far under the new management they've failed to roll out any brownfield nodes in streets and that 25mbps promise for "every household and business" in Australia has been downgraded to 43%. Discuss


----------



## sydboy007

H C said:


> Good point. So far under the new management they've failed to roll out any brownfield nodes in streets and that 25mbps promise for "every household and business" in Australia has been downgraded to 43%. Discuss




Yes.  His LN+P tinted glasses don't allow him to see the increasing failures of the current Government.

_/sarcasm_

I love the fact the only NBN VDSL FTTB trial so far had just 1 user connected.  Not sure exactly what it was supposed to prove, but hey 1 test user in 3 months is pretty good going by the MTM team.   Combined with the enforced slow down for the FTTP rollout and things are looking on the up and up

_/end sarcasm_


----------



## noco

It would appear from this link from the Australian that neither side of politices have a firm grip of this "WHITE ELEPHANT" called the NBN.

Conroy had no idea what it was going to finally cost and Malcom Turbull has also underestimated the final cost of the revamp NBN by many billions of dollars.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...n-conroys-fibre/story-e6frgd0x-1226793319264#


----------



## sydboy007

noco said:


> It would appear from this link from the Australian that neither side of politices have a firm grip of this "WHITE ELEPHANT" called the NBN.
> 
> Conroy had no idea what it was going to finally cost and Malcom Turbull has also underestimated the final cost of the revamp NBN by many billions of dollars.
> 
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...n-conroys-fibre/story-e6frgd0x-1226793319264#




A white elephant would be something no one uses.  Considering the extremely fast take up rates of the NBN, it seems very unlikely that it wont achieve the forecast take up rates.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

noco said:


> It would appear from this link from the Australian that neither side of politices have a firm grip of this "WHITE ELEPHANT" called the NBN.
> 
> Conroy had no idea what it was going to finally cost and Malcom Turbull has also underestimated the final cost of the revamp NBN by many billions of dollars.
> 
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...n-conroys-fibre/story-e6frgd0x-1226793319264#




White elephant, only half describes it.

The NBN will be a drain on the public purse for 2 generations.

Conroy and Rudd have much to answer for.

gg


----------



## H C

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Conroy and Rudd have much to answer for.



False. That would only be true if NBNco was going ahead with the plan as they intended. Since there has been a change of government the responsibility for the current direction of the "new" look GimpCo lies with Abbott and Turnbull thus they must shoulder the blame for the eventual failure and any waste associated with it. Surely the promises they made before the election must mean something...


----------



## drsmith

Broadband Availability and Quality: Summary Report 23 December 2013

http://www.minister.communications....4/205061/myBroadband_Summary_Report_FINAL.pdf

There's been no rollout updates from NBN Co since December 15.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Broadband Availability and Quality: Summary Report 23 December 2013
> 
> http://www.minister.communications....4/205061/myBroadband_Summary_Report_FINAL.pdf
> 
> There's been no rollout updates from NBN Co since December 15.




I cannot believe the below table.  They're claiming around 1/3 of ADSL customers are getting at least 21Mbs.

I deal with tens of thousands of ADSL connections in my job and I'd estimate < 20% get much past 12Mbs

I wonder where they got the 20K worth of empirical observations, because their results are definitely skewed to make the current broadband situation look far better than it really is.

Then they say:

_Of premises with access to xDSL broadband services over copper, about 3.7 million are located in areas with an estimated peak median download speed of less than 9 Mbps, and 920,000 in areas with an estimated peak median download speed of less than 4.8 Mbps_

It would be great if they'd provide information used in formation these assumptions.


----------



## drsmith

The data inputs are outlined on pages 3 and 4 of the report.


----------



## sydboy007

http://www.buddeblog.com.au/frompaulsdesk/analysis-of-nbn-2-0/

A pretty unbiased analysis of where things are and where they could end up


----------



## drsmith

Apologies if the following has been posted before.

http://blogs.abc.net.au/sa/2013/12/new-recruit-to-the-nbn-board.html

It's an ABC interview with Simon Hackett from early December.


----------



## sptrawler

The three units next to mine, which have the NBN on the wall, still aren't connected. 
I will keep you posted, my guess is our place will get connected first, a mate is thinking of moving in. 
There is a rider, he is only moving in untill he finds a place to buy, then it will be disconnected again.
What a magic way to spend $50Billion dollars.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> The three units next to mine, which have the NBN on the wall, still aren't connected.
> I will keep you posted, my guess is our place will get connected first, a mate is thinking of moving in.
> There is a rider, he is only moving in untill he finds a place to buy, then it will be disconnected again.
> What a magic way to spend $50Billion dollars.




Hmmm

That's in no way like someone renting and getting the phone and / or ADSL connected and disconnected when they leave?  No idea what the full cost of the copper network was, but probably up there aroudn the $50B in todays dollars.

At least with the NBN getting connected at a new rental property can occur within a few hours if you're lucky.  I know my company has been able to get people signed up and active on the same day in a few instances.  Never get that to happen via ADSL.


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> Hmmm
> 
> That's in no way like someone renting and getting the phone and / or ADSL connected and disconnected when they leave?  No idea what the full cost of the copper network was, but probably up there aroudn the $50B in todays dollars.
> 
> At least with the NBN getting connected at a new rental property can occur within a few hours if you're lucky.  I know my company has been able to get people signed up and active on the same day in a few instances.  Never get that to happen via ADSL.




No I'm not renting, will use the property myself, next door do the same. 
The Lady in the end unit is 94 years old, I've told her it is cheaper and quicker to get on the NBN, she says "I'm happy with what I have".
It just does my head in, when they are spending all this money on useless infrastructure, when they could be focusing it on CBD, Industrial and small to medium enterprise.
Even you Syd, must see the wastage.
It's your money, not mine
it's your future,not mine.lol

Actually Syd you are probably better off registering 'Syds Aussie burgers' than trying to make a career out of I.T.
Fast food is probably the fastest growing industry in Australia, the fifo family have to go somewhere.lol
Unfortunately I bet when you try to register 'Syd burgers' it's already gone.lol
Been there done that.lol


----------



## sptrawler

Try and register any fast food or I.T name, see how you go. It doesn't cost anything, just see if the name is available.

Pretend you've lost your job and your going to start your own business, give it a go.
A bit off topic but an enlightening experience.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> No I'm not renting, will use the property myself, next door do the same.
> The Lady in the end unit is 94 years old, I've told her it is cheaper and quicker to get on the NBN, she says "I'm happy with what I have".
> It just does my head in, when they are spending all this money on useless infrastructure, when they could be focusing it on CBD, Industrial and small to medium enterprise.
> Even you Syd, must see the wastage.
> It's your money, not mine
> it's your future,not mine.lol
> 
> Actually Syd you are probably better off registering 'Syds Aussie burgers' than trying to make a career out of I.T.
> Fast food is probably the fastest growing industry in Australia, the fifo family have to go somewhere.lol
> Unfortunately I bet when you try to register 'Syd burgers' it's already gone.lol
> Been there done that.lol




Oh I fully agree it would have been better to roll our the NBN in the capitals.  Certainly there would be a lot more people connected which would have made the economics stack up better.  Then again there's the social policy aspect which ws about providing an upgrade to broadband in the main areas that either had limited access to broadband, or poor quality access.

Sounds like your neighbour probably just has a phone line.  She'll be just as happy getting an NBN voice service.  I dare say she's a Telstra users so am sure Telstra will nudge her onto the NBN before the copper gets cut.

It's a shame the SME sector was so quiet the last few years.  They are the ones who could have gone from needing to pay $4-500+ a month (on top of sky high install costs) for high speed broadband to < $130 for 100/40 plans.

The Coalition will be in the same boat, probably worse, because the Nationals will want the focus to remain on rural and regional areas over the cities.

It'll probably take 5-10 years for you to realise it, but the Coalition version of the NBN is the one that's going to waste tens of billions and leave us with sub standard broadband for a couple of decades.


----------



## drsmith

B]Rollout update for the week to January 05[/B]



> A total of 19,843 additional lots/premises were passed/covered by the network since the week ending 15-Dec-13, of which 5,183 were in Brownfield and 3,249 were in Greenfield areas. Fixed wireless coverage increased by 11,411 premises.




Total brownfields passed is now 273,174. Brownfields passed in the 6-months from July 01 to Dec 31 was 109,659. The fixed line rollout numbers were little changed over the Xmas-new year fortnight (Dec 22 to Jan05).

http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/weekly-progress-report.html



drsmith said:


> *Rollout update for the week to December 15*
> 
> 8043 brownfields and 2117 greenfields passed in the past week. Brownfields now passed is 267,991.
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/weekly-progress-report.html
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco/documents/nbnco-rollout-metrics-15122013.pdf
> 
> The Strategic Review estimates 357,000 brownfields will be passed by June 30 2014.
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/media/news/strategic-review.html
> 
> Meanwhile on costs,
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/technology/contractors_seek_more_money_from_0qr6R0dCDvpRHtFuKoDeZM


----------



## IFocus

sydboy007 said:


> It'll probably take 5-10 years for you to realise it, but the Coalition version of the NBN is the one that's going to waste tens of billions and leave us with sub standard broadband for a couple of decades.




yep best way to waste money is do the same job x 2.

Also as the revenues will be lower under the Coalition plan it truly will be a big white elephant all be it an out dated one.


----------



## sydboy007

IFocus said:


> yep best way to waste money is do the same job x 2.
> 
> Also as the revenues will be lower under the Coalition plan it truly will be a big white elephant all be it an out dated one.




I think Corgi Bernardi sums up the Liberal understanding of technology.  

His latest book is only available in paperback.  No electronic version is available.  I dare say the guy has no idea what  kindle / Kobo / Nook is.  Tony was the same with his Battlelines book.

Considering Amazon has been selling more ebooks than paper versions since 2010 it shows just how far behind the times they really are in their understanding.

I suppose the target audiences for their books probably have even less of an understanding, so maybe it makes sense after all.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

sptrawler said:


> The three units next to mine, which have the NBN on the wall, still aren't connected.
> I will keep you posted, my guess is our place will get connected first, a mate is thinking of moving in.
> There is a rider, he is only moving in untill he finds a place to buy, then it will be disconnected again.
> What a magic way to spend $50Billion dollars.




Such a waste.

All from an ALP, Rudd and Conroy brainfart.

As Maggie Thatcher famously said.

"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money to spend."

So true.

Now the coalition have to build up our savings again. Same ole, same ole.

gg


----------



## sptrawler

IFocus said:


> yep best way to waste money is do the same job x 2.
> 
> Also as the revenues will be lower under the Coalition plan it truly will be a big white elephant all be it an out dated one.




How many of your Mandurah units are connected?


----------



## sptrawler

What happens if the Government pulls the pin on the NBN.
It honours existing contracts, but decides the project is too big, too costly.
Then Telstra keeps its obsolete copper and have to meet consumer expectations.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> What happens if the Government pulls the pin on the NBN.
> It honours existing contracts, but decides the project is too big, too costly.
> Then Telstra keeps its obsolete copper and have to meet consumer expectations.




i suppose you'll be happy.

it was a key election promise though, the kind Tony said we can believe in since it was written down, but seems Liberals breaking election promises is somehow not nearly as bad as when Labor does it.

The main thrust of the promise has already been broken - 2016 pushed back to 2019 and now no guaranteed speeds.

Personally I'd be happier to see it canned than the absolute dogs breakfast being proposed.  At least that way when we have a Federal Govt that is forward thinking we can start a new FTTP rollout.  If the MTM gets built we'll be stuck on sub standard broadband for a couple of decades.


----------



## overhang

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Such a waste.
> 
> All from an ALP, Rudd and Conroy brainfart.
> 
> As Maggie Thatcher famously said.
> 
> "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money to spend."
> 
> So true.
> 
> Now the coalition have to build up our savings again. Same ole, same ole.
> 
> gg




And the trouble with capitalism is the other people don't have money, its all at the top and distributed between the select few lucky enough to be born into it or the few outliers that work their way up through the system.  Neither is a perfect system and a balance between the two that ensures incentive for hard work is rewarded and that regardless of upbringing we all have access to healthcare and education is needed.

By the coalition building up the savings again you mean selling our profitable assets in the way of Aus Post and Medibank Private.  One day when Labor gets us in this mess there will be no assets to sell because the coalition don't invest in infrastructure and then and only then will we find out just how good of economic managers they are.  It's easy to govern on the credit card but its also easy to govern by paying the credit card off by selling the car and the house.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Broadband Availability and Quality: Summary Report 23 December 2013
> 
> http://www.minister.communications....4/205061/myBroadband_Summary_Report_FINAL.pdf
> 
> There's been no rollout updates from NBN Co since December 15.




This was the report that teh Coalition said in the April 2013 policy release:

_“Within 90 days the department of Broadband Communications and the digital economy, with the assistance of NBN Co and private carriers, will provide Parliament with a ranking of broadband quality and availability in all areas of Australia. This ranking will be published for comment and review and will guide prioritisation of the rollout.”_

Don't know about you but 3 pages of large font based high level summary, and certainly doesn't provide _a ranking of broadband quality and availability in all areas of Australia._

There's no geographical based data that would help NBNCo modify it's rollout plans for _prioritisation of the rollout_.

Pretty much the report - I'd call it a brochure - appears to be based on a sample size of 20,000, with no information on how representative that sample was, and then everything else in the report has been extrapolated from that.  

Hands up those who think a sample of 20,000 for a project rolling out to another 7 or 8 million premises is good enough to base your whole rollout schedule on?  Hands up those who think this sampling will highlight those areas where the copper may be a bigger than average problem?  Doesn't seem a very good basis to begin planning on.

Seems the coalition can't even keep a policy promise as simple as a report.


----------



## drsmith

Syd,

What was Labor's 2016 rollout objective ?

That's right, it was a very scientific have the rollout be active in every electorate after 9-years in office. What needs based objective would have that satisfied ?

The Coalition has clearly failed to reach its 2016 target, but Labor's failed to reach many downward revised targets throughout it's 6-years in office. It's this relative position of the two major parties that hurts Labor much more than the Coalition walking part of it's pre-election targets and will continue to do so for some time. After 6-years in office, Labor left the electorate with little more than a dream and the incoming Coalition government with a mess.

That being said, the Coalition will obviously need the rollout to progress much more smoothly than Labor's did from the 2014 corporate plan to be released from NBN Co to have any effective political advantage on this in the next and subsequent elections.

The next steps from the above document are outlined under the title Next Steps.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> Syd,
> 
> What was Labor's 2016 rollout objective ?
> 
> That's right, it was a very scientific have the rollout be active in every electorate after 9-years in office. What needs based objective would have that satisfied ?
> 
> The Coalition has clearly failed to reach its 2016 target, but Labor's failed to reach many downward revised targets throughout it's 6-years in office. *It's this relative position of the two major parties that hurts Labor much more than the Coalition*




As far as political damage i think your right, Noalition voters don't want the govt to do anything while Labor voters wanted a world class NBN...what we are going to get (as i have been saying for 10 months) is a $40B+ dogs Breakfast, a bits and pieces, half assed NBN.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Syd,
> 
> That being said, the Coalition will obviously need the rollout to progress much more smoothly than Labor's did from the 2014 corporate plan to be released from NBN Co to have any effective political advantage on this in the next and subsequent elections.




....and that is rather unlikely.

The startup period of any major project is where the biggest delays and teething problems occur. Those years have already passed for FTTP, and the rollout gathers pace all the time.

It took 3 years (and many technological changes) to go from FTTP trial to volume rollout. Now (as Paul Budde wrote), the Coalition are starting from scratch all over again, and will experience all those teething issues for not only FTTN but also their proposed HFC upgrade. There's no FTTN in Australia. There's been no testing of FTTN on thin Australian copper, so even node range is not yet known. There are no FTTN cabinets built for Australian heat. There's no knowledge of the condition of the copper or the HFC. They don't even have access to basic maps of copper or HFC yet, let alone being in a position to commence a trial rollout.

As time goes on, I think they'll be lucky to have much more than an FTTN trial running by early 2016.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Syd,
> 
> What was Labor's 2016 rollout objective ?
> 
> That's right, it was a very scientific have the rollout be active in every electorate after 9-years in office. What needs based objective would have that satisfied ?
> 
> The Coalition has clearly failed to reach its 2016 target, but Labor's failed to reach many downward revised targets throughout it's 6-years in office. It's this relative position of the two major parties that hurts Labor much more than the Coalition walking part of it's pre-election targets and will continue to do so for some time. After 6-years in office, Labor left the electorate with little more than a dream and the incoming Coalition government with a mess.
> 
> That being said, the Coalition will obviously need the rollout to progress much more smoothly than Labor's did from the 2014 corporate plan to be released from NBN Co to have any effective political advantage on this in the next and subsequent elections.
> 
> The next steps from the above document are outlined under the title Next Steps.




If the Government doesn't face a whole host of issues like Labor did in their learning curve for FTTP, I'll be greatly amazed.  

Optus and Telstra hold the key though.  If the Government has to pay anything for their networks the cost advantage of the MTM will pretty quickly disappear.

How many non FTTP MTM connections do you believe would show "success" for their project?  They might score some quick runs with FTTB, but then if they do allow cherry picking by the other carriers I hate to see how the economics of the leftovers of the MTM will stack up.

The 2016 target was a KEY election promise.  There's no way of knowing, but I wonder how many votes that would have cost the Coalition at the election if they'd had to walk away from their commitment before the election?  It was obviously an important enough issue that they were forced to release a policy on in and move away from the rip it up and cancel the rollout.

Some of the next steps are supposed to have already occurred ie the report we're supposed to have had released prio to Christmas h been turned into a next step.


----------



## IFocus

sydboy007 said:


> Personally I'd be happier to see it canned than the absolute dogs breakfast being proposed.  .





I am starting to think the same pointless blowing it on FTTN



> There are no FTTN cabinets built for Australian heat.




Syd any idea what the temperature rating would be of the gear required in a FTTN cabinet?  

50 degrees c max?


----------



## H C

sydboy007 said:


> The 2016 target was a KEY election promise.  There's no way of knowing, but I wonder how many votes that would have cost the Coalition at the election if they'd had to walk away from their commitment before the election?  It was obviously an important enough issue that they were forced to release a policy on in and move away from the rip it up and cancel the rollout.




Well the thing I was saying long ago is that they only had to fool enough people long enough to win the election, the cow plop pie they announced in April did the trick. Now it doesn't matter, the coalition clowns patchwork plan is shaping up to be a unmitigated disaster just as they wanted, so we will still get the cow plop pie but one from more sickly cow with diarrhea. Of course judging from the comments here it's obvious they didn't have to do much hard work to fool some people so in 2016 we should offer them glasses rather than spoons...


----------



## NBNMyths

IFocus said:


> Syd any idea what the temperature rating would be of the gear required in a FTTN cabinet?
> 
> 50 degrees c max?




I posted a link a while back to a VDSL2 DSLAM, and yes the max operating temp was 50 ºC. No way will that be achieved without active cooling for the cabinets. I'm already shuddering at the power bill for air-conditioning ~60,000 roadside cabinets.

EDIT: Here's an example: ftp://ftp.zyxel.com/VES-1602FE-57/datasheet/VES-1602FE-57_2.pdf

0-50 ºC, and 10-95% humidity. So they'll need reverse-cycle AC to cool, heat and dehumidify depending on the time of year and geographic location.


----------



## sydboy007

NBNMyths said:


> I posted a link a while back to a VDSL2 DSLAM, and yes the max operating temp was 50 ºC. No way will that be achieved without active cooling for the cabinets. I'm already shuddering at the power bill for air-conditioning ~60,000 roadside cabinets.
> 
> EDIT: Here's an example: ftp://ftp.zyxel.com/VES-1602FE-57/datasheet/VES-1602FE-57_2.pdf
> 
> 0-50 ºC, and 10-95% humidity. So they'll need reverse-cycle AC to cool, heat and dehumidify depending on the time of year and geographic location.




Huawei seem to have from -40 to +65 operational temperature, but like all electronics the more time you spend at the upper limits, the faster the equipment will break down.  Still, it doesn't take too much over say 30 degrees to get into the upper ranges of operational temperatures inside a sealed box.

It might be possible to use mil-spec equipment - no idea if they do that for VDSL technology - to withstand higher operating temperatures, but either way you will be paying a lot of additional cost over the standard technology.

If they can get away with non active cooling, they will also see much higher temperature swings inside the node, which causes other issues too, as the circuit boards and other components expand and contract with the temperature swings.  That's why most electronic equipment like a nice data centre with aircon that keeps things at a relatively constant temperature.

I'm just looking forward to the first nodes in a leafy Sydney North Shore suburb being installed, when Mrs Marsh is standing with her placard out front the white picket fence demanding the eyesore be moved.  Between the shading of her petunias and the graffiti magnet it will be, she doesn't see why they can't be underground.

*NB - the current Government has kept the ban on Huawei so not too relevant, but doubt other vendors have much better high temperature tolerances.


----------



## DB008

> I'm just looking forward to the first nodes in a leafy Sydney North Shore suburb being installed, when Mrs Marsh is standing with her placard out front the white picket fence demanding the eyesore be moved.  Between the shading of her petunias and the graffiti magnet it will be, she doesn't see why they can't be underground.




So....
Who is at fault? Libs or ALP?
Who started this project?


----------



## Smurf1976

sydboy007 said:


> Huawei seem to have from -40 to +65 operational temperature, but like all electronics the more time you spend at the upper limits, the faster the equipment will break down.  Still, it doesn't take too much over say 30 degrees to get into the upper ranges of operational temperatures inside a sealed box.
> 
> It might be possible to use mil-spec equipment - no idea if they do that for VDSL technology - to withstand higher operating temperatures, but either way you will be paying a lot of additional cost over the standard technology.
> 
> If they can get away with non active cooling, they will also see much higher temperature swings inside the node, which causes other issues too, as the circuit boards and other components expand and contract with the temperature swings.  That's why most electronic equipment like a nice data centre with aircon that keeps things at a relatively constant temperature.



I've worked servicing and installing electronic equipment outdoors in metal boxes. Nothing to do with the NBN, but electronics nonetheless. Noting that this was professional grade equipment built to a strict standard, not consumer electronics built down to a price, comments as follows.

Temperature - On a hot day (high 30's is about as high as it gets down here) everything inside the box is too hot to touch if it's in full sun. You'd be looking at temperatures around 15 - 20 degrees higher than ambient due to the direct heating from the sun plus internal heat generation (anything that uses electricity produces at least some heat in operation). So in Hobart you'd expect the temperature inside to range from about 0 to about 60 degrees. Somewhere like Perth or Adelaide it would get into the mid 60's I'd expect. Inland parts of mainland Australia it could approach 70.

A complication in that is the surrounding ground surface. If it's natural bush or something like an asphalt road or a water reservoir then it doesn't reflect a lot of heat back onto the cabinet and so it's only heated on the side the sun is actually coming from. But if it's concrete or something like a light coloured fence then that would reflect more heat, thus heating the cabinet from both sides and raising the temperature further.

You can keep the temperature down a bit using simple mechanical ventilation. Exhaust fan blows air out the top and sucks it in the bottom. But unless you're in an incredibly clean environment (eg natural bushland not beside a road) then you'll end up with a box full of dust rather quickly unless you use a filter on the air inlet. And if you use a filter then it needs replacement every 3 - 6 months depending on location and how dusty it is. And if it was somewhere really dusty, like near a beach (sand blowing around) or heavy industry (coal dust etc) then it's going to be blocked in no time. If you're in a city then just take a look at things in the CBD which aren't cleaned too often and you'll see that they're covered in a film of black muck (presumably from vehicle exhausts, tyres wearing away, general contamination of the air due to the sheer volume of activity - even the rubber on your shoe soles wears away and ends up in the air or down the drain).

The other option for cooling is to air-condition the box. It works but now you've got a need for a more substantial supply of electricity, the issue being finding somewhere to get that from close by rather than the cost of power as such, and you've also got an air-conditioner which will inevitably fail at some point too. Not to mention that any external condenser is prone to vandalism.

So how long do electronics actually last outside in a metal box? Here's some real data.

In inland parts of Tasmania, including Hobart (not really inland but close enough) and Launceston it's around 30 years lifespan. But go to a coastal location and salt spray becomes a major issue, corroding the cabinet itself (unless it's stainless steel which is expensive) rather quickly. Steel rusts once the paint goes, aluminium also falls apart due to corrosion. And if it's somewhere near an industry emitting sulphur fumes then it's a nightmare with corrosion - you can easily spot a vehicle (for example) that has been routinely parked in such a place as it looks "old" alarmingly quickly. Sulphur leads to corrosion to the point that there's a true story at a certain factory down here of a company vehicle (ute) literally snapping in half due to the extent of corrosion. Needless to say, cabinets fall apart pretty quickly too - realistic lifespan is 2 years.

How many places are subject the salt spray issue? Pretty much anywhere on the coast where the wind blows from the sea to inland - that's most places on the coast. 

How many places have sulphur pollution? It's emitted in potentially problematic quantities by places that process metallic ores (smelters), anything which burns coal or fuel oil and in some cases by gas processing plants may also emit sulphur. Whilst most coal used in Australia is low in sulphur (mostly around 0.3 - 0.5%), there are instances where much higher sulphur content coal (approaching 4%) is used and it does cause pollution issues at times. So whilst it's not a mainstream issue, there would be at least a few places where cabinets will rust due to pollution from sulphur.

But what about that heat? The same electronics that last 30 years in Tas (removed due to being obsolete) fail after 20 years in Adelaide. Whilst Tas does get the occasional very hot day (record for Hobart is 41.8), they are relatively infrequent compared to the heatwaves which occur quite routinely in SA. I don't have data for more inland regions, but I'd guess that they would have an even shorter lifespan for the equipment.

Cold is also a potential issue, albeit one easily resolved by heating the cabinet with an internal resistive (electric) heater. But it's certainly quite possible to end up with a box dripping wet on the inside due to condensation in some locations if it's not heated or ventilated adequately (but ventilation means dust).

Another issue is graffiti. Roadside cabinets are a magnet for it and attitudes vary across the country. Some councils ignore it, others see it as an emergency and require removal within 24 hours (including weekends and public holidays). If the asset owner doesn't remove it then the council does - sending the owner a bill for an after hours call out and the cost of the paint (which will be whatever colour the council happens to think looks nice, typically ends up being a dark colour which causes more problems when the sun comes out as it gets hotter than a light colour would).

Now, if they build the cabinets from stainless steel, keep them regularly painted in a light colour (which will be anything from once a decade to once a day repainting depending on graffiti), only put them in places near existing power infrastructure that's readily accessible and don't expect the electronics to last more than 15 or so years then it's all going to be just fine. A lot of ifs and buts there though.


----------



## sydboy007

http://www.telepower.com.au/INT94b.PDF

From the mouth of Telstra back in 1994

_In Australia air temperatures in excess of 45 °C are not uncommon. Dense packaging of the electronics within the housings results in areas of relatively concentrated heat generation which must be dissipated. Power conversion equipment can be a significant source of the heat energy. Telstra's experience shows the temperature in presently used housings can vary from 40 °C to 60 °C daily.  *Reduction of heat using an active cooling system raises system costs and fan-forced air circulation does not always provide significant cooling.  Elevated temperatures have an adverse affect on the reliability of electronics*. Dry-out of electrolytic capacitors might be expected to threaten the reliability of power conversion equipment.  Similarly, the service-life degradation of batteries as a function of operating temperature is well known._

I wonder how many of these unforeseeable issues will plague the MTM rollout?


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> I posted a link a while back to a VDSL2 DSLAM, and yes the max operating temp was 50 ºC. No way will that be achieved without active cooling for the cabinets. I'm already shuddering at the power bill for air-conditioning ~60,000 roadside cabinets.
> 
> EDIT: Here's an example: ftp://ftp.zyxel.com/VES-1602FE-57/datasheet/VES-1602FE-57_2.pdf
> 
> 0-50 ºC, and 10-95% humidity. So they'll need reverse-cycle AC to cool, heat and dehumidify depending on the time of year and geographic location.



Myths,

Take a closer look at the application diagram in the above link and you'll see the obvious error in your post.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

The whole NBN Rollout is a shambles, and as is usual with ALP ideas, the Coalition have to try and make it pay for itself.

Such a massive waste.

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Myths,
> 
> Take a closer look at the application diagram in the above link and you'll see the obvious error in your post.




That link is to an FTTB version, but the street cabinet version isn't much different. -10 to 60 º, and still 10-95% RH.
http://www.zyxel.com/au/en/products_services/ves_1624ft_55a.shtml?t=p


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> So....
> Who is at fault? Libs or ALP?
> Who started this project?




The libs, because it's _their_ FTTN system that requires the huge (fridge-size) powered street cabinets every ~400m along every street:



…and the pictured FTTN cabinet isn't actively cooled. How big will it be in hotter areas of Australia, where AC is required?


The ALP's NBN requires much smaller cabinets, and only a few per suburb:


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> That link is to an FTTB version, but the street cabinet version isn't much different. -10 to 60 º, and still 10-95% RH.
> http://www.zyxel.com/au/en/products_services/ves_1624ft_55a.shtml?t=p



Not 0-50 ºC as you so boldly claimed.

It's your problem that you struggle so much with acknowledging when you're wrong.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> It's your problem that can't acknowledge when you're wrong.




I'm not sure what your point is. 

I quickly posted a link to what turned out to be FTTB version. Does the 10 º extra street cabinet version make any difference to whether they'll need active cooling or not? Not in most parts of Australia it doesn't, so the point stands.

Tasmania and (close)east-coat mainland aside, 40+ degree days are common, which would easily lead to >60 º in an uncooled cabinet full of heat-generating active electronics. So either you cool them (adding cost, size and power consumption), or you don't and expect no communications in hot weather and regular replacements due to failure. Which option wood you pick?

_EDIT: While I couldn't find any testing of cabinets, I did find a test of car interior temperatures by the RACQ. It found the peak air temp inside a car parked in full sun on a 32.5 º day reached 75.1 º after two hours. Doesn't bode well for a cabinet full of heat-gereating equipment sitting in the sun all day, does it?_

There's a reason why even Telstra's baby rural exchanges are made of insulated sandwich panel and have redundant AC units.


----------



## H C

DB008 said:


> So....
> Who is at fault? Libs or ALP?




The "Libs" are at fault. They are insisting on changing the original NBN plan to something that requires littering Australia with many ugly inefficient nodes. Think about what they are doing here. They are essentially taking an exchange and the technology required to make one operate, splitting it up and then placing those chunks out in the streets. It's not just inefficient, it's a sloppy solution.


----------



## IFocus

NBNMyths said:


> The libs, because it's _their_ FTTN system that requires the huge (fridge-size) powered street cabinets every ~400m along every street:
> View attachment 56269
> 
> …and the pictured FTTN cabinet isn't actively cooled. How big will it be in hotter areas of Australia, where AC is required?
> 
> 
> The ALP's NBN requires much smaller cabinets, and only a few per suburb:
> 
> View attachment 56270




Is the cabinet just a termination point or are there active components?


----------



## NBNMyths

IFocus said:


> Is the cabinet just a termination point or are there active components?




In FTTN cabinets there are active components. It's where the fibre finishes and the copper starts. So you have VDSL2 DSLAMs (which are powered), plus AC-DC converters to send the DC voltage down the copper, and backup batteries.

In FTTP cabinets, there are no active components and no electricity. They contain the GPON (Gigabit Passive Optical Network) splitters. There is one cabinet for every ~288 premises. Those cabinets then link to the area's FAN (Fibre Access Node), which is active (powered), and typically housed in a telephone exchange.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> I'm not sure what your point is.
> 
> I quickly posted a link to what turned out to be FTTB version. Does the 10 º extra street cabinet version make any difference to whether they'll need active cooling or not? Not in most parts of Australia it doesn't, so the point stands.




and emphasised a max operating temp of 50 ºC, twice.



NBNMyths said:


> I posted a link a while back to a VDSL2 DSLAM, and yes the max operating temp was 50 ºC. No way will that be achieved without active cooling for the cabinets. I'm already shuddering at the power bill for air-conditioning ~60,000 roadside cabinets.
> 
> EDIT: Here's an example: ftp://ftp.zyxel.com/VES-1602FE-57/datasheet/VES-1602FE-57_2.pdf
> 
> 0-50 ºC, and 10-95% humidity. So they'll need reverse-cycle AC to cool, heat and dehumidify depending on the time of year and geographic location.




You obviously don't want to acknowledge you're wrong and by subsequently attempting to discount the 10 º extra in the street cabinet version, you demonstrate a further ignorance in terms of the flexibility that provides in terms of both passive and active ventilation.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> and emphasised a max operating temp of 50 ºC, twice.
> 
> 
> 
> You obviously don't want to acknowledge you're wrong and by subsequently attempting to discount the 10 º extra in the street cabinet version, you demonstrate a further ignorance in terms of the flexibility that provides in terms of both passive and active ventilation.




I did acknowledge I was wrong re the 50 v 60 º.

I then wrote that the 10 º makes little difference for most parts of Australia. For reliable operation, the cabinets are going to need active cooling and/or humidity control. Do you dispute this?


----------



## IFocus

drsmith said:


> and emphasised a max operating temp of 50 ºC, twice.
> 
> 
> 
> You obviously don't want to acknowledge you're wrong and by subsequently attempting to discount the 10 º extra in the street cabinet version, you demonstrate a further ignorance in terms of the flexibility that provides in terms of both passive and active ventilation.




LOL you are starting to struggle if this is all you have to dispute.

Note that 60 degrees C max is a limit but equipment ages and performance degrades exponentially at the top end of the range. I would expect some sort of powered cooling och.


----------



## drsmith

IFocus said:


> LOL you are starting to struggle if this is all you have to dispute.



Have you considered how the internal components inside the typical desktop computer case are kept cool ?

You should stick to squawking in the asylum seeker thread. That way you'll only be losing one argument at a time.


----------



## H C

drsmith said:


> Have you considered how the internal components inside the typical desktop computer case are kept cool ?



Have you considered that we dont place "typical desktop computers" out in the street exposed to the elements 365 days of the year? They usually have a great big brick shell around them called a house. Those components in desktop computers are not going to be running at 100% or near 100% utilisation 24/7 either.


----------



## sptrawler

Regional Power Stations through out W.A, have tin sheds full of high speed turbo diesel engines running at 3000rpm. These engines and the alternators are controlled by electronic control modules, including plc's and avr's. The sheds aren't air conditioned, nor the electrical control panels (when I worked on them) and electronics failure was extremely rare.
I'm talking about Power Stations in Marble Bar, Nullagine, Halls Creek, Wiluna etc, where temps inside the stations can hit 60c, no problems.
The amount of heat you are talking about in a low current system, like the NBN electronics, is far less than the heat stress your underbonnet car computer is subjected to.
I think you need to get a grip on reality.

If your so $hit scared of the heat related problems in an optical fibre node cabinet, best you don't drive your car.

How many of you have A/C units outside in direct sunlight, OMG you must be worrying endlessly.lol
The A/C unit electronics not only has to put up with ambient temps but also the heat generated by the compressor and and condenser.


----------



## Smurf1976

A relatively small number of power stations can be maintained and equipment replaced at end of life etc. If the electronics last (say) 20 years then just replace the electronics after 20 years - relatively straightforward. That plus I'd assume that the power stations are designed and set out with respect to their location - if it's 60 degrees inside then everything would have been designed with that operating temperature in mind.

But it's very different with a 5 figure number of boxes spread across the country and everything mass produced with no account of local conditions. The box that goes in a highlands region of NSW, Vic or Tas which gets regular snow will probably be the exact same box that gets installed in the outback where high temperatures are very common. Maybe they will, but I doubt very much that they'll produce different cabinets according to the installation location.

I don't doubt at all that it is possible to build this system with a large number of cabinets outside and to make it all work. In a technical sense I don't doubt that at all - it's certainly possible to do it. What I doubt is that, given the overall nature of this project, it will actually be done in a robust manner that is reliable.

Part of it comes down to how politically driven NBN Co ends up. If it's a stand alone entity with no day to day influence from government then quite likely it will do things properly. But "stand alone" means just that - government might have final sign off for major investment but it doesn't make decisions at the technical level or regarding day to day operations. I very much doubt that NBN Co will have this sort of independence.

But if it's under heavy political influence then expect the maintenance budget to be practically zero until things actually fall in a heap since politicians generally don't allocate funds for future maintenance of anything. Fast forward a few years and in the hotter parts of the country you've got a lot of cabinets full of worn out electronics and no money set aside, or physical resources available, for replacement. That's when it gets interesting.

As I said, I don't doubt that it could be done. It's what they'll actually do that has me concerned. It's a complex technical project being heavily influenced by non-technical people and that usually ends badly.


----------



## sptrawler

Smurf1976 said:


> A relatively small number of power stations can be maintained and equipment replaced at end of life etc. If the electronics last (say) 20 years then just replace the electronics after 20 years - relatively straightforward. That plus I'd assume that the power stations are designed and set out with respect to their location - if it's 60 degrees inside then everything would have been designed with that operating temperature in mind.
> 
> But it's very different with a 5 figure number of boxes spread across the country and everything mass produced with no account of local conditions. The box that goes in a highlands region of NSW, Vic or Tas which gets regular snow will probably be the exact same box that gets installed in the outback where high temperatures are very common. Maybe they will, but I doubt very much that they'll produce different cabinets according to the installation location.
> 
> I don't doubt at all that it is possible to build this system with a large number of cabinets outside and to make it all work. In a technical sense I don't doubt that at all - it's certainly possible to do it. What I doubt is that, given the overall nature of this project, it will actually be done in a robust manner that is reliable.
> 
> Part of it comes down to how politically driven NBN Co ends up. If it's a stand alone entity with no day to day influence from government then quite likely it will do things properly. But "stand alone" means just that - government might have final sign off for major investment but it doesn't make decisions at the technical level or regarding day to day operations. I very much doubt that NBN Co will have this sort of independence.
> 
> But if it's under heavy political influence then expect the maintenance budget to be practically zero until things actually fall in a heap since politicians generally don't allocate funds for future maintenance of anything. Fast forward a few years and in the hotter parts of the country you've got a lot of cabinets full of worn out electronics and no money set aside, or physical resources available, for replacement. That's when it gets interesting.
> 
> As I said, I don't doubt that it could be done. It's what they'll actually do that has me concerned. It's a complex technical project being heavily influenced by non-technical people and that usually ends badly.




I doubt the NBN cabinets will be tin boxes, one would expect IF the government proceeded with cabinets they would be insulated and vented for natural circulation or forced circulation. 
I was only trying to highlight the fallacy of some, who would try and use heat as an excuse.

Also I defer back to my own position, it is a crock of manure and should only be supplied to those who require it" at this time".


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> I doubt the NBN cabinets will be tin boxes, one would expect IF the government proceeded with cabinets they would be insulated and vented for natural circulation or forced circulation.
> I was only trying to highlight the fallacy of some, who would try and use heat as an excuse.
> 
> Also I defer back to my own position, it is a crock of manure and should only be supplied to those who require it" at this time".




As Smurf highlighted before, even if you rely on passive cooling you're going to need some way to clean the air being moved through the cabinet, otherwise you'll end up with a node full of the local environment in no time.  Have a look inside a PC at work to see what happens when you have no filters but rely on the outside air for cooling.  If you're lucky enough to be in a tiled area then things aint too bad, but once there's carpet around it's amazing how much of it ends up inside the PCs.

The other issue is that equipment made for a power station is going to be built to a lot higher specification than for a fridge node.  Most of the equipment I can see that is currently available is designed for a max temp of 65 degrees.  That means it's quite likely to have issues when the ambient temperature outside is above 35 degrees.  With a lot of the nodes beign placed where the heat island effect will be quite high, it's easy to see that the equipment inside the nodes will face plenty of time in the upper range for their operational temperature.

Another difference between temperatures inside a power station and a node cabinet is the temperature changes will be much faster inside the node cabinet, and the changes will most likely occur more frequently due to the smaller size of the node.  As I said before, electronic components suffering from repeated expansion and contraction due to temperature changes is likely to see an increase in failure of the equipment.

A GPON network is inherently more reliable than FTTN / HFC due to the much smaller amount of active components required.  Not even the Earl of Wentworth tries to deny that


----------



## drsmith

sptrawler said:


> I was only trying to highlight the fallacy of some, who would try and use heat as an excuse.




The ultimate aim of this is to reduce a complex mix of issues to a much narrower consideration of a single element.



sydboy007 said:


> A GPON network is inherently more reliable than FTTN / HFC due to the much smaller amount of active components required.  Not even the Earl of Wentworth tries to deny that




As Labor discovered in office, implementation is a much broader issue than what is the rolled gold technology.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> As Smurf highlighted before, even if you rely on passive cooling you're going to need some way to clean the air being moved through the cabinet, otherwise you'll end up with a node full of the local environment in no time.  Have a look inside a PC at work to see what happens when you have no filters but rely on the outside air for cooling.  If you're lucky enough to be in a tiled area then things aint too bad, but once there's carpet around it's amazing how much of it ends up inside the PCs.



Where active ventilation is required to cope with extreme air temperatures, it's still only a small proportion of the year that it would be required. This is very much the case in coastal areas where the vast majority of our population lives.  



sydboy007 said:


> Another difference between temperatures inside a power station and a node cabinet is the temperature changes will be much faster inside the node cabinet, and the changes will most likely occur more frequently due to the smaller size of the node.  As I said before, electronic components suffering from repeated expansion and contraction due to temperature changes is likely to see an increase in failure of the equipment



Lets not forget that the cabinet hardware linked in Myths's original post is built to higher environmental specifications than those units that would be housed inside a more environmentally controllable structure such as a building.

That's how this particular conversation started in the first place.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Have you considered how the internal components inside the typical desktop computer case are kept cool ?




Surely you're not serious with that analogy?

Tell you what….. Put your desktop computer in your car in the sun all day, then get in at about 4pm and see how it works.*

_* I take no responsibility for any loss if you follow this suggestion._


----------



## IFocus

drsmith said:


> Have you considered how the internal components inside the typical desktop computer case are kept cool ?
> 
> You should stick to squawking in the asylum seeker thread. That way you'll only be losing one argument at a time.





I will count that as a bite, hook line and sinker.

60 degrees C will kill most PC's but really not a worthy comparison as they are spec-ed totally differently than any field based equipment.


----------



## Smurf1976

Here's some real data for a real outdoor cabinet with electronics inside.

Temperature inside cabinet this afternoon = 53 degrees as measured by internal thermometer (not calibrated but would be reasonably accurate within a degree or two).

Temperature outside cabinet at nearest Bureau of Meteorology monitoring site = 39 degrees.

There was no significant internal heat generation inside the cabinet at the time, it would have had an electrical load of a few watts, so the 14 degree difference was almost entirely due to direct heating from the sun.

Cabinet has natural ventilation only (no fans or other powered cooling). Location is the Derwent Valley (inland Tasmania).

I'll leave it to those who know more than me about the actual NBN equipment to comment further but if the same cabinet were somewhere in Vic or SA today then it would likely have reached about 60 degrees inside given the higher ambient temperature.

Obviously this isn't hurting the equipment inside the cabinet (otherwise it would have been built differently) but if it was getting that hot regularly then it would certainly reduce the lifespan. Not really an issue in Tas but it would be in places that get regular high temperatures. It won't kill anything there and then, but higher temperatures do wear electronics out faster as a general principle.

I'm pretty confident that it could be made to work as per my previous post. It's whether or not they'll actually build it to be a durable piece of infrastructure that concerns me. This whole project seems to be too focused on politics rather than sound engineering.


----------



## sptrawler

Smurf1976 said:


> Here's some real data for a real outdoor cabinet with electronics inside.
> 
> Temperature inside cabinet this afternoon = 53 degrees as measured by internal thermometer (not calibrated but would be reasonably accurate within a degree or two).
> 
> Temperature outside cabinet at nearest Bureau of Meteorology monitoring site = 39 degrees.
> 
> There was no significant internal heat generation inside the cabinet at the time, it would have had an electrical load of a few watts, so the 14 degree difference was almost entirely due to direct heating from the sun.
> 
> Cabinet has natural ventilation only (no fans or other powered cooling). Location is the Derwent Valley (inland Tasmania).
> 
> I'll leave it to those who know more than me about the actual NBN equipment to comment further but if the same cabinet were somewhere in Vic or SA today then it would likely have reached about 60 degrees inside given the higher ambient temperature.
> 
> Obviously this isn't hurting the equipment inside the cabinet (otherwise it would have been built differently) but if it was getting that hot regularly then it would certainly reduce the lifespan. Not really an issue in Tas but it would be in places that get regular high temperatures. It won't kill anything there and then, but higher temperatures do wear electronics out faster as a general principle.
> 
> I'm pretty confident that it could be made to work as per my previous post. It's whether or not they'll actually build it to be a durable piece of infrastructure that concerns me. This whole project seems to be too focused on politics rather than sound engineering.




Hopefully the project is scaled back to a manageable size and cost effective high volume users recieve the service first.
Then at least it will start paying its way earlier, IMO heat in panels is the least of their worries, at this point in time.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Surely you're not serious with that analogy?
> 
> Tell you what….. Put your desktop computer in your car in the sun all day, then get in at about 4pm and see how it works.*
> 
> _* I take no responsibility for any loss if you follow this suggestion._






IFocus said:


> I will count that as a bite, hook line and sinker.
> 
> 60 degrees C will kill most PC's but really not a worthy comparison as they are spec-ed totally differently than any field based equipment.



In singing from similar hymn books, you've both managed to miss the point and Myths,
not taking responsibility for your actions is the Labor way.


----------



## drsmith

Smurf1976 said:


> I'm pretty confident that it could be made to work as per my previous post. It's whether or not they'll actually build it to be a durable piece of infrastructure that concerns me. This whole project seems to be too focused on politics rather than sound engineering.



Being based on politics was the fundamental problem with Labor's project. 

The extent to which it is with the Coalition's version remains to be seen. If they don't get the physical aspects right in the context of their underlying principals then they will obviously be little better than Labor. 

The greatest encouragement I get from the Coalition is not FTTN as an ideological position, but the appointment of the likes of Simon Hackett to the board. That shows they're prepared to be flexible about detail of their build which unfortunately was lacking in Labor's model.   It will be interesting to see what comes out in the NBN Co 2014 corporate plan. While the recent Strategic review outlines the relative merits of each of the options and favour the multi-technology approach, the precise detail I suspect is still yet very much to be determined.


----------



## sptrawler

drsmith said:


> Being based on politics was the fundamental problem with Labor's project.
> 
> The extent to which it is with the Coalition's version remains to be seen. If they don't get the physical aspects right in the context of their underlying principals then they will obviously be little better than Labor.
> 
> The greatest encouragement I get from the Coalition is not FTTN as an ideological position, but the appointment of the likes of Simon Hackett to the board. That shows they're prepared to be flexible about detail of their build which unfortunately was lacking in Labor's model.   It will be interesting to see what comes out in the NBN Co 2014 corporate plan. While the recent Strategic review outlines the relative merits of each of the options and favour the multi-technology approach, the precise detail I suspect is still yet very much to be determined.




+1 doc. 
I'm getting a bit fed up with speculation for speculations sake. 
I'm getting a bit fed up with self appointed oracles, ordaining themselves geniuses.
Let's just sit back and see what is actually agreed upon.

It's a bit like the hype and slagging that was thrown at Abbott over the illegal asylum seekers. Let's just sit back and see how it pans out.


----------



## drsmith

*Rollout update for the week to January 12*

A big week for brownfields with close to 9000 passed. Individual weeks though can be lumpy and this has been very much so over the broader Xmas period.



> A total of 9,685 additional lots/premises were passed/covered by the network during the week, of which 8,802 were in Brownfield and 907 were in Greenfield areas. Fixed wireless coverage decreased by 24 premises due to premise count reviews. During the week an additional 2,814 premises had services activated on the network, including 2,278 on fixed line services and 536 using satellite and fixed wireless technologies.




Total brownfields passed is now 281,976. The Strategic Review estimates 357,000 brownfields will be passed by June 30 2014.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/weekly-progress-report.html


----------



## sydboy007

Poor Telstra exchange at South Morang VIC is having trouble coping with the 41+ outside temperature.

Our equipment isn't too happy with a 53C intake temp.  Some of the chips are report 78C operating temps.  Supposedly the equipment can cope with up to the high 80s before likely to shut down to protect itself from damage, but I'd hate to be running it this hot for weeks / months at a time.

Note this is in a building that has aircon, it's just not coping with the heatwave being experienced in Melbourne.

Ashfield in Sydney isn't much better, with our equipment hitting 55C even though the outside temp is only 28C.

Darwin was hitting 55C for our equipment at 5am.

I'd hate to think what a passively / fan only cooled node would be like today.  Certainly don't like the idea of lead acid back up batteries being subjected to those kinds of temperatures.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Darwin was hitting 55C for our equipment at 5am.



Darwin is in the tropics and has been for some time.

Darwin also doesn't get the extremes of temperatures we see in southern Australia.


----------



## So_Cynical

sptrawler said:


> +1 doc.
> I'm getting a bit fed up with speculation for speculations sake.
> I'm getting a bit fed up with self appointed oracles, ordaining themselves geniuses.
> Let's just sit back and see what is actually agreed upon.
> 
> It's a bit like the hype and slagging that was thrown at Abbott over the illegal asylum seekers. Let's just sit back and see how it pans out.





Phenomenal..its panning out as a half arsed dogs breakfast, national infrastructure based on "wait and see how it pans out" The noalition and its supporters at their brilliant best.


----------



## medicowallet

sydboy007 said:


> Poor Telstra exchange at South Morang VIC is having trouble coping with the 41+ outside temperature.




I wonder how the same equipment fared in 1908?   I guess back then whoever designed the equipment had considered the possibility of such "extreme" weather events.

MW


----------



## NBNMyths

medicowallet said:


> I wonder how the same equipment fared in 1908?   I guess back then whoever designed the equipment had considered the possibility of such "extreme" weather events.
> 
> MW




In 1908, the "equipment" consisted of copper or iron wires switched manually.

Pretty sure there were no VDSL2 DSLAMs back then, equipped with sensitive microprocessors generating large amounts of their own heat as they transmit and convert data between mediums.

No-one is saying that FTTN nodes can't be designed/constructed to cope with extreme weather. It's the cost of doing so that is the issue, both initial and ongoing.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Darwin is in the tropics and has been for some time.
> 
> Darwin also doesn't get the extremes of temperatures we see in southern Australia.




No. It only varies between _hot and wet _ and _very hot and very wet._

Can't wait to see how a FTTN street node without active environmental management copes with 38 degrees ambient and 99% RH.


----------



## sydboy007

medicowallet said:


> I wonder how the same equipment fared in 1908?   I guess back then whoever designed the equipment had considered the possibility of such "extreme" weather events.
> 
> MW




MW

things have moved on from the last time you saw one of those new fangled electronic calculator thingamajigs.  The sheer density of circuits in current technology means they run hot.  They generate a LOT of heat, which was the point I was trying to make is that equipment in a decent sized building where the aircon starts to fail or can't remove the heat fast enough due to high outside ambient temperatures can see the temperatures of the electronic components rise to extreme levels very quickly.

Running electronic equipment at the top end of their temperature ranges for extended periods of time will shorten their economic life and increase failure rates.  Factor in most nodes will have backup batteries and I'm not sure how well lead acid batteries will do in an environment where they can be heated to 55-60 degrees fairly easily.  

Typically the rating for lead acid batteries is based on an ambient temperature of 25C. For every 8C above ambient during use, the life of the battery will be reduced by 50%. Ideally batteries should be operated at 25C or less. - See more at: http://myelectrical.com/notes/entryid/116/effect-of-temperature-on-lead-batteries

It's quite likely there will be 200-300 thousand backup batteries in use in the MTM network.  It will be a maintenance nightmare, and certainly not factored into the cost of the network since the focus has been purely on CAPEX and not enough attention on OPEX over a 10 year time frame.  I've seen what can happen at Telstra exchanges when the UPS is not properly maintained, and the batteries in a node are even more likely to not be properly maintained.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> No. It only varies between _hot and wet _ and _very hot and very wet._
> 
> Can't wait to see how a FTTN street node without active environmental management copes with 38 degrees ambient and 99% RH.



Don't become a meteorologist Myths.

Hobart's highest recordrd temperature exceeds that of Darwin and Darwin is never 38 degrees ambient in conjunction with 99% RH.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Don't become a meteorologist Myths.
> 
> Hobart's highest recordrd temperature exceeds that of Darwin and Darwin is never 38 degrees ambient in conjunction with 99% RH.




Me thinks you're nitpicking. If you think an FTTN cabinet containing equipment with limits of 60 º and 95% RH can survive in Darwin without active environmental controls, then build one yourself and tell the Govt you'll cover the ongoing maintenance and replacement costs for the expected life of the equipment under the recommended conditions.

The fact is that the coalition's FTTN cabinets will need active cooling in many parts of Australia. Adding to the cost of deployment. It's one of the reasons why running costs, maintenance costs and environmental impact (from power usage) is 2-3 times higher than FTTP. I'm not saying that alone is a reason not to do FTTN, but it is a fact that should be considered, and one that even Turnbull acknowledges.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Me thinks you're nitpicking.



You may not like it or even want to accept it, but I'm just pointing out the misinformation in your posts.



NBNMyths said:


> If you think an FTTN cabinet containing equipment with limits of 60 º and 95% RH can survive in Darwin without active environmental controls, then build one yourself and tell the Govt you'll cover the ongoing maintenance and replacement costs for the expected life of the equipment under the recommended conditions.
> 
> The fact is that the coalition's FTTN cabinets will need active cooling in many parts of Australia.



Regardless of whether it's the case or not, you have not with your distortions established it as fact.


----------



## sydboy007

yeee ha.  Seems I'm facing some serious copper degradation now.

My sync has been consistently over 12Mbs since I've had ADSL2+ - going on 6 or 7 years now.

Seeing a drop to 9.7Mbs.  Just what I want.  Usually don't get anywhere near that kind of fall in speed when it rains, and it's certainly not been that heavy the last couple of days.

I'll just have to remind myself it's fit for high speed - but not ULTRA high speed - internet access in 2019.


----------



## medicowallet

Hi,

I would like to know how Armidale NSW is going now that it is connected to the NBN.

How much revenue for the country has been generated?

What has happened to population? productivity? etc.

Surely after the time it has had it there would be some extra employment/jobs created.

Or is the copper mine there the only driver of productivity?

MW

(The NBN is a tool for consumption supported by media who wants to target advertising directly to the consumer)


----------



## DB008

NBNMyths, what did you say about 5G a while back?


*South Korea to spend $1.5 billion on 5G 'movie-in-a-second' service *



> SEOUL: South Korea, already one of the most wired countries on earth, Wednesday announced a 1.6 trillion won ($1.5 billion) plan to roll out a next-generation 5G wireless service quick enough to download full-length films in a second.
> 
> The science ministry said it aims to implement the technology -- about 1,000 times faster than the 4G services currently available -- within six years.
> 
> "We helped fuel national growth with 2G services in the 1990s, 3G in the 2000s and 4G around 2010. Now it is time to take preemptive action to develop 5G," the ministry said in a statement.





http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/29193519.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst


----------



## NBNMyths

sydboy007 said:


> yeee ha.  Seems I'm facing some serious copper degradation now.
> 
> My sync has been consistently over 12Mbs since I've had ADSL2+ - going on 6 or 7 years now.
> 
> Seeing a drop to 9.7Mbs.  Just what I want.  Usually don't get anywhere near that kind of fall in speed when it rains, and it's certainly not been that heavy the last couple of days.
> 
> I'll just have to remind myself it's fit for high speed - but not ULTRA high speed - internet access in 2019.




I've been providing friends with "IT support" for the last few weeks, which has coincided with their ongoing ADSL2+ problems. Sync keeps dropping out every time it's either hot or wet. Three visits by the Telstra tech later, they finally have what seems like decent reliability on their line, after the tech relented and gave them the _last_ 'spare' pair that exists on their street bundle back down to the pillar (1.2km away). They now have a blistering 4500kbps sync speed. They can't get wireless reliably, because the hilly terrain makes reception hopeless.

I will be watching with great interest to see what happens with their "NBN" (which was due to be commenced next year). The street is very low density, with all 5-10 acre lots. So the ~1.6km of cable from the pillar to the end of the street only serves maybe 120 homes. It's only about 30 years old, but all in bad condition (2 other friends in the street also have regular dropouts). So will the coalition run FTTP in that street, or replace the entire copper bundle _and_ install 3 nodes to service just 120 homes?

FTTP would be cheaper, but it would mean that the least-densely populated street in the suburb would get the best broadband service. Or will they spend more money to install their inferior system instead?


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> NBNMyths, what did you say about 5G a while back?
> 
> 
> *South Korea to spend $1.5 billion on 5G 'movie-in-a-second' service *
> 
> 
> http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/29193519.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst




I believe I said that it cannot cope with fixed line volumes, and that article doesn't indicate anything different. Currently, even 3G and 4G networks struggle to cope with 5% of the network load. So they would have to be 20 times faster to cope with even today's fixed line volumes. But the fixed line volume is increasing at over 50% a year, compounded. So by 2020 (when they say their "40x faster" network will be commercially available), it would actually need to be more like 250x faster to cope with the expected fixed line load at that time.

That aside, there's nothing particularly special in the article. It says Samsung completed a test transmitting 1Gbps using their "5G". But LTE advanced has completed similar trials. It's not very helpful, because that 1Gbps is a headline cell speed shared by users on the network. With a few thousand users connected to that tower, the speed drops just like it does today. Because wireless bandwidth is shared amongst everyone connected. They are also using a very high frequency, which brings its own problems because it's heavily impacted by obstructions such as buildings or hills, even rain and fog.

the headline says it can transmit "a movie in a second"…. Turns out they mean an 800MB movie (which isn't even DVD quality)…. to a single user…..

What happens when 3,000 users try to download a 40,000MB 4k movie (which will be the norm by 2020)?


BTW, looking back at the original Samsung announcement, their test was 1 Giga*bit* per second, 1/8th the (incorrect) speed given in your linked article of 1 Giga*byte* per second.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> the headline says it can transmit "a movie in a second"…. Turns out they mean an 800MB movie (which isn't even DVD quality)…. to a single user…..
> 
> What happens when 3,000 users try to download a 40,000MB 4k movie (which will be the norm by 2020)?
> 
> 
> BTW, looking back at the original Samsung announcement, their test was 1 Giga*bit* per second, 1/8th the (incorrect) speed given in your linked article of 1 Giga*byte* per second.




Which leads to the philosophical question, is it necessarily good that a movie be downloaded that quickly?

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Which leads to the philosophical question, is it necessarily good that a movie be downloaded that quickly?
> 
> gg




Without arguing the good or bad of the claim, my point is that the headline is misleading (at best). The _network_ is capable of that speed, but only if the person downloading the movie is the only one using it at the time. Given that there's an average of over 3000 people per wireless tower in Australia, such performance is practically impossible even if the network lives up to the claims being made.


----------



## sydboy007

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Which leads to the philosophical question, is it necessarily good that a movie be downloaded that quickly?
> 
> gg




I sometimes had wished certain moves had been over that quickly


----------



## Smurf1976

Downloading a movie in 2 minutes seems a lot like having a water heater that heats 300 litres in a minute or putting an 800kW engine in a normal road car.

What, exactly, is the benefit in being able to do any of that for a normal householder / driver? 

If the movie takes 2 hours to watch and is being streamed in real time then there should be no problem if it takes 2 hours to download. Likewise the average shower flows at 9 litres per minute, so about 5 litres of actual hot water, making it pointless to have a 1.2 megawatt water heater at home and a small sub-station in the front yard to run it. And there's no sensible place for an 800kW car other than a race track or similar.

I'm in favour of the NBN as a concept but if the best "need" we can come up with is fast movie downloads etc then it seems that the internet has already well and truly reached the point of diminishing returns. Data transmission for the sake of it, rather than an actual need.

As a random example, take news websites. 10 years ago a 28.8K modem was no problem but now even a slower ADSL connection will struggle. There's been a massive increase in the amount of data transmitted but little real benefit - the news is the news, and transmitting text requires minimal bandwidth. Spending $ billions just so that someone can have an amateur video playing automatically seems rather pointless. Likewise all those sites which require that you click on 10 pages in order to read a 10 point list complete with irrelevant stock photos in the background - it's just a case of demand increasing to meet supply for no real benefit.

Back to the other side of the argument, here are some real projected lifespan figures for an outdoor cabinet housing copper to fibre communications equipment. 

I can't be too specific (commercial confidentiality) but this is to interface a small private copper communications system to the power industry's fibre network (which also operates as a communications carrier on a commercial basis in competition with Telstra etc). In short, they wish to keep an existing copper system at one end, put it all onto fibre, then pull it all back out quite some distance away.

In order to do this they will install an outdoor cabinet, connecting all the existing cables and the new fibre connection to this point. So far as equipment lifespan is concerned:

If they seal the cabinet and do nothing else then the expected lifespan is 5.5 years. Solar heating effects are the primary issue here, noting that their preferred external colour is not white (presumably due to council requirements for aesthetics).

No calculations have been done for natural ventilation, since achieving this effectively whilst meeting other requirements (security and keeping dust and rodents out) is problematic.

If they install forced ventilation (fans) then the expected lifespan is 17 years. Such a system will require frequent maintenance of filters however and they would prefer a system not requiring regular maintenance. 

If they air-condition the cabinet then lifespan is a function of the temperature setting. It is then an economic tradeoff - longer equipment life versus a higher capacity (more expensive) air-conditioner and higher electricity costs. But a 33 year equipment life is practical to achieve for the electronics, with the air-conditioner being replaced after 15 years. 

The physical cabinet itself is being built to last 30 years, with an unspecified life on the external coating (since it will likely need to be repainted due to graffiti well before the paint actually wears off).

The final design will involve an air-conditioned cabinet as this is the best way to meet the requirements.

I can't be too specific, this is a real engineering job currently being worked on, but it's indicative of the heat issue with electronics in a similar situation. Location is an urban area in Tasmania.


----------



## sydboy007

Smurf1976 said:


> Downloading a movie in 2 minutes seems a lot like having a water heater that heats 300 litres in a minute or putting an 800kW engine in a normal road car.
> 
> What, exactly, is the benefit in being able to do any of that for a normal householder / driver?
> 
> .......
> 
> I can't be too specific, this is a real engineering job currently being worked on, but it's indicative of the heat issue with electronics in a similar situation. Location is an urban area in Tasmania.




I think the use of how fast you can download a movie is so those who don't understand fully the IT world can conceptually see how fast the download speeds are.  Talk to someone about gigabit or ten gig speeds and then press them to explain how fast it is and most will probably not be able to.  It's the same when they talk about transmitting 1 million books in a second.

....

Interesting they've gone the active cooling route.  Hopefully they wont be on ToU charging or it will be a killer.  Any idea on how they propose to protect the compressor from vandalism?  I'd assume that is going to reduce COP and increase the energy costs.  How will they protect against condensation?  Have they got a costing for connecting to the electricity?  I've read in the UK it's been costing between 2.5K to 25K pounds for each node BT has been rolling out.


----------



## drsmith

*Rollout update for the week to January 19*

1,551 brownfields in the past week compared to close to 9000 in the week to Jan 12 demonstrates how lumpy the individual weekly stats can be.



> A total of 2,243 additional lots/premises were passed/covered by the network during the week, of which 1,551 were in Brownfield and 698 were in Greenfield areas. Fixed wireless coverage decreased by 6 premises due to premise count reviews. During the week an additional 2,598 premises had services activated on the network, including 2,163 on fixed line services and 435 using satellite and fixed wireless technologies.




Total brownfields passed is now 283,527. The Strategic Review estimates 357,000 brownfields will be passed by June 30 2014.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/weekly-progress-report.html


----------



## Smurf1976

sydboy007 said:


> I think the use of how fast you can download a movie is so those who don't understand fully the IT world can conceptually see how fast the download speeds are.  Talk to someone about gigabit or ten gig speeds and then press them to explain how fast it is and most will probably not be able to.  It's the same when they talk about transmitting 1 million books in a second.




So it's basically the same principle the power industry uses. Tell visitors to power stations that "at full capacity, this plant generates enough power to run 400,000 houses" as a means of putting its' capacity into perspective in a way that people can comprehend. Then state the actual technical details for the few who will understand them (which by the way tends to be mostly older people.....).



> Interesting they've gone the active cooling route.  Hopefully they wont be on ToU charging or it will be a killer.  Any idea on how they propose to protect the compressor from vandalism?  I'd assume that is going to reduce COP and increase the energy costs.  How will they protect against condensation?  Have they got a costing for connecting to the electricity?




Active cooling best meets their needs in this situation and is thus the recommended option. They wanted something durable and low maintenance, not necessarily cheap, as the key criteria. No ToU charging to worry about - will be on a flat rate tariff with conventional metering. Vandalism - not sure but just put a strong cage around it and that will fix it. Condensation - shouldn't happen but if it does then it will be on the outside of the cabinet so not a huge issue, worst case it will just make the grass grow. Electricity will need to be connected anyway since there are powered devices inside therefore it's not an additional expense for active cooling. At a rough guess (just my guess, I haven't seen the actual calcs for this), the cooling will add around $250 a year to power costs for the cabinet so it's not huge. They'll only need a single phase supply to run the cooling plus everything else and would need that connection regardless of what is done in relation to temperature.


----------



## drsmith

Rollout progress and the Xmas shutdown.



> A spokesperson for NBN Co confirmed to ZDNet that construction had slowed over the Christmas and New Year's break as a result of the industry shut-down period, and that construction efforts for the network would ramp back up in the coming months.
> 
> NBN Co executive chair Ziggy Switkowski highlighted in December that in revising the premises passed forecast for June 2014 down from 450,000 brownfields in November to 357,000 brownfields premises in the strategic review, NBN Co was taking the Christmas shut down into account where he believed it hadn't been in prior announcements.
> 
> "You cannot take 5,000 homes passed per month and not allow for the fact that from the middle of December to the middle of January the industry shuts down. There is 20,000 off your number to start off with," he said.




Last week's update is perhaps where we've started seeing this flow through to the weekly rollout figures.

http://www.zdnet.com/au/nbn-construction-just-resting-not-ended-7000025650/


----------



## medicowallet

http://delimiter.com.au/2014/01/24/unlimited-76mbps-38-bt-cuts-fttn-prices/

Showing unlimited fttn plans in england for $30.   Now whilst i know we are different,this shows how ripped we are here.

Also ftth plans had increasing prices going forward as highlighted in the excellent presentation by simon havkett linked here.  Perhaps this offers some support fir a fttn?   Imo both labor and liberal have crap plans


----------



## So_Cynical

medicowallet said:


> http://delimiter.com.au/2014/01/24/unlimited-76mbps-38-bt-cuts-fttn-prices/
> 
> Showing unlimited fttn plans in england for $30.   Now whilst i know we are different,this shows how ripped we are here.
> 
> Also ftth plans had increasing prices going forward as highlighted in the excellent presentation by simon havkett linked here.  Perhaps this offers some support fir a fttn?   Imo both labor and liberal have crap plans




Dude seriously.



			
				http://delimiter.com.au/2014/01/24/unlimited-76mbps-38-bt-cuts-fttn-prices/ said:
			
		

> BT has also cut its Unlimited BT Infinity 1 plan, *which offers up to 38Mbps speeds with an unlimited data quota, from £23 (AU$43) per month to £16 (AU$30.36) per month for the first three months,* and its Unlimited BT Infinity 2 plan, which offers up to 76Mbps speeds with unlimited downloads, from £26 (AU$49.33) per month down to £20 ($38) per month for the first three months.
> 
> *All of the plans also mandate the purchase of telephone line rental at an additional £15.99 (AU$30.34) per month.*




Its a BS comparison anyway, a cheap half assed technology versus state of the art, surprise surprise its cheaper. lets not even discuss the $30 per month forced PSTN line.


----------



## sptrawler

medicowallet said:


> Hi,
> 
> I would like to know how Armidale NSW is going now that it is connected to the NBN.
> 
> How much revenue for the country has been generated?
> 
> What has happened to population? productivity? etc.
> 
> Surely after the time it has had it there would be some extra employment/jobs created.
> 
> Or is the copper mine there the only driver of productivity?
> 
> MW
> 
> (The NBN is a tool for consumption supported by media who wants to target advertising directly to the consumer)




Even Infrastructure Australia is asking why our infrastructure spending is focused on politicaly motivated 'big ticket' projects. At the expense of more critical infrastructure to facilitate a rapidly growing country.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-29/kohler-infrastructure-emergency/5224586

Infrastructure Australia (IA) was set up as a statutory body in 2008 to organise and prioritise infrastructure spending but six years later Michael Deegan, the Infrastructure Coordinator (effectively the body's chief executive), has written a deeply frustrated submission to a Senate inquiry, declaring: "There is an air of unreality about our infrastructure planning."

By the way" good post medic" IMHO


----------



## drsmith

*Rollout update for the week to January 26*

4,709 brownfields in the past week.



> A total of 5,817 additional lots/premises were passed/covered by the network during the week, of which 4,709 were in Brownfield and 636 were in Greenfield areas. Fixed wireless coverage increased by 472 premises During the week an additional 2,738 premises had services activated on the network, including 2,343 on fixed line services and 395 using satellite and fixed wireless technologies.




Total brownfields passed is now 288,236. The Strategic Review estimates 357,000 brownfields will be passed by June 30 2014. A total of 68,764 brownfields now need to be passed over the next 22 weeks at an average of 3126 per week to reach the above target.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/weekly-progress-report.html



drsmith said:


> *Rollout update for the week to January 19*
> 
> 1,551 brownfields in the past week compared to close to 9000 in the week to Jan 12 demonstrates how lumpy the individual weekly stats can be.


----------



## sptrawler

This is a bit damning of the NBN roll out. 
It would appear that of the 8000 homes in these towns only 50% are connected. It also sounds like, these are one of the early roll out areas. Sounds like an utter shambles, not to mention the wasted money.

http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/gov...siness-in-broadband-limbo-20140204-hvb58.html

An extract:
At a senate committee hearing on the National Broadband Network (NBN) in Hobart on Tuesday, Digital Tasmania (DigiTas) spokesperson John Dalton said that plans to deactivate six towns’ copper services within 16 weeks would digitally isolate 4000 homes, or approximately 50 per cent of premises, which still don’t have access to fibre.

Tasmania was the first state to connect to the NBN in 2010.

Advertisement ‘‘Across those six towns, approximately 50 per cent of premises don’t currently have an active NBN connection – that's approximately 4000 premises that only have 16 weeks in order to connect before the cut off date," Dalton said.

He said the number could be higher as in some cases, such as that of St Helens, only 30 per cent of premises had an active NBN connection.

*About half of the homes and businesses in those were connected to the NBN over the past two years, but for the remainder the rate of connections could be further delayed by additional factors, including landlord co-operation, heritage building issues, and even contractors missing appointments*


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> This is a bit damning of the NBN roll out.
> It would appear that of the 8000 homes in these towns only 50% are connected. It also sounds like, these are one of the early roll out areas. Sounds like an utter shambles, not to mention the wasted money.
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/gov...siness-in-broadband-limbo-20140204-hvb58.html
> 
> An extract:
> At a senate committee hearing on the National Broadband Network (NBN) in Hobart on Tuesday, Digital Tasmania (DigiTas) spokesperson John Dalton said that plans to deactivate six towns’ copper services within 16 weeks would digitally isolate 4000 homes, or approximately 50 per cent of premises, which still don’t have access to fibre.
> 
> Tasmania was the first state to connect to the NBN in 2010.
> 
> Advertisement ‘‘Across those six towns, approximately 50 per cent of premises don’t currently have an active NBN connection – that's approximately 4000 premises that only have 16 weeks in order to connect before the cut off date," Dalton said.
> 
> He said the number could be higher as in some cases, such as that of St Helens, only 30 per cent of premises had an active NBN connection.
> 
> *About half of the homes and businesses in those were connected to the NBN over the past two years, but for the remainder the rate of connections could be further delayed by additional factors, including landlord co-operation, heritage building issues, and even contractors missing appointments*




The three Tassie trial sites have always been below the mainland sites for connection rates. I remember reading that before the NBN, only ~45% of premises in those towns even had an ADSL connection.

Even at 50% after 3 years though, the take-up is far ahead of a typical technology adoption curve. No matter how good something is, no matter how much we take it for granted today, the take-up always follows the same basic curve. 

The take-up of ADSL was only 3% after 18 months in Australia. It had only reached 46% by March 2007, 5 years after the rollout was completed.

Would you describe (then majority Govt-owned Telstra's) rollout of ADSL as "wasted money", given that it clearly had such a pathetic take-up rate compared to even the slowest NBN areas?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

sptrawler said:


> This is a bit damning of the NBN roll out.
> It would appear that of the 8000 homes in these towns only 50% are connected. It also sounds like, these are one of the early roll out areas. Sounds like an utter shambles, not to mention the wasted money.
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/gov...siness-in-broadband-limbo-20140204-hvb58.html
> 
> An extract:
> At a senate committee hearing on the National Broadband Network (NBN) in Hobart on Tuesday, Digital Tasmania (DigiTas) spokesperson John Dalton said that plans to deactivate six towns’ copper services within 16 weeks would digitally isolate 4000 homes, or approximately 50 per cent of premises, which still don’t have access to fibre.
> 
> Tasmania was the first state to connect to the NBN in 2010.
> 
> Advertisement ‘‘Across those six towns, approximately 50 per cent of premises don’t currently have an active NBN connection – that's approximately 4000 premises that only have 16 weeks in order to connect before the cut off date," Dalton said.
> 
> He said the number could be higher as in some cases, such as that of St Helens, only 30 per cent of premises had an active NBN connection.
> 
> *About half of the homes and businesses in those were connected to the NBN over the past two years, but for the remainder the rate of connections could be further delayed by additional factors, including landlord co-operation, heritage building issues, and even contractors missing appointments*




The NBN rollout in Aitkenvale is a complete shambles.

From the Townsville Bulletin.



> MORE than a thousand Townsville homes face being cut off from their phone, internet and even medical and security systems because they have not registered for the compulsory switch to the National Broadband Network in just two months.
> 
> The National Broadband Network Company said just over 50 per cent, or about 1400 households in the 2800-home zone set for the next rollout, are yet to put in the groundwork for the switch and will be left in the dark if they don't.




Complete disregard for vulnerable members of our community from a top-down inspired and run, ALP shambles. 

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> The NBN rollout in Aitkenvale is a complete shambles.
> 
> From the Townsville Bulletin.
> 
> Complete disregard for vulnerable members of our community from a top-down inspired and run, ALP shambles.
> 
> gg




Residents had over 18 months notice that they must migrate to the NBN. Switching is free, and monthly costs are lower than they pay now. 

Their ISPs can do everything for them at no cost. All residents need to do is reply to a letter which was sent to them, or give authorisation over the phone.

What more should they do?


----------



## overhang

NBNMyths said:


> Residents had over 18 months notice that they must migrate to the NBN. Switching is free, and monthly costs are lower than they pay now.
> 
> Their ISPs can do everything for them at no cost. All residents need to do is reply to a letter which was sent to them, or give authorisation over the phone.
> 
> What more should they do?




I thought after the Tasmania test they were looking to make it so that the NBN was actually opt out rather than opt in so that incompetent sods such as these wouldn't be left without a service unless they actually requested not to receive it.  This was some years ago now.


----------



## boofhead

At the time there was a lot of political mumbo jumo which probably confused a lot of the people. Also the scare of them needing to spend thousands to prepare their house to make use of it which was also incorrect for most people.


----------



## Knobby22

They are from Townsville. Some probably refused on principle and half of them wouldn't know what the internet was anyway. 

Instead of providing the service cheaper they should have given them a free counter tea at the local pub if they join and then they would have had a lot more success.


----------



## sptrawler

Knobby22 said:


> They are from Townsville. Some probably refused on principle and half of them wouldn't know what the internet was anyway.
> 
> Instead of providing the service cheaper they should have given them a free counter tea at the local pub if they join and then they would have had a lot more success.




It is still a dumb rollout model, that will be broke before it produces results.
Meanwhile high volume business data users, sit twiddling their thumbs, while they wait for their connection. If ever.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Knobby22 said:


> They are from Townsville. Some probably refused on principle and half of them wouldn't know what the internet was anyway.
> 
> Instead of providing the service cheaper they should have given them a free counter tea at the local pub if they join and then they would have had a lot more success.




Your points, though probably said in jest have a core truth.

Any business person would have addressed this, encouraging and educating the vulnerable, rather than running "Information Days" for Townsville Labor Royalty in Council Libraries.

But the NBN as I have repeatedly said was not rolled out as a business. It was a political charade, executed by nincompooks, who I wouldn't send down to the local store to buy me a pack of Marlboro, lest they be conned.

Rudd and Conroy have much to answer for.

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Your points, though probably said in jest have a core truth.
> 
> Any business person would have addressed this, encouraging and educating the vulnerable, rather than running "Information Days" for Townsville Labor Royalty in Council Libraries.
> 
> But the NBN as I have repeatedly said was not rolled out as a business. It was a political charade, executed by nincompooks, who I wouldn't send down to the local store to buy me a pack of Marlboro, lest they be conned.
> 
> Rudd and Conroy have much to answer for.
> 
> gg




1. NBN were running TV, radio, internet and print advertisements, which Coalition supporters decried as a waste of money.

2. NBN Co had a mobile semitrailer, which went to every site to promote and explain the NBN, which coalition supporters decried as a waste of money.

3. NBN Co initiated a bonus scheme, to encourage people to connect within 6 months, which coalition supporters decried as a waste of money.

4. The CEO of NBN co was a successful COO of the hugely successful global telco supplier, Alcatel (later Alcatel-Lucent), renowned and awarded throughout his career for his competence.

5. The take-up of the NBN is far ahead of anything similar, anywhere in the World.

…..

The Coalition have been running the NBN for 4 months now. What steps have they taken to "educate the vulnerable" about the need to be connected? 

It's a rhetorical question, because I'll answer it: They have taken no steps, and in fact cancelled all advertising and promotion of the NBN, and even removed many of the online instructional videos about how to connect.


----------



## Smurf1976

My mother (who is over 70) recently connected to the NBN and had no real hassles.

It was pretty straightforward, although it did involve two visits - one to physically install the cable and a second one to get it working. Location is suburban Hobart.

That said, she sees no real benefit in it as such since ADSL was perfectly adequate for her usage. As with many people, especially the older generations, her internet usage is pretty much limited to emails, news websites and other things which don't need a huge amount of data. That plus normal phone calls. So it's been installed but there's no real benefit in a practical sense in her case.

The only issue that I've come across is a couple of people being a bit confused and concerned about the backup battery. Suffice to say that they read the information and end up a bit concerned about the lead acid battery, thinking that it might be dangerous since acid is involved. So I do think that NBN Co should be providing some reassurance on this point - SLA batteries have been around for decades and are a reasonably safe, proven technology. But not everyone knows that, and if you say "acid" then that does tend to get people worried if they know nothing about it.

Dealing with the public 101 - always explain things in layman's terms and be sure to address anything they might perceive to be a danger. Don't assume any prior knowledge whatsoever. Only after that should you provide a more technical explanation for those who want it.


----------



## sptrawler

IMO, too many people have made the NBN a 'life defining quest".


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

sptrawler said:


> IMO, too many people have made the NBN a 'life defining quest".




It's known as the "Holy Grail"

And many have sought it.



gg


----------



## drsmith

*Rollout update for the week to Feb 02*

7,113 brownfields passed in the past week.



> A total of 7,990 additional lots/premises were passed/covered by the network during the week, of which 7,113 were in Brownfield and 479 were in Greenfield areas. Fixed wireless coverage increased by 398 premises During the week an additional 2,228 premises had services activated on the network, including 1,920 on fixed line services and 308 using satellite and fixed wireless technologies.




Total brownfields passed is now 295,349. The Strategic Review estimates 357,000 brownfields will be passed by June 30 2014. A total of 61,651 brownfields now need to be passed over the next 21 weeks at an average of 2936per week to reach the above target.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/weekly-progress-report.html


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Many elderly in Aitkenvale and Mundingburra, suburbs of Townsville containing many elderly and War Widows are distraught at the threat from the NBN to cut off their landline. 

This il-advised ALP thought bubble is having a devastating effect on the well-being of the elderly.

From the Townsville Bulletin.



> NBN Co clearly needs to lift its game.
> 
> The prospect of more than 1000 households, including many elderly, having their phone and internet services cut off or downgraded because they have yet to make the switch to the National Broadband Network is unsatisfactory.
> 
> Residents in Aitkenvale and Mundingburra have just four months to register for the NBN before existing services are lost.
> 
> Those who fail to make the switch will still be able to receive calls but be prevented from dialling out.
> 
> And what does NBN have to say about it apart from urging residents to "get their order in" ahead of May 2014? Nothing.
> 
> NBN has an obligation to ensure the community is properly informed. If this requires doorknocking and community meetings, so be it.
> 
> C'mon NBN, pick up your act.




gg


----------



## sptrawler

Well I thought I'd better do the right thing and find out how much it will cost to connect to the NBN, the box has been on the wall for four months.
Well what a joke it isn't available. 
The box is on the wall, the cabinet is 100mtrs down the road.

However, I was told it could be upto two years before it's available, check you have a dial tone and use the copper.
So the capital expenditure has gone into the deployment of the infrastructure, but it may not be up and running for two years.
I said there must be people connected, the NBN have been in the street for 12 months, all they could say was "leave your number" we'll get back to you.lol
It is an absolute fiasco, like everything else Labor implemented.IMO


----------



## drsmith

*Rollout update for the week to Feb 09*

5,311 brownfields passed in the past week.

Total brownfields passed is now 300,660. The Strategic Review estimates 357,000 brownfields will be passed by June 30 2014. A total of 56,340 brownfields now need to be passed over the next 20 weeks at an average of 2817per week to reach the above target.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/weekly-progress-report.html

Meanwhile in Tasmania, a back-door in the in the rollout contracts.



> Ziggy Zwitkowski says the contracts to connect 200,000 homes do not specify the sort of technology which must be used.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-13/tasmanian-homes-may-miss-out-on-nbn-fibre-rollout/5256794

The Australian,



> At last year’s federal election, the Coalition government promised to honour all “existing contracts” for the rollout, which under Labor was based on fibre-optic cable to the premise.
> 
> This had led to assumptions that areas where the rollout was already contracted and underway would receive fibre to the premise.
> 
> However, late yesterday NBN Co confirmed to The Australian all of its contracts with companies performing the rollout were sufficiently flexible to allow for changes of delivery technology, including switching to copper.
> 
> “All major construction contracts contain sufficient flexibility to take into account changes in things such as price, volumes and approach,” said NBN Co media manager Andrew Sholl. “We’d be rightly criticised if there wasn’t that flexibility in NBN contracts. It’s especially important in a project as complex as the NBN, a telecommunications rollout the magnitude of which has never before been attempted.” This “adaptability” would allow NBN Co to deliver high-speed broadband to more people faster and “at less cost to the taxpayer”.




So much for that poison pill.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...exible-on-fibre/story-e6frgaif-1226826537411#


----------



## IFocus

sptrawler said:


> Well I thought I'd better do the right thing and find out how much it will cost to connect to the NBN, the box has been on the wall for four months.
> Well what a joke it isn't available.
> The box is on the wall, the cabinet is 100mtrs down the road.
> 
> However, I was told it could be upto two years before it's available, check you have a dial tone and use the copper.
> So the capital expenditure has gone into the deployment of the infrastructure, but it may not be up and running for two years.
> I said there must be people connected, the NBN have been in the street for 12 months, all they could say was "leave your number" we'll get back to you.lol
> It is an absolute fiasco, like everything else Labor implemented.IMO




Decisions made today are a result of coalition policy just suck it up and get used to it there will be less services right across the board so the conservative government can throw money their mates and marginal seats.


----------



## drsmith

Someone pleeease wring its neck.  

:topic


----------



## DB008

*Google promises 10Gps fiber network to blast 4K into living rooms*



> Google Fiber is the fastest broadband internet provider in the US, but according to the Chocolate Factory's CFO Patrick Pichette, its 1Gbps connection speeds are going to increase ten-fold.
> 
> Pichette told the Goldman Sachs Technology and Internet conference that the firm is actively developing the equipment to pump 10Gbps of data into homes and offices on its network and will deploy it faster than people expect.
> 
> "That's where the world is going. It's going to happen," Pichette said, USA Today reports. Originally, the plan had been to roll this out in a decade but "why wouldn't we make it available in three years? That's what we're working on. There's no need to wait," he added.
> 
> Getting faster broadband into people's homes and businesses was vital to Google's own business, Pichette said. The more people used the internet, the better it is for Google, and he opined that cloud services would become much more popular if bandwidth lag were eliminated.
> 
> While Google Fiber retains its speed advantage, the number of homes it actually reaches is tiny. The company set up a test network in Palo Alto in 2011 before rolling out its first commercial installation in Kansas City, Missouri, after strong public demand.
> 
> Next on the list for deployment is Austin, the cultural capital of Texas, and Google also spent one dollar buying up the municipal network of Provo, Utah, and will invest $18m in finding out where the network cables are and getting them up to speed.




http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/02/14/google_will_upgrade_fiber_network_to_give_10gbps_home_broadband/


----------



## drsmith

NBN Co half-year results briefing on Friday and some more info on coverage.

http://www.zdnet.com/au/nbn-co-to-count-on-transact-fibre-for-quick-win-7000026393/


----------



## sydboy007

http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...ces-growing-in-popularity-20140221-hvddr.html

_The figures released as part of the company's first half year financial results on Friday, show 130,759 premises had an active NBN service on December 31, with a sevenfold increase in fibre users to 80,077.

The company said 23 per cent of end-users were connected to the 100/40 Mbps (download/upload) wholesale service, a decline of 2 per cent over the preceding six months.

Advertisement 
Meanwhile, use of the median 25/5 Mbps service increased to 29 per cent, from 23 per cent previously, and usage of the most popular plan, the 12/1 Mbps service, dropped from 46 per cent to 42 per cent.

The average speed ordered and provisioned across all fibre subscribers was 38 Mbps, a slight decrease of 1 Mbps since 30 June 2013._

Seems there IS demand for high speed internet access in Australia.


----------



## sydboy007

https://www.mybroadband.communications.gov.au/

good for a laugh.

My address results:

The broadband availability and quality information below is based on the services likely to be available to the 294 residential and/or business premises identified as being within a green boundary*.

*The green boundary (NEWT:89) sits within the Exchange Service Area of NEWTOWN, NSW, shown as a blue boundary.

Overall Fixed Broadband Availability A
This is the highest availability rating. Between 80 and 100 per cent of premises in the area surrounding your address have access to at least one broadband technology.

Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line (ADSL) quality  > B
The average speed of the ADSL services delivered over the copper network in your area fall into the B category when compared to the ADSL services available in other areas.
The estimated median ADSL speed for your area is (Mbps):  > 17.05

_*I'm getting a tad over 10Mbs so I'd love to know how 50% of broadband users in my area are getting OVER 17Mbs*_

Mobile broadband availability  > Very good availability
The area surrounding your address has very good access to mobile broadband services.
Mobile broadband quality  > 4G coverage
Where mobile broadband services are available in your local area, they will typically offer speeds of between 2-50 Mbps downstream and 1-10 Mbps upstream. 3G services will also be available providing 1-20 Mbps downstream and up to 3 Mbps upstream.

_*Just WOW.  Between 2-50 down and 1-10 up.  They might as well say the whole of Australia gets the same result.  My 4G has never tested over 27Mbs, even in the CBD early morning.*_

If this is how the Government is going to decide who gets broadband upgrades, well it's certainly not very representative data.  Come on Malcolm, I thought there was anti cherry picking laws.

When I compare the results to http://www.adsl2exchanges.com.au/viewexchange.php?Exchange=NEWT and the heatmap that people have updated with their download speeds, I'm not seeing more than 50% over that magical 17Mbs mark.


----------



## DB008

sydboy007 said:


> http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...ces-growing-in-popularity-20140221-hvddr.html
> 
> _The figures released as part of the company's first half year financial results on Friday, show 130,759 premises had an active NBN service on December 31, with a sevenfold increase in fibre users to 80,077.
> 
> The company said 23 per cent of end-users were connected to the 100/40 Mbps (download/upload) wholesale service, a decline of 2 per cent over the preceding six months.
> 
> Meanwhile, use of the median 25/5 Mbps service increased to 29 per cent, from 23 per cent previously, and usage of the most popular plan, the 12/1 Mbps service, dropped from 46 per cent to 42 per cent.
> 
> The average speed ordered and provisioned across all fibre subscribers was 38 Mbps, a slight decrease of 1 Mbps since 30 June 2013._
> 
> Seems there IS demand for high speed internet access in Australia.




Show me one person (on ASF, or in Australia in general), that wouldn't mind paying exactly the same as they are now (or even cheaper), for faster/more reliable internet ????


Ford
Holden
Mitsubishi
Toyota
Telstra
Shell (Clyde/Geelong)
Caltex (Kurnell)
Banking
Qantas
Virgin


Which company isn't leaving this country (or moving staff offshore)? I don't think we have a choice, jobs are leaving this country in droves, if we (as a nation) don't develop an industry (technology), we will bite the dust, hard...

I'm for the NBN, as long as it is done properly, first time.


----------



## drsmith

Some insight on the upcoming FTTN trials,



> The FTTB pilot will test the rollout of high speed VDSL broadband to end users in ten apartment complexes and office blocks in the suburbs of Carlton, Brunswick and Parkville in Melbourne.
> 
> Fibre optic cables are being delivered to a telecommunications node located in the communications rooms of the buildings. This box will connect to the existing in-building wiring, enabling retail service providers (RSPs) to deliver broadband to individual premises. Switkowski said a technology trial in December, in advance of the participation of end users and RSPs, produced download speeds of 108 Mbps and upload speeds of 48Mbps.
> 
> The FTTN pilot is in two locations: Umina near Woy Woy on the NSW Central Coast and Epping in Melbourne’s northern suburbs. The company will construct two small scale Copper Serving Area Modules, erecting kerbside node cabinets which will connect NBN fibre to spare copper pairs in the Telstra pillar.
> 
> Once active, NBN Co will invite RSPs to participate in a FTN end user trial. This limited term trial will test the delivery of high speed broadband via FTTN to up to 100 premises at each location.




http://www.itwire.com/it-policy-news/govenrment-tech-policy/63236-turnbull’s-nbn-morphs-into-shape

The weekly rollout summary or the week ending 16 February 2014 is as follows,



> This weekly report by NBN Co of network rollout progress reflects the Government’s requirements for greater transparency as set out in its 24 September 2013 Statement of Expectations to NBN Co. This shows rollout progress as of last Sunday 16 February 2014.
> 
> A total of 4,018 additional lots/premises were passed/covered by the network during the week, of which* 3,245 were in Brownfield *and 737 were in Greenfield areas. Fixed wireless coverage increased by 36 premises During the week an additional 3,333 premises had services activated on the network, including 2,817 on fixed line services and 516 using satellite and fixed wireless technologies.




http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/weekly-progress-report.html

My bolds.


----------



## NBNMyths

sydboy007 said:


> https://www.mybroadband.communications.gov.au/
> 
> good for a laugh.




It's copping a pummelling for being somewhat  optimistic in its estimates: http://delimiter.com.au/2014/02/26/mybroadband-tracker-overestimates-broadband-speeds/


​


And here's my own result from this morning, as a graphic. Interesting how a bit of rain just destroys my speed. I usually manage 12-15Mbps, but after a small storm last night I'm down to 8.6, even though 60% of the copper between my place and the exchange is less than 3 years old. Yep, Telstra's copper will be fine for FTTN….

​


----------



## drsmith

Broadband Availability and Quality Report December 2013.

https://www.mybroadband.communications.gov.au/upload/documents/Final_report (2).pdf

I haven't read it. The link for information.


----------



## sydboy007

Maybe some Dilbert can sum things up

http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1995-12-09/   Negotiations with Telstra on the CAN

http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1995-12-07/   Poor sod responsible for making the MTM work

http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1995-11-29/   How your FTTP friends will p0wn you


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Broadband Availability and Quality Report December 2013.
> 
> https://www.mybroadband.communications.gov.au/upload/documents/Final_report (2).pdf
> 
> I haven't read it. The link for information.




What a joke that paper is.

According to their calculations, about 34% of premises can currently get 21Mbps or more over ADSL2+.

With a tailwind, I could throw a paper plane to my local exchange yet I only get 12-15Mbps in dry weather, or <10 in wet weather.


If they're going to stick to fantasy like that, then I guess it will be a snap to deliver 25Mbps to everyone by 2019.


----------



## sydboy007

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/03/04/fttn_who_will_fix_the_mess/

Raises a very interesting question on who pays for any new lead in cables that the FTTN rollout requires.


_
*Does anybody know how many shared lead-in pipes there are in Australia? *
If not, any prediction of the cost of the project is moonshine.

*What of the cost to the consumer? *
When a permanent termination is attached to the front of my house, I (not Telstra) will need to pay for an electrician to pull a customer-side cable three metres. Remember the News Limited scare-story that consumers would have to re-wire their homes for the NBN? Any new lead-in will mean a customer-paid-for tech call.

*Is it worth it? *
VDSL-plus-vectoring isn't going to magic-bullet my pathetic broadband speed. My brand-new lead-in plus repairs to the cable outside gets me 25 per cent of an ADSL2+ service, and I'm a 650m cable run from where the node would be installed. In other words, the government's spend on me, when and if, will probably get me about 20 Mbps_

Note; At 650M he *might* get 50Mbs but NBN is no longer going to guarantee speeds so the writer could be right depending on the quality of the remaining copper.


----------



## nulla nulla

From this...




To this....




This improvement was from upgrading from a Telstra ADSL 2+ connection to a Telstra Cable connection.


----------



## sydboy007

nulla nulla said:


> From this...
> 
> View attachment 57106
> 
> 
> To this....
> 
> View attachment 57107
> 
> 
> This improvement was from upgrading from a Telstra ADSL 2+ connection to a Telstra Cable connection.




Lucky you.  Quite a few people on whirlpool report atrocious speeds on Telstra cable.  You must be on a relatively non congested cable servicing area.

Was that test run at peak time - say 6pm till 9pm?

What's the cost difference?

Not much joy though for the 2/3 of households outside the HFC network.


----------



## nulla nulla

sydboy007 said:


> Lucky you.  Quite a few people on whirlpool report atrocious speeds on Telstra cable.  You must be on a relatively non congested cable servicing area.




Multiple users in the area for Foxtel and Bigpond internet.




sydboy007 said:


> Was that test run at peak time - say 6pm till 9pm?




Last test was run at 9:47pm, download speed is fairly constant around the 108-113m/ps throughout the day with 2-3 pc's/laptops connected for normal browsing and live asx data streaming. Not sure what would happen if someone started downloading movies .



sydboy007 said:


> What's the cost difference?




Telstra Max bundle $135 per month includes: 200gig internet; Landline rental; all local calls; STD calls, calls mobiles; and a mobile sim with 500meg allowance for data. Worked out less than the cost of separate: adsl 2+ with 100gig; landline for adsl; and call charges. 



sydboy007 said:


> Not much joy though for the 2/3 of households outside the HFC network.




Just running on Telstra cable, not sure extent of population covered but similar bundles/speeds would be available with Optus cable.


----------



## sydboy007

nulla nulla said:


> Multiple users in the area for Foxtel and Bigpond internet.
> 
> Last test was run at 9:47pm, download speed is fairly constant around the 108-113m/ps throughout the day with 2-3 pc's/laptops connected for normal browsing and live asx data streaming. Not sure what would happen if someone started downloading movies .
> 
> Telstra Max bundle $135 per month includes: 200gig internet; Landline rental; all local calls; STD calls, calls mobiles; and a mobile sim with 500meg allowance for data. Worked out less than the cost of separate: adsl 2+ with 100gig; landline for adsl; and call charges.
> 
> Just running on Telstra cable, not sure extent of population covered but similar bundles/speeds would be available with Optus cable.




You must be lucky to not have heavy users on your cable section.

$135 seems not to bad for what you're getting, but an advantage of the NBN is being able to get rid of the land line expense.  With mobile cap plans I rarely use a land line except to make a cheap VOIP 10c untimed international call or calling a 1800 for free.  

I have ADSL2+ with mynetfone (optus DSLAM) for $50 a month with 200GB (doesn't count uploads which Telstra does) along with their free whirlpool VOIP account with phone number at $10 for 3 years and find their service pretty good.

I get unlimited calls and 2GB of data with my mobile - total cost $110 / month with extra for the international calls.

If that Telstra deal was in my area I'd be tempted, but only if I was getting similar performance to you, but cable is like ADSL and an UP TO technology.  It will cost billions to get it up to NBN levels for where it's been rolled out.  At least with fibre NBN you get your allocated bandwidth and much less chances of congestion slowing you down.


----------



## drsmith

The growth in brownfields passed has slowed to an average of about 3,400 per week over the past 4 weeks, but the number on service class zero has ceased increasing and started to decline.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco/documents/nbnco-rollout-metrics-09032014.pdf.pdf


----------



## sptrawler

drsmith said:


> The growth in brownfields passed has slowed to an average of about 3,400 per week over the past 4 weeks, but the number on service class zero has ceased increasing and started to decline.
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco/documents/nbnco-rollout-metrics-09032014.pdf.pdf




Well talking from personal experience, the holiday home in Mandurah, which has the box and optical fibre on the wall.
Still can't be connected, the distribution box is just down the road, so that's not an issue.lol

Just another stuff up, unfortunately the coalition will wear it.


----------



## overhang

As suspected Turnbulls loaded NBN review overlooked many key costing components.


*The committee – which began operating on 14 November with a remit to inquire into the government's reviews of the NBN and the governance of NBN Co – called out seven key deficiencies that it had identified with the Coalition policy and the Strategic Review it delivered in December. These include the findings that the Strategic Review:*

*Estimated a revised deployment schedule that is at odds with NBN Co's current run rate – allowing the Review to “strip out” $11.6 billion in revenues from the Labor model and adding $13 billion to the Strategic Review's calculation of peak funding;

    Ignores $4 billion in architectural savings that had already been signed off by previous NBN Co management;

    Increased estimates of the capital expenditure of the fibre build by $14.4 billion despite evidence from NBN Co and the Department of Finance;

    Uses “overly pessimistic revenue assumptions” for the FttP NBN that “do not reflect existing strong demand for NBN services” and ignore “important elements of broadband quality”;

    Assumes “without direct explanation” that Labor will fly a third satellite in 2021, increasing the estimated cost of the satellite deployment without including revenues from that service in its projections';

    Includes costs and revenues for the Multi Technology Mix through its assumed completion, but excludes $15 billion worth of revenues that would be obtained from the fibre build after 2021;

    Acknowledges that the government's multi-technology model will need to be upgraded within five years but ignores the costs of these upgrades in calculating the total cost of the model.*
http://www.zdnet.com/senate-committee-finds-fttn-nbn-inadequate-recommends-fttp-7000027728/


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> As suspected Turnbulls loaded NBN review overlooked many key costing components.



I can't imagine Stephen Conroy saying opps, sorry for the mess.

That committee as a whole split along partisan lines.

http://www.computerworld.com.au/art...n_strategic_review_coalition_slams_committee/


----------



## sptrawler

Well, I still haven't had contact to say the NBN is available, the box has been on the wall for quite a few months now.

Checking back through the thread it was October, what a laugh, all the existing contracts to be honoured and still no connection.

Actually now most people I know, are migrating to 4g wireless and mobile.lol


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Well, I still haven't had contact to say the NBN is available, the box has been on the wall for quite a few months now.
> 
> Checking back through the thread it was October, what a laugh, all the existing contracts to be honoured and still no connection.
> 
> Actually now most people I know, are migrating to 4g wireless and mobile.lol




Your friends must either be very rich and/or very low users of data, given the massive cost of replacing ADSL with 4G for an average user consuming ~50GB per month. It would cost between $370 and $650 (Telstra/Optus), compared to ~$50 on ADSL or NBN.

And then there's the physical issues, which would prevent everyone doing so. Cue the CSIRO's latest report, which just repeats what everyone in the industry has been saying for years, but Jones, Bolt et al and their merry band of technical ignoramuses cannot grasp: http://www.businessinsider.com.au/w...l-fail-as-the-world-sucks-up-bandwidth-2014-4



> Big cities are fast approaching the point of peak data where user demand for wireless internet, telephony and other services can no longer be met by the available radio frequency spectrum.
> 
> The CSIRO, which invented the wireless technology in the 1990s, released a report, World Without Wires, today showing we are faced with a finite resource and growing demands to use it.
> 
> etc etc


----------



## drsmith

The brownfields rollout now at 340,956 as at the end of March is rapidly approaching the strategic review target of 357,000 by the end of June.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco/documents/nbnco-rollout-metrics-31032014.pdf

Also of interest, the brownfields rollout have averaged about 10,000 per week over the past 3-weeks which represents a significant increase on the average of earlier weeks.

Brownfields passed in the quarter to the end of March was approximately 68,000 suggesting 400,000 is achievable at that rate by the end of June.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Your friends must either be very rich and/or very low users of data, given the massive cost of replacing ADSL with 4G for an average user consuming ~50GB per month. It would cost between $370 and $650 (Telstra/Optus), compared to ~$50 on ADSL or NBN.
> 
> And then there's the physical issues, which would prevent everyone doing so. Cue the CSIRO's latest report, which just repeats what everyone in the industry has been saying for years, but Jones, Bolt et al and their merry band of technical ignoramuses cannot grasp: http://www.businessinsider.com.au/w...l-fail-as-the-world-sucks-up-bandwidth-2014-4




The people I was refering to were my two daughters and a mate who has moved into our holiday home. They are far from rich actually probably represent the other end of the scale.
All of them are wireless only.
I asked my friend what plan he had, and it is 8gig of 4g costs $45/mth.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> The people I was refering to were my two daughters and a mate who has moved into our holiday home. They are far from rich actually probably represent the other end of the scale.
> All of them are wireless only.
> I asked my friend what plan he had, and it is 8gig of 4g costs $45/mth.




So low volume users then (compared to the average of ~50GB/month last time I looked at the ABS). For ~$45/month on the NBN you'd get 100-200GB.


----------



## DB008

NBNMyths said:


> So low volume users then (compared to the average of ~50GB/month last time I looked at the ABS). For ~$45/month on the NBN you'd get 100-200GB.




Some plans here...
http://www.whistleout.com.au/Broadband/National-Broadband-Network-NBN-12Mbps-Plans

More like $50+

To get something decent (Tier 2 plan), your looking at around $70-$80 per month.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> So low volume users then (compared to the average of ~50GB/month last time I looked at the ABS). For ~$45/month on the NBN you'd get 100-200GB.




Yes, but low volume users are thinking, why have a mobile a landline and a wireless tablet.

They think the tablet and mobile phone are a must, so are dumping the landline.

I've just checked my usage and it is between 4gig and 7gig per month. I keep my land line because it comes with free calls to any mobile, free national calls and 20gig adsl2 and line rental for $80/mth.
Because I travel thoughout Australia I have a Telstra mobile.
If I didn't do remote areas, I would consider full wireless.


----------



## sydboy007

DB008 said:


> Some plans here...
> http://www.whistleout.com.au/Broadband/National-Broadband-Network-NBN-12Mbps-Plans
> 
> More like $50+
> 
> To get something decent (Tier 2 plan), your looking at around $70-$80 per month.




plenty of NBN plans available for less than $50 even at 25 or 50 Mbs rates.  Skymesh even offer a 100/40 plan for $49.95 and it's feasible to get 100GB of downloads a month at 25/5 for less than $50

I'd take a fibre connection for use at home over wireless any day.

http://bc.whirlpool.net.au/bc/?acti...99999&needhw=yes&conntype=9&conntype=5&sort=2


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> Yes, but low volume users are thinking, why have a mobile a landline and a wireless tablet.
> 
> They think the tablet and mobile phone are a must, so are dumping the landline.
> 
> I've just checked my usage and it is between 4gig and 7gig per month. I keep my land line because it comes with free calls to any mobile, free national calls and 20gig adsl2 and line rental for $80/mth.
> Because I travel thoughout Australia I have a Telstra mobile.
> If I didn't do remote areas, I would consider full wireless.




Depending on how many calls you're making you'd probably be better off on a higher mobile plan for calls and using mynetfone for landline calls via VOIP at 10C untimed.

A Telstra pre paid encore CAP could be the way to go.  Free calls to landlines and mobiles after 6pm and the ability to use the $30 or $40 you pay as credit for other services ie set your wife up on a telstra simplicity plan and SMS credit2u each month to get her calls basically for free.  As long as you recharge each month the credit you build up doesn't expire.  It's the only mobile option with Telstra that's competitive.

http://bc.whirlpool.net.au/bc/?acti...9&upfront=999999&needhw=yes&conntype=1&sort=2

https://www.mynetfone.com.au/whirlpool/VoIP/Plans/WhirlpoolSaver-Plan

I happily use the neosaver plan for 100 calls at $5 a month including to 31 countries (some including to mobile phones) with a free DID that you can set up anywhere in Australia - I did this for my aunt and picked a DID that was local to one of her children so they could call her cheaply.  Use the G.711 codec and you'd not know the difference to a standard phone call.


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> Depending on how many calls you're making you'd probably be better off on a higher mobile plan for calls and using mynetfone for landline calls via VOIP at 10C untimed.
> 
> A Telstra pre paid encore CAP could be the way to go.  Free calls to landlines and mobiles after 6pm and the ability to use the $30 or $40 you pay as credit for other services ie set your wife up on a telstra simplicity plan and SMS credit2u each month to get her calls basically for free.  As long as you recharge each month the credit you build up doesn't expire.  It's the only mobile option with Telstra that's competitive.
> 
> http://bc.whirlpool.net.au/bc/?acti...9&upfront=999999&needhw=yes&conntype=1&sort=2
> 
> https://www.mynetfone.com.au/whirlpool/VoIP/Plans/WhirlpoolSaver-Plan
> 
> I happily use the neosaver plan for 100 calls at $5 a month including to 31 countries (some including to mobile phones) with a free DID that you can set up anywhere in Australia - I did this for my aunt and picked a DID that was local to one of her children so they could call her cheaply.  Use the G.711 codec and you'd not know the difference to a standard phone call.




Thanks for the info Syd, my wife doesn't have a mobile(she hates phones). But I really do need to rationalise my situation. $110/month is crazy really, when I consider how much we use the services.
My $30/month Telstra plan, I've had for years, as you say there are probably better plans.
Getting my hip replaced today, so it will have to wait untill I stop crying and can think straight. lol


----------



## drsmith

sptrawler said:


> Thanks for the info Syd, my wife doesn't have a mobile(she hates phones). But I really do need to rationalise my situation. $110/month is crazy really, when I consider how much we use the services.
> My $30/month Telstra plan, I've had for years, as you say there are probably better plans.
> Getting my hip replaced today, so it will have to wait untill I stop crying and can think straight. lol



I have a VOIP internet and mobile setup with Iinet.

The VOIP internet is $60pm for 100gig/month and includes local and national calls. 

The mobile is 1.5gig/month + $450 (or something like that) included calls for $20. It's Optus network though so that's a bit of a disadvantage.

I made the mistake though of purchasing their hardware (Bob). The base unit while being very plasticy (I did say my spelling was crap) works fine although the answering machine can be slightly feral on occasion. The handset though is exceptionally bad and overall worth little more than immediate dispatch to the xxxxhouse.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> I made the mistake though of purchasing their hardware (Bob). The base unit while being very plasticy (I did say my spelling was crap) works fine although the answering machine can be slightly feral on occasion. The handset though is exceptionally bad and overall worth little more than immediate dispatch to the xxxxhouse.




Couldn't agree more. I had 2 BoBs, then 2 BoB2s and they were hopeless. I eventually went to a standard VoIP router, then plugged in a Uniden 2-line cordless phone, giving me PSTN and VoIP lines. Works great.


----------



## sydboy007

NBNMyths said:


> Couldn't agree more. I had 2 BoBs, then 2 BoB2s and they were hopeless. I eventually went to a standard VoIP router, then plugged in a Uniden 2-line cordless phone, giving me PSTN and VoIP lines. Works great.




Mynetfone are selling the Gigaset (Siemens) A510IP VoIP Hybrid Phone quite cheap at $99.95 for base station and single handset, but the 3 handset package for $179.95 is a standout deal.

I have a working couple running multiple home businesses off a 3 handset setup and they couldn't be happier.  Can have up to 8 VOIP providers configured with certain calls only ringing on particular handsets.  2 VOIP + 1 PSTN call at the same time.  It's perfect for a small business.  VERY reliable.  Great call quality.  Up to 6 handsets on the 1 base station.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> I have a VOIP internet and mobile setup with Iinet.
> 
> The VOIP internet is $60pm for 100gig/month and includes local and national calls.
> 
> The mobile is 1.5gig/month + $450 (or something like that) included calls for $20. It's Optus network though so that's a bit of a disadvantage.




Something we can agree on Doc, i have the same plan and its a hoot.


----------



## sydboy007

So Malcolm has come out and told us he's shocked that the areas due for fixed wireless and satellite now have massive increases in demand - near 80% instead of the forecast 30%.  Who could uh known that if you introduce a reasonably priced broadband solution into under serviced areas that demand might actually take off?

Seems those rolls royce NBN satellites are not looking such a bad investment after all.

Malcolm also goes on to say NBN doesn't own enough spectrum on the edges of the main cities, but he's somehow forgot that Labor wasn't willing to sell off 30MHz of the digital dividend spectrum on the cheap, so actually Malcolm has quite a bit of spectrum available for the NBN if he wished to use it.  Me thinks he's gunning for a reduction in the amount of fixed wireless and a bigger rollout of FTTN in the areas most likely to require high levels of copper remediation.  Talk about setting up for a budget blowout.

Factor in Malcolm is still living in double rainbow fantasy land about the quality of the copper.  The below graphs shows just how far out from the guestimates cold hard broadband speed reality is in Australia.

note: while the mybroadband site does talk about medians and labor has talked about averages I would find it very hard to believe that the median and average could be so far apart for most suburbs.  I'd argue the median figures are more likely to be wrong than the averages.


----------



## So_Cynical

New Bureau of Statistics internet usage figures out today, to 31st Dec 2013

Surprise surprise the 20 year trend continues with Aussies Downloading more than ever, 55% up on the same period last year with *fixed line downloads more than 22 times greater than wireless*, and wireless at close to capacity.




			
				www.cnet said:
			
		

> In the three months leading up to 31 December 2013, Australian internet users *downloaded 860,000TB of data (823,000TB through fixed line connections and 37,400 via wireless)*. While that's a big figure in and of itself, it's a 55 per cent increase on the volume of data downloaded just one year earlier.




http://m.cnet.com.au/australians-downloading-more-and-at-greater-speeds-339347031.htm


----------



## NBNMyths

So_Cynical said:


> New Bureau of Statistics internet usage figures out today, to 31st Dec 2013
> 
> Surprise surprise the 20 year trend continues with Aussies Downloading more than ever, 55% up on the same period last year with *fixed line downloads more than 22 times greater than wireless*, and wireless at close to capacity.
> 
> http://m.cnet.com.au/australians-downloading-more-and-at-greater-speeds-339347031.htm




Yes, haven't you heard? The NBN is a white elephant. Fixed lines are dead. We're all moving to wireless. It must be true, because Alan Jones, Ray Hadley, Andrew Bolt, Piers Ackerman, Tony Abbott et al told us so….


----------



## sydboy007

Malcolm Turnbull pre elction

_the Coalition will conduct an independent cost benefit analysis of the project and a review of the regulations relating to broadband. _

Malcolm Turnbull post election

Pushing NBN co to move to the MTM model before the CBA has handed down it's findings.

Rank hypocrisy from the man, along with the fact he's waster how many millions on a CBA he seems to have not needed.  Possibly Michael Vertigan hasn't done much so Malcolm is heading things off by making the CBA irrelevant.

3 years of hounding Labor for investing so much money without a CBA, and now he's doing the same.

I suppose in Malcolms' defense he never actually said they'd use the CBA.  Must be like communist Russia where the outcome was known before the report was written?


----------



## sydboy007

http://www.zdnet.com/au/nbn-co-should-own-copper-hfc-networks-switkowski-7000028219/

_In an interview on ABC's The Business last night, Switkowski said negotiations should result in NBN Co taking ownership of the networks from Telstra.

"I think the outcome of these negotiations should lead to a situation where the copper network, the ownership, is transferred into the NBN; the ownership of the HFC network is transferred into NBN," he said.

"And then we get to invest in it, provide in-fill where needed, upgrade progressively over time so that as consumer needs for ever-higher bandwidth, which we know are going to grow spectacularly, can be met by our use of those networks."

He said that this would mean that NBN Co would take on the responsibility for maintenance of the copper network which a leaked analysis of the Coalition's policy by NBN Co prior to the election estimated that maintenance costs for fibre to the node with the copper network included would be between four to six times that of the fibre to the premises model.

"For this to work, NBN has got to be a monopoly provider and will wholesale to all of the retail service providers including TPG," he said._

-----------------------

Malcolm Turnbull pre election

_“Labor’s re-establishment of a public monopoly in a crucial sector of the economy, and its archaic refusal to weigh options, costs and benefits, or seek genuinely expert advice, demonstrate disdain for the proven policy principles of the past 30 years.”_

I wonder why being a monopoly post election is now OK????


----------



## Knobby22

For Malcolm's plan to work, he does need to own the copper wire otherwise it will be a bureaucratic nightmare. The present joint operation with Telstra is untenable as he now wants to keep some of the copper.

But Optus own fibre and TPG want to cherry pick. The more they steal customers, the bigger risk to the project. Is he going to try to stop them rolling out fibre?


----------



## sydboy007

Further rank hypocricy from Turnbull

December 2011

_“One of my concerns is that as the rollout confirms the NBN to be logistically daunting and financially untenable, NBN Co and the Government will try to obscure this by focusing on the easiest areas, not those most in need.”_

February 2014 Broadband Availability and Quality Report

_the analysis has found that there are areas of inadequate access to infrastructure across the country, including areas distributed as small pockets of poor service in metropolitan and outer metropolitan areas. It will be difficult for NBN Co to deploy in these areas but the objective is to prioritise the areas of greatest need where this is logistically and commercially feasible.”_

Latest statement of expectations

_"NBN Co will prioritise areas identified as poorly served by the Broadband Availability and Quality Report published in February 2014 (including any subsequent refinements arising from additional data) to the extent commercially and operationally feasible.”_

-----------------

So within 7 months of taking his ministerial position Turnbull has moved NBN to the position he firmly criticised a bit over 2 years ago.


----------



## sydboy007

Sums up the CBN quite nicely


----------



## So_Cynical

sydboy007 said:


> Sums up the CBN quite nicely




Brilliant, says it all...someone should get this printed on T-Shirts.


----------



## drsmith

My goodness!

The grapes have become very sour in this thread and that when it is looking like more brownfields will be passed with fibre in the first 12 months of this government than there was under the previous 6-years of Labor.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> My goodness!
> 
> The grapes have become very sour in this thread and that when it is looking like more brownfields will be passed with fibre in the first 12 months of this government than there was under the previous 6-years of Labor.




No one gives a rats ass, its a half arsed NBN, a technological mish mash to satisfy some right wing political agenda, infrastructure with a political agenda, its madness.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> My goodness!
> 
> The grapes have become very sour in this thread and that when it is looking like more brownfields will be passed with fibre in the first 12 months of this government than there was under the previous 6-years of Labor.




So you believe 100% of that improvement is due to the Liberals, or could it be that the workers have gotten through the learning period and have gained quite a bit of efficiency which is just kicking in?  As with most large scale projects most of the efficiency gains come from learning what does and doesn't work.  I'm sure there will be an equally steep learning curve on for the CBN, worse so because they will have to learn with regards to HFC and FTTN.  I'm still waiting to see how long it will take to link up the pillar to premises pair with the exchange to pillar pair.  Multiply that by tens of thousands of pillars.  Either extended outages as users are cutover to the node, or significantly degraded ADSL services till a person chooses to be migrated due to interference from the VDSL spec.  No vectoring though if everyone is not migrated to the node, so will be interesting to see what option Turnbull picks.

Considering the LN+P went to the election with an IRONCLAD promise to have the FTTN rolled out by end of 2016 for minimum 25Mbs and reneged on that within a few months, why should the electorate be happy?  Now there's no minimum speed upgrade and so a continuation of the current situation of those closest to the exchange / node get higher speeds than those further away.  Yay for Node lotto.

If the little slip Ziggy let go that the Telstra / Optus negotiations may still be going on in 2015 is true, one has to wonder when any of the actual Liberal CBN will start to be built, or just how much taxpayers money they will have to spend on fixing up the copper network they previously sold off and which Telstra has allowed to degrade considerably if Ziggy gets his wish that NBNCo will own it.

I'll be quite surprised if there's a non trial FTTN customer connected to the CBN by the end of this year.

maybe we should have a quarterly tally of active connections on the NBN (current FTTP and Fixed wireless rollout) and compare to the CBN (FTTN and HFC after optical Node upgrades).

I wonder how many years it will take before the CBN is in front?


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> No one gives a rats ass, its a half arsed NBN, a technological mish mash to satisfy some right wing political agenda, infrastructure with a political agenda, its madness.



We know where the political agenda at any cost was, right down to the red underpants. That though and Syd's post below mostly old ground which has long since been covered in this thread.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> My goodness!
> 
> The grapes have become very sour in this thread and that when it is looking like more brownfields will be passed with fibre in the first 12 months of this government than there was under the previous 6-years of Labor.




Seriously?

As syd wrote, all the rollout gains we are seeing now are due to the project finally hitting volume rollout, which it did before the election. Every connection currently being switched on was started before the Coalition even came to power!

There's no sour grapes here, only plenty of "I told you so", as the Coalition stumble from one broken NBN commitment to another.

Their "25Mbps to 100% by 2016" fell by ~50% within 2 months of the election, as the cost went up by 25%. The deadline for 50Mbps has gone completely.

The long-promised CBA has been pushed aside, with Turnbull telling NBN Co to go ahead with the Coalition's plan before the CBA has been completed! What was the point of doing it, if the results have already been ignored?

Have they actually kept a single one of their pre-election NBN commitments? If this was the ALP, you'd be screaming blue murder.

Mark my words: In 20 years, Turnbull's multi technology mix (spin for obsolete hodgepodge) NBN will go down as one of the biggest infrastructure bungles in Australia's history.

If there are sour grapes, then you'll be enjoying them too.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> There's no sour grapes here, only plenty of "I told you so", as the Coalition stumble from one broken NBN commitment to another.



The rollout under this government seems to be progressing far more soothly than it ever did under Labor. The failed election promises and fanciful corporate plans from NBN Co throughout Labor's time in office is actual history.



NBNMyths said:


> If there are sour grapes, then you'll be enjoying them too.



In that statement, you highlight the reality of sour grapes.

The only way you'll actually enjoy them is in the hope that others will have to as well.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> The rollout under this government seems to be progressing far more soothly than it ever did under Labor. The failed election promises and fanciful corporate plans from NBN Co throughout Labor's time in office is actual history.
> 
> In that statement, you highlight the reality of sour grapes. The only way you'll actually enjoy them is in the hope that others will have to as well.




You don't get it. The rollout as it currently runs is no different to the way it was pre-election. The connections currently being made began over 12 months ago, or ~7 months before the coalition came to power.

The rollout is Labor's Fibre-wireless-satellite NBN, being done by the same contractors on the same terms using the same methods. The only difference is the way progress is being reported.

The "CBN" hasn't even begun yet. Not a single connection outside Labor's already-underway model has been made, and won't be for at least another 12 months.

The Coalition's performance can only be judged on *their* plan and the implementation of it. Progress? Even before basic design has begun, their promised deadline has blown out by 50% and costs by 25%! I can only imagine where it will go from here.

I don't want anyone to have to 'enjoy' sour grapes. My point is that all of Australia will get to have them whether they like it or not, because of the already-obsolete schemozzle being imposed upon us. The fact this is occurring despite essentially 99.9% of expert opinion makes it all the more disappointing.


----------



## drsmith

Myths,

You say all the above ignoring the train wreck Labor's plan became. it couldn't even make the grade on successive downgraded corporate plans let alone election commitments.

As I've said before, what will be critical for the Coalition is NBN Co meeting targets set out implementing their model through future corporate plans under their government.


----------



## IFocus

NBNMyths said:


> You don't get it. The rollout as it currently runs is no different to the way it was pre-election. The connections currently being made began over 12 months ago, or ~7 months before the coalition came to power.
> 
> The rollout is Labor's Fibre-wireless-satellite NBN, being done by the same contractors on the same terms using the same methods. The only difference is the way progress is being reported.
> 
> The "CBN" hasn't even begun yet. Not a single connection outside Labor's already-underway model has been made, and won't be for at least another 12 months.
> 
> The Coalition's performance can only be judged on *their* plan and the implementation of it. Progress? Even before basic design has begun, their promised deadline has blown out by 50% and costs by 25%! I can only imagine where it will go from here.
> 
> I don't want anyone to have to 'enjoy' sour grapes. My point is that all of Australia will get to have them whether they like it or not, because of the already-obsolete schemozzle being imposed upon us. The fact this is occurring despite essentially 99.9% of expert opinion makes it all the more disappointing.




Your wasting your breath quoting facts as you see from the replies through out this entire thread no facts but ultra politicization Coalition good Labor bad.


----------



## drsmith

IFocus said:


> Your wasting your breath quoting facts as you see from the replies through out this entire thread no facts but ultra politicization Coalition good Labor bad.



The facts are littered throughout this thread should you wish to take a deeper look.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> As I've said before, what will be critical for the Coalition is NBN Co meeting targets set out implementing their model through future corporate plans under their government.




So you make no criticism for the Coalition's complete failure to meet any of their their pre-election NBN targets, costs or commitments?


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> So you make no criticism for the Coalition's complete failure to meet any of their their pre-election NBN targets, costs or commitments?



Less than the litany of failures this project suffered under Labor which went well beyond election commitments.

IIRC, this aspect of the discussion was covered in this thread when the strategic review was released.


----------



## Calliope

IFocus said:


> Your wasting your breath quoting facts as you see from the replies through out this entire thread no facts but ultra politicization Coalition good Labor bad.




Yeah IF. Your three wise guys, IF, Myths and Sid, still yearning for the lost Messiah...Conroy.:roll eyes:


----------



## DB008

Calliope said:


> Yeah IF. Your three wise guys, IF, Myths and Sid, still yearning for the lost Messiah...Conroy.:roll eyes:




Conroy?

This guy??


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Less than the litany of failures this project suffered under Labor which went well beyond election commitments.




I would certainly hope so. They've only been in power for 6 months, and haven't actually tried to _do anything _yet.

I wonder how it would look if we compared the status of Labor's NBN plan 6 months after they came to power, versus the Coalition's plan today….


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> I would certainly hope so. They've only been in power for 6 months, and haven't actually tried to _do anything _yet.
> 
> I wonder how it would look if we compared the status of Labor's NBN plan 6 months after they came to power, versus the Coalition's plan today….




As you know a project like this is massive, Labor will be pleased to be out from under it.
I have had an optical fibre at the house since the election, the cabinet has been in the street for 12 months, yet there is still no service available.
I contacted them in October and they had no idea of time frame, I contacted them last week, same answer.
Now from my understanding all existinging connenctions were given the green light by the coalition just after they took office.Therefore funding would have been uninterupted and the connection time wouldn't have changed.
However I have no doubt the full blame will be laid at the coalitions feet. Labor has a child like inability to accept any accountability, for irresponsible policy. 
I admire your knowledge and enthusiasm for the NBN, Myths, however there are some much bigger issues facing us.IMO
Having said that, it is always great to read your posts.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> Now from my understanding all existinging connenctions were given the green light by the coalition just after they took office.Therefore funding would have been uninterupted and the connection time wouldn't have changed.




No, connections currently taking place were started about 12 months ago (it takes ~12 months from the issue of construction orders for an area to activation of that area).

The Coalition have indeed kept FTTP rollout going with new construction orders, but they won't be activated for another ~6 months yet.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> I would certainly hope so. They've only been in power for 6 months, and haven't actually tried to _do anything _yet.
> 
> I wonder how it would look if we compared the status of Labor's NBN plan 6 months after they came to power, versus the Coalition's plan today….



6-months after coming to office, Labor was still on plan A.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> No, connections currently taking place were started about 12 months ago (it takes ~12 months from the issue of construction orders for an area to activation of that area).
> 
> The Coalition have indeed kept FTTP rollout going with new construction orders, but they won't be activated for another ~6 months yet.




Thanks for the info.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> 6-months after coming to office, Labor was still on plan A.




Yes, they were. As are the Coalition, more-or-less, yet look at the major changes that have already occurred. My point is that you're trying to say "Labor=bad" due to the rough 6-year evolution of the NBN into what it is today, while saying "Liberal=good" because there haven't been as many issues in their first 6 months.

They haven't even reach any hard spots yet. The only thing they have going for them is that Telstra are somewhat friendlier now than they were back when Labor tried to do FTTN. How friendly is yet to be seen however.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> My point is that you're trying to say "Labor=bad" due to the rough 6-year evolution of the NBN into what it is today, while saying "Liberal=good" because there haven't been as many issues in their first 6 months.



After 6-years in office, Labor essentially failed on delivery and part of the reason for that was that their project was fanciful within the parameters set during their time in office. Remember that Stephen Conroy effectively confessed as much in relation to FTTP to MDU's. There's also Simon Hackett's views in relation to the use of existing HFC.

While debate and issues will obviously continue around the detail, the multi technology approach was always going to be more sound as a matter of principal than one size fits all. To that end, I note that in Malcolm's statement of expectations from last week that the principal constraints are time and cost and not the specific tech that's to be used at any given location. This gives the Coalition a greater prospect of success than the red underpants approach from Stephen Conroy.

http://www.communications.gov.au/__...14/221162/SOE_Shareholder_Minister_letter.pdf


----------



## Calliope

NBNMyths said:


> . My point is that you're trying to say "Labor=bad" due to the rough 6-year evolution of the NBN into what it is today, while saying "Liberal=good" because there haven't been as many issues in their first 6 months.




Parrotting the parrot.

The Galah said;



> Your wasting your breath quoting facts as you see from the replies through out this entire thread no facts but ultra politicization Coalition good Labor bad.


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> After 6-years in office, Labor essentially failed on delivery and part of the reason for that was that their project was fanciful within the parameters set during their time in office. Remember that Stephen Conroy effectively confessed as much in relation to FTTP to MDU's. There's also Simon Hackett's views in relation to the use of existing HFC.




Yes this was one of Labors biggest failures, they had 6 years to get the NBN to a position where the coalition couldn't come in and make a diabolical mess of it that at some point will require a large expenditure to fix.

You know you have really stuffed the NBN up when even The Australian thinks you have.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...oadband-service/story-e6frg9tf-1226883007979#

I note most of those opposed to the NBN in this thread demanded a CBA be carried out by Labor, I expect you'll hold the same level of disgust to Turnbull who is now switching to his NBN model before the CBA is released.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> Yes this was one of Labors biggest failures, they had 6 years to get the NBN to a position where the coalition couldn't come in and make a diabolical mess of it that at some point will require a large expenditure to fix.
> 
> You know you have really stuffed the NBN up when even The Australian thinks you have.
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...oadband-service/story-e6frg9tf-1226883007979#
> 
> I note most of those opposed to the NBN in this thread demanded a CBA be carried out by Labor, I expect you'll hold the same level of disgust to Turnbull who is now switching to his NBN model before the CBA is released.



More sour grapes.

None of your response above effectively addresses the point of mine that you quoted.


----------



## drsmith

An update on rollout expectations,



> The slideshow also reveals NBN Co will, as previously reported, easily exceed its 357,000 brownfields premises passed target for the end of June 2014. NBN Co is currently tracking to pass around 400,000 brownfields premises by the end of June, and around 102,214 greenfields premises, with a total of around 596,000 premises covered by the network, including fixed wireless.
> 
> NBN Co is also estimating that by the end of the year, when NBN Co's legacy fibre construction contracts run out, the fibre network will reach 550,000 brownfields premises, meaning NBN Co is only expecting to pass an additional 150,000 brownfields premises in the last six months of this year.




http://www.zdnet.com/au/revealed-nbn-co-scales-back-fibre-rollout-7000028381/


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> After 6-years in office, Labor essentially failed on delivery and part of the reason for that was that their project was fanciful within the parameters set during their time in office. Remember that Stephen Conroy effectively confessed as much in relation to FTTP to MDU's. There's also Simon Hackett's views in relation to the use of existing HFC.
> 
> While debate and issues will obviously continue around the detail, the multi technology approach was always going to be more sound as a matter of principal than one size fits all. To that end, I note that in Malcolm's statement of expectations from last week that the principal constraints are time and cost and not the specific tech that's to be used at any given location. This gives the Coalition a greater prospect of success than the red underpants approach from Stephen Conroy.
> 
> http://www.communications.gov.au/__...14/221162/SOE_Shareholder_Minister_letter.pdf




technically the CBN no longer has a rollout schedule - makes it easy to never miss a target

So we've gone from late 2016 time frame pre election, to 2019 once the fairy tale rollout was shown to have been either an outright lie or poorly planned election promise, to the latest revision that actually doesn't mention a completion date but does have the following aspirational objective:

_The Australia Government is committed to completing the National Broadband Network ('NBN') and ensuring all Australians have access to very fast broadband as soon as possible..."

The design of a multi-technology mix NBN....download data rates (an proportionate upload rates) of at least 25Mbs to all premises and at least 50Mbs to 90% of fixed line premises as soon as possible._

http://www.communications.gov.au/__...14/221162/SOE_Shareholder_Minister_letter.pdf

What time frame do you consider "as soon as possible" doc?

What do you think of Turnbulls' unwillingness to talk about TPG and it's FTTB plans with a decision on if it's legal or not?  He harped on so many times about how Labor was nearly communistic in bringing back a Government monopoly, yet he seems reluctant to allow private sector investment that would compete with the CBN.


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> More sour grapes.
> 
> None of your response above effectively addresses the point of mine that you quoted.




There was nothing of substance to address, as per usual you play the blame game.

From the article you quoted but left out 







> The 20 percent of premises is down from the 24 percent proposed in NBN Co's own multi-technology mix model in the NBN Strategic Review released last year, and *down from 22 percent outlined in the Coalition's 2013 election policy*.



More broken promises from this government.  What a shambles this NBN will become in 20 years when fibre is still the benchmark and yet we still have millions of dollars in copper maintenance per year, thanks Turnbull.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> After 6-years in office, Labor essentially failed on delivery and part of the reason for that was that their project was fanciful within the parameters set during their time in office. Remember that Stephen Conroy effectively confessed as much in relation to FTTP to MDU's. There's also Simon Hackett's views in relation to the use of existing HFC.
> 
> While debate and issues will obviously continue around the detail, the multi technology approach was always going to be more sound as a matter of principal than one size fits all. To that end, I note that in Malcolm's statement of expectations from last week that the principal constraints are time and cost and not the specific tech that's to be used at any given location. This gives the Coalition a greater prospect of success than the red underpants approach from Stephen Conroy.
> 
> http://www.communications.gov.au/__...14/221162/SOE_Shareholder_Minister_letter.pdf




You're forgetting the issues that Labor faced _at that time_. Labor set a target of 100Mbps. Given that "expectation" and the situations below, FTTP was really the only choice available to them.

*FTTN?*
They couldn't do FTTN because of Telstra, and they couldn't include Telstra's HFC for the same reason. They had three choices:
1. Do nothing (i.e. allow Telsra to do FTTN as they saw fit)
2. Forcibly acquire Telstra's copper (cost estimated at $20bn)
3. Do FTTP

They went with #3, which I'm sure few people would disagree with given the available choices.

Additionally, in 2009 you could not practically do 100Mbps via FTTN. So if 100Mbps was the target, then even if they could pry the copper from the three amigos, it would not have delivered the target capability.


*HFC?*
In my submission to the NBN enquiry some years back, I suggested they use HFC as an interim measure, allowing HFC areas to be done with FTTP last. However, I have since learned that (at the time) there was not a single wholesale HFC network operating anywhere in the World, and I believe (happy to be corrected) this was because the HFC standards at that time did not facilitate a wholesale network.

Then there's the upgrades required. Optus HFC has less than 20% take-up, and even with that level it was only delivering ">8Mbps" in 2009 (according to Optus). So you can imagine the upgrade cost to deliver 100Mbps to 90% of premises in the footprint, given that it's a shared network (so more connections means slower speeds for everyone).

So even if they had been able to access Optus HFC back then, it's entirely possible that it would not have been a practical solution.

The only change I think was plausible was to do MDUs as FTTB as the default. Despite Turnbull's ramblings, that was always permitted under the NBN plan if the MDU was frustrated (i.e. the body corporate refused FTTP), but I do think that making FTTP an opt-in for MDUs would have been a better idea.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> While debate and issues will obviously continue around the detail, the multi technology approach was always going to be more sound as a matter of principal than one size fits all.




A half arsed bits and pieces approach of copper, fibre, cable, satellite and wireless across the board is better than fibre for 90% of us? .. more sound as a matter of principle.? 

 I'm stunned at the depth of absolute lunacy that the above quote displays, the absolute contempt for logic and sense.


----------



## NBNMyths

So_Cynical said:


> A half arsed bits and pieces approach of copper, fibre, cable, satellite and wireless across the board is better than fibre for 90% of us? .. more sound as a matter of principle.?
> 
> I'm stunned at the depth of absolute lunacy that the above quote displays, the absolute contempt for logic and sense.




Couldn't agree more. Pretty much everyone admits that FTTP is the end game. In 20 years, that's what will be the standard, just as copper twisted pairs have been the standard for the last hundred years. Yet here we are with people saying that it's more sensible to spend billions of dollars on technology which is admittedly nothing more than a stop gap, than to spend a few more billion doing it properly the first time.

100 years ago, the same sort of people were complaining about the cost of replacing iron with copper. Imagine if they'd gone with a "multi technology approach" then. Iron for most, copper twisted pairs for the lucky 25%, telegrams with messenger boys for the suburbs, carrier pigeons for the rest.

Yep, multi-technology is the way to go alright. I know that when I was building my house, the PGH sandstocks were damn expensive. So I decided to do part of the house with sandstocks, then a few areas with commons and the rest with fibro. That way, in 10 years I can rip out the commons and the fibre and do the rest of the house in the sandstocks. Sure, it will cost me 50% more by the time I finish, but at least I saved a few dollars in the first 10 years.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Couldn't agree more.




Then you're at odds with Stephen Conroy post election, Simon Hackett and yourself.



NBNMyths said:


> The only change I think was plausible was to do MDUs as FTTB as the default.




And that's at odds with the statement of expectations for the NBN issued under Labor. 



> The Government expects that NBN Co will design, build and operate a new NBN to provide access to high speed broadband to all Australian premises. *The Government’s objective for NBN Co is to connect 93 per cent of Australian homes, schools and businesses with fibre-to-the-premises technology providing broadband speeds of up to 100 megabits per second, with a minimum fibre coverage obligation of 90 per cent of Australian premises.* All remaining premises will be served by a combination of next-generation fixed wireless and satellite technologies providing peak speeds of at least 12 megabits per second.




My bolds.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/assets/documents/statement-of-expectations.pdf


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Then you're at odds with Stephen Conroy post election, Simon Hackett and yourself.
> 
> And that's at odds with the statement of expectations for the NBN issued under Labor.
> 
> 
> My bolds.
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/assets/documents/statement-of-expectations.pdf




No, I'm not. FTTB is essentially FTTP. The fibre goes *all the way to the building*. It doesn't involve the construction and powering of 60,000 outdoor node cabinets which will be obsolete under FTTP. It doesn't involve spending billions purchasing or leasing Telstra's copper network. It requires _very_ little additional equipment, and that equipment is cheap. The copper loop is well under 100m long (in most cases, probably ~20m). The technology exists now (and even then) to deliver 100Mbps over that distance.

I'll have to search to see how far back the agreement goes to allow FTTB for frustrated MDUs, but it's at least a few years. Possibly back to the KPMG implementation study IIRC.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> No, I'm not. FTTB is essentially FTTP. The fibre goes *all the way to the building*.



That's not what Labor meant by minimum 90% FTTP in their statement of expectations and you know it.



So_Cynical said:


> A half arsed bits and pieces approach of copper, fibre, cable, satellite and wireless across the board is better than fibre for 90% of us? .. more sound as a matter of principle.?




You're the one who quoted the above and said you couldn't agree more.

What about Simon Hackett and HFC or do you now consider him to be on the dark side as well ?


----------



## sydboy007

From Bill Morrow (NBN CEO):

_“A building that signs up to TPG runs the risk of being left with only one retail service provider -- TPG itself,” he told the AFR as NBN Co prepared to launch what he describes as “a commercial response to emerging competition”._

So much for Turnbull being pro facilities based competition from the private sector.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> That's not what Labor meant by minimum 90% FTTP in their statement of expectations and you know it.
> 
> You're the one who quoted the above and said you couldn't agree more.
> 
> What about Simon Hackett and HFC or do you now consider him to be on the dark side as well ?




There are two different issues here:

1. Why didn't Labor use HFC.

I answered this above. When the FTTP NBN was announced, it was not practical for them to acquire an HFC network, nor was it practical to deliver 100Mbps over HFC.


2. Why not include HFC now? /Simon Hackett's view:

Even Simon says that FTTP is the end game, even though he advocates making HFC part of the NBN now. His primary reasoning is speed of rollout.

And he only advocates it if it is upgraded (at considerable cost) to be able to deliver NBN-class speeds ("100Mbps down and 30-40Mbps up").

This depends on two things:

a) NBN Co acquiring an HFC network (or two).

b) NBN Co investing a sizeable amount of money to upgrade the HFC network(s) to be able to deliver such speeds.

To be honest, I doubt whether it would be economical for NBN Co to acquire and upgrade the HFC to deliver true NBN-class speeds during busy periods. It would cost a fortune to do so.

I suspect what will really happen is that they'll get the Optus HFC, then perform minor upgrades which allow 100Mbps during off-peak periods. They would have more trouble getting Telstra's HFC because Telstra are still planning to use it for Foxtel. And the Optus HFC network is smaller, slower and less well maintained that Telstra's, making the cost of upgrading it higher.

Remember that MT regularly tells us that "the last mile" is the reason why FTTP is so expensive. Yet ~70% of premises in the HFC footprint don't have HFC leadins either. And given that MDUs are rife within the HFC footprint, chances are that almost every street will need fibre run down it anyway to do FTTB for MDUs. So if you need to run fibre down 70% of streets, and HFC requires you do to 70% of leadins, will it really be much cheaper to buy and upgrade HFC instead of doing FTTP?


To summarise my position on this….

*IF *it's substantially cheaper to buy and upgrade the HFC to deliver *true* NBN-class speeds 24/7, *and such upgrades really occur*, then I can live with it. Because (from a user's perspective), there would be no difference. But I don't believe that will actually happen. I believe that users in the HFC footprint will receive a lower class connection, because the cost of upgrading it will be prohibitive.

That's the problem with the "multi technology" approach. It doesn't matter how much you spin it, the only technology that can really deliver an equivalent service to everyone is FTTP.

FTTN QOS is dependent on the length of the copper loop. People who live at the end of the street *will* receive lower capability than people at the top of the street. 

HFC QOS is dependent on the number of people on the node, and how heavily they use the network.


----------



## NBNMyths

I should also add, that what seems to be lost a little here in the talk about the alleged efficiencies of the "technology agnostic approach", is that the alleged savings have come at the expense of capability.

It wouldn't be so bad if the CBN was "technologically agnostic" with an expectation of minimum 100Mbps speeds rising to 1000Mbps (like the real NBN), but it isn't is it? The alleged saving of $10-15bn (~30%) has come with a 50-75% reduction in capability to just 25-50Mbps.


----------



## Bintang

NBNMyths said:


> I should also add, that what seems to be lost a little here in the talk about the alleged efficiencies of the "technology agnostic approach", is that the alleged savings have come at the expense of capability.
> 
> It wouldn't be so bad if the CBN was "technologically agnostic" with an expectation of minimum 100Mbps speeds rising to 1000Mbps (like the real NBN), but it isn't is it? The alleged saving of $10-15bn (~30%) has come with a 50-75% reduction in capability to just 25-50Mbps.




Maybe that will just mean that people will spend 25% to 50% less time glued to their PC screens and mobile devices. Heavens, it might even give them some spare time to do something unusual like go for a walk and exercise their limbs. And maybe it might help reduce obesity in Australian kids by 25% to 50%.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> ~70% of premises in the HFC footprint don't have HFC leadins either.



Where does this 70% figure come from ?


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Where does this 70% figure come from ?




Sorry, don't have the ref. I remember reading it some time ago (although it was given the other way around i.e. that ~30% do have working leadins.)

It's likely pretty accurate, based on Optus saying recently that they had <20% take-up of HFC.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Where does this 70% figure come from ?




Collectively, Telstra and Optus HFC networks pass ~2.7 million premises. A further ~0.7 million premises are in the geographic area bounded by the networks, but currently not passed.

1 million active users out of 3.4M planned.

I wonder why Turnbull had the cost of rolling out the HFC network redacted?  Similar to his no longer having a final rollout date for the CBN.  I've NEVER seen a large scale project not have a target date and I've been involved in Australia wide Bank and Fast food chain rollouts.

---

No mention of what kind of testing will need to be performed on lead-ins that may not have been used for a decade or more as plenty of properties would have got Foxtel installed only to cancel it.

http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo...en/f27fdc68-c7e5-4056-b1bb-f2fbc5b9881c/0000"

CHAIR: So the strategic review appears””and I think Mr Wilms may have gone here already””appears to assume that 2.5 million premises have a coax lead-in. That is on page 89. Is that correct, or are you double counting? I think you mentioned something along these lines, Mr Wilms, so you might want to answer that question; but anyone else can if they want to. So 2.5 million premises have a coax lead-in. Is that both of them combined?

Mr Wilms : that is both of them combined””and, as you can see, if you add 1.7 and 0.9 up, there is actually some overlap in the lead-ins.

CHAIR: What is the actual number of premises that have at least one coax lead. That is that 2.5?

Mr Wilms : That is the 2.5.

CHAIR: Okay. So what are the cost assumptions providing lead-ins for the premises in a footprint where HFC ends up being the optimal solution? How many extra ones is it? Is it only 200,000, or is at 3.4? I am just trying to get an indication of””

Mr Wilms : We have budgeted for two additional types of cost: one is the 0.2 million lead-ins, which currently do not exist within the footprint””

CHAIR: Is it 0.2 within?

Mr Wilms : Yes; and then we have allocated a budget for another 0.7 million of homes which you could call holes in the HFC footprint. They could be smaller-sized holes where the extension of the HFC network is the most economical option.

---
http://wiki.nbnalliance.org/Technology+Outlook+HFC

Network maintenance costs are higher than with FTTH networks. Operational costs for HFC networks have been estimated at approximately 5 times those of FTTP networks, to maintain identical operational outcomes.

---
http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/computers/blogs/gadgets-on-the-go/hfc-suburbs-nbn-no-mans-land

Today, Telstra and Optus have about 1 million HFC broadband subscribers, which reportedly represents a combined penetration rate of 36 per cent of premises. This means the new-look NBN could triple the number of users on the HFC networks in order to avoid running fibre to those areas. The government actually predicts that 3.4 million premises will end up on HFC under the new NBN plan. That's every home in the HFC footprint.

---
http://www.sortius-is-a-geek.com/hybrid-fibre-farce/

Now Simon Hackett, a man I had admired for a long time, has come out swinging seeing as he’s now a part of this NBN farce, posting an article that is a wild step in the opposite direction to much of what he has stated to this point.

Simon is under the impression that 4-7Mbps on an 120Mbps service equates to “low contention-ratio” broadband. That’s closer to a 30:1 contention ratio, one of the highest hardware contention ratios I’ve seen for broadband.

Meanwhile, GPON (Gigabit Passive Optical Network), even with the 32 fibre splitters being fully utilised, has a contention ratio of 1.33:1 (the NBN only utilises ~19 lines from the split, so it’s a 0.79:1 contention ratio). Even FTTN doesn’t offer such ridiculous contention ratios as HFC, sitting closer to a 3:1 for 50Mbps, and 6:1 for 100Mbps, if you can get those speeds.

I’d actually like to quote Simon himself at this point:

_The demand for broadband has to magically plateau on a permanent basis at 2x-3x the current demand that we see in the market.

All the CISCO lovely VNI graphs have to be wrong in the future in a way that they’ve been right in the past._

- Simon Hackett, CommsDay Sydney 2013

---


----------



## sydboy007

Bintang said:


> Maybe that will just mean that people will spend 25% to 50% less time glued to their PC screens and mobile devices. Heavens, it might even give them some spare time to do something unusual like go for a walk and exercise their limbs. And maybe it might help reduce obesity in Australian kids by 25% to 50%.




Diet changes would probably make bigger inroads into chilhood obesity.


----------



## boofhead

Alternatively with a faster connection they will spend less time waiting of the data and can move on to other activities.


----------



## trainspotter

boofhead said:


> Alternatively with a faster connection they will spend less time waiting of the data and can move on to other activities.




So they can order their McPizzas quicker on line no doubt?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> I should also add, that what seems to be lost a little here in the talk about the alleged efficiencies of the "technology agnostic approach", is that the alleged savings have come at the expense of capability.
> 
> It wouldn't be so bad if the CBN was "technologically agnostic" with an expectation of minimum 100Mbps speeds rising to 1000Mbps (like the real NBN), but it isn't is it? The alleged saving of $10-15bn (~30%) has come with a 50-75% reduction in capability to just 25-50Mbps.




This post epitomises the pretend triumph of scienticism over logic. The more I hear and see these numbers, the more I want to see a statement at the beginning of this delusion that is the NBN, of benefits versus risk.

The secret of this camoflage is to use latinate words that nobody can understand, and numerical values that are open to interpretation. 

This is a sad sorry Magic Pie, full of ulcers, groans, farts, pools of effluent, wise fools and when it comes down to it a burst appendix. 

gg


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Sorry, don't have the ref. I remember reading it some time ago (although it was given the other way around i.e. that ~30% do have working leadins.)




I refer you to Exhibit 3-2: Categories of premises within the HFC footprint on page 89 of the strategic review,

http://www2.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco/documents/NBN-Co-Strategic-Review-Report.pdf



sydboy007 said:


> Collectively, Telstra and Optus HFC networks pass ~2.7 million premises. A further ~0.7 million premises are in the geographic area bounded by the networks, but currently not passed.
> 
> 1 million active users out of 3.4M planned.



You're obviously more familiar with the above table than Myths, but the basis of his position wasn't about active users. It was about leadins. 



NBNMyths said:


> Remember that MT regularly tells us that "the last mile" is the reason why FTTP is so expensive. Yet ~70% of premises in the HFC footprint don't have HFC leadins either.




From the above table in the strategic review, there's a combined 3.4m total potential HFC premises of which 2.5m have a coax lead-in.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> 1. Why didn't Labor use HFC.
> 
> I answered this above. When the FTTP NBN was announced, it was not practical for them to acquire an HFC network, nor was it practical to deliver 100Mbps over HFC.




Something about a 1-size fits all solution in a rapidly evolving technological environment comes to mind here.

Simon Hackett,



> *What about future upgrades?*
> 
> Upgrade paths beyond 100 megabits for HFC are noted in the strategic review document on page 100. However, the review is also being conservative (in my view) in framing DOCSIS 3.1 as only supporting up to 250 megabit services on HFC.
> 
> I have participated in vendor briefings already in which I’ve been shown the rollout path via DOCSIS 3.1 all the way to delivering 1000 megabit data rates. These upgrade paths start to become possible once DOCSIS 3.1 equipment hits the market in the next 3-5 years.
> 
> It is also important to note that coaxial cable doesn’t have the very short distance limitations that copper does, at gigabit speeds.
> 
> These are much ‘fatter’ cables – in physical and in spectral terms. They are of a far higher quality than copper phone lines, and are capable of sustaining dramatically higher bandwidths.




http://simonhackett.com/2013/12/14/hfc-in-the-nbn/#more-1090


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Now Simon Hackett, a man I had admired for a long time, has come out swinging seeing as he’s now a part of this NBN farce, posting an article that is a wild step in the opposite direction to much of what he has stated to this point.



I see.

You now have him on the dark side.



> Simon is under the impression that 4-7Mbps on an 120Mbps service equates to “low contention-ratio” broadband. That’s closer to a 30:1 contention ratio, one of the highest hardware contention ratios I’ve seen for broadband.
> 
> Meanwhile, GPON (Gigabit Passive Optical Network), even with the 32 fibre splitters being fully utilised, has a contention ratio of 1.33:1 (the NBN only utilises ~19 lines from the split, so it’s a 0.79:1 contention ratio). Even FTTN doesn’t offer such ridiculous contention ratios as HFC, sitting closer to a 3:1 for 50Mbps, and 6:1 for 100Mbps, if you can get those speeds.
> 
> I’d actually like to quote Simon himself at this point:
> 
> _The demand for broadband has to magically plateau on a permanent basis at 2x-3x the current demand that we see in the market.
> 
> All the CISCO lovely VNI graphs have to be wrong in the future in a way that they’ve been right in the past._
> 
> - Simon Hackett, CommsDay Sydney 2013




If you're a better technical expert than Simon Hackett, perhaps it might have been worthwhile making submissions to Malcolm Turnbull.

You might have got the tap on the shoulder from Malcolm instead of Simon and got away of those graveyard shifts.



> *What about contention ratios?*
> 
> The last part of the coaxial cable network is shared between you and your immediate neighbours.
> 
> Despite claims to the contrary (including in Adam Turner’s article linked above), this use of shared segments in the last part of the network is also the case in the existing NBN fibre (FTTP) design.
> 
> The FTTP network uses Passive Optical Network (PON) shared segments to deliver access in each local group of premises.
> 
> The trick (in both technologies) is to keep the contention ratio acceptable in each of these shared segments. There is a commitment in the NBN HFC context to do that, just as in the FTTP rollout, so that the result is great for all users.
> 
> So this really isn’t going to be like present-day HFC internet services, which deliver speeds of up to 100/2 and which do tend to slow down in busy periods.
> 
> Instead, the rollout proposed can create an outcome that will be very similar to the FTTP network in terms of consumer outcomes, for speed, performance, and reliability.




http://simonhackett.com/2013/12/14/hfc-in-the-nbn/#more-1090


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> From the above table in the strategic review, there's a combined 3.4m total potential HFC premises of which 2.5m have a coax lead-in.




At least 1.1M lead ins to be done, along with how much remediation work on ones that haven't been used for quite some time?

Probably as big, if not bigger cost will be the installation of thousands of optical nodes to the HFC network to get the loop size down to a point where peak usage times won't get to the current crawling speeds most cable users complain of.

I would expect the current topology of the HFC networks will have to go through major changes to achieve the above, which will add considerably to the cost.

Considering that HFC or GPON lead in costs the same, HFC costs around 5 times as much in OPEX to FTTN, I question why those premises without a HFC lead-in aren't just upgraded to FTTN.  They could be connected back to the optical nodes for the HFC network.  May add to the CAPEX slightly, but then saves the added cost when the eventual move to fibre occurs.  To me that is a far better outcome than forcing HFC onto everyone in those areas.

As for DOCSIS 3.1 providing above 250Mbs speeds, at what contention ratio and how far from the node and is the CBN being built to provide those speeds or will the number of optical nodes be minimised so that 100Mbs is all that can be provided?  All well and good to say a new standard that hasn't been used out in the real work yet CAN provide those speeds, but is the network that Turnbull has asked CBNCo actually being built to provide it?

Considering how open Turnbull is with his redacted information, my bet is that whatever HFC upgrades occur will be done at minimal CAPEX and provide download somewhere in the 50-90Mbs range and no idea what the upload speeds will be, but seems irrelevant within the CBN.  It'll be past the next election beofre we know, and even then maybe not.  It's all state secrets from the Turbull Politburo.


----------



## sydboy007

Garpal Gumnut said:


> This post epitomises the pretend triumph of scienticism over logic. The more I hear and see these numbers, the more I want to see a statement at the beginning of this delusion that is the NBN, of benefits versus risk.
> 
> The secret of this camoflage is to use latinate words that nobody can understand, and numerical values that are open to interpretation.
> 
> This is a sad sorry Magic Pie, full of ulcers, groans, farts, pools of effluent, wise fools and when it comes down to it a burst appendix.
> 
> gg




You've summed up the Turnbull CBN quite nicely GG


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

sydboy007 said:


> You've summed up the Turnbull CBN quite nicely GG




syd,

You have totally missed my point. 

The NBN, from the beginning was doomed. 

JC himself could have taken it over with mummery and water, and still had a stuff up.

Because the project did not have a proper Risk Analysis done. 

It is 101 of any project.

It was not done, because the ALP do not do it. 

gg


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> From the above table in the strategic review, there's a combined 3.4m total potential HFC premises of which 2.5m have a coax lead-in.






sydboy007 said:


> At least 1.1M lead ins to be done, ........



3.4 - 2.5 = 0.9.

0.9/3.4 = 0.265 or 26.5%.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> 3.4 - 2.5 = 0.9.
> 
> 0.9/3.4 = 0.265 or 26.5%.




I'm suspecting your point is trying to make out I was supporting myths claim that it was 70% for lead-ins  to be installed in an HFC upgrade, when all I did was provide the best available information.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I'm suspecting your point is trying to make out I was supporting myths claim that it was 70% for lead-ins  to be installed in an HFC upgrade, when all I did was provide the best available information.



I'll leave any differences you and Myths now have between yourselves, but my response above was about your math.

My response regarding your contribution to Myth's 70% claim was as follows,



drsmith said:


> You're obviously more familiar with the above table than Myths, but the basis of his position wasn't about active users. It was about leadins.




I should also add that I calculated the actual percentage from the numbers in the Strategic Review in the name of debunking the FUD on the NBN.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

drsmith said:


> 3.4 - 2.5 = 0.9.
> 
> 0.9/3.4 = 0.265 or 26.5%.






sydboy007 said:


> I'm suspecting your point is trying to make out I was supporting myths claim that it was 70% for lead-ins  to be installed in an HFC upgrade, when all I did was provide the best available information.






drsmith said:


> I'll leave any differences you and Myths now have between yourselves, but my response above was about your math.
> 
> My response regarding your contribution to Myth's 70% claim was as follows,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I should also add that I calculated the actual percentage from the numbers in the Strategic Review in the name of debunking the FUD on the NBN.







May I please ask you muppets to address the Governance issues over the NBN, as I have politely posted over some years, and stop talking about concepts and numbers that make no sense to rational people. 

Please. 

gg


----------



## drsmith

My apologies GG.

Upon reflection, math should only be discussed during school hours.


----------



## So_Cynical

sydboy007 said:


> No mention of what kind of testing will need to be performed on lead-ins that may not have been used for a decade or more as plenty of properties would have got Foxtel installed only to cancel it.




Foxtel/Telstra stopped new cable installs in Sydney 15 years ago and hasn't done any new cable connections for the same amount of time...the Telstra/Foxtel cable network is Sydney is over 20 years old.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> I'll leave any differences you and Myths now have between yourselves, but my response above was about your maths.
> 
> I should also add that I calculated the actual percentage from the numbers in the Strategic Review in the name of debunking the FUD on the NBN.




The 70% figure I gave was not from the strategic review, and I never claimed as much. It was from something I read well before the SR was done, but can't remember where sorry. Based in the figures given in the SR which sydboy has provided, I assume that it related only to the _Optus_ HFC network, since it ties with the SR figures for the Optus network.

Nevertheless, as Sydboy has stated there is no indication of how many of the once-done leadins actually still work.

And again, while it's probable that NBN can acquire the Optus HFC at a reasonable price (since they are decommissioning it anyway) there's no certainty that NBN will be able to get the Telstra HFC network at all, since Telstra still plan to use and maintain it for Foxtel. There's no incentive whatsoever for Telstra to give it up (as opposed to earning from it), unless there are a lot of dollars on the table.

If I may lob another spanner….(purely guesswork)…. If I were running Foxtel, then I'd have ensured when contracting Telstra to operate the HFC cable for me, that I had exclusive rights to provide TV content over that network. Any such agreement would have to be changed in the event of the HFC moving to NBN, because all of the ISPs would then be using it to provide IPTV services over that cable, in competition to Foxtel. I can't imagine Foxtel would be too receptive to that idea.

So _if_ they can only get the Optus HFC network, they're back to needing ~70% of leadins….


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

drsmith said:


> My apologies GG.
> 
> Upon reflection, math should only be discussed during school hours.




My apologies to all.

Excuse my remarks above. I just get so frustrated with this lemon of a scheme.

Let the maths continue.

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> May I please ask you muppets to address the Governance issues over the NBN, as I have politely posted over some years, and stop talking about concepts and numbers that make no sense to rational people.
> 
> Please.
> 
> gg




The NBN is all about numbers. That's the whole point. The 'numbers' surrounding Australia's broadband are amongst the lowest in the OECD. If the numbers make no sense to you, then I'd suggest you either learn about them or move on.

Saying that the numbers don't matter is akin to saying you'd be happy with 12v electricity to your house, because so long as it's electricity then discussing the actual numbers is irrational nonsense.


I didn't know _rational_ was a synonym for _technologically illiterate_.


----------



## drsmith

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Excuse my remarks above. I just get so frustrated with this lemon of a scheme.
> 
> Let the maths continue.
> 
> gg



The frustration gets to me too.

One moment it's about guesswork and ifs and the next it's about numbers.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> The frustration gets to me too.
> 
> One moment it's about guesswork and ifs and the next it's about numbers.




No guess work.  Morrow has come out and stated Haymarket in Sydney, New Farm and Fortitude Valley in Brisbane and South Melbourne, will have NBN services scheduled to be available to these premises in the middle of 2014.

Strangely this is to try and squash private infrastructrue investment from TPG.

It's strange considering some of those areas already have HFC, and all of them have pretty good ADSL2+ coverage.  So the question is why areas that have 1 or 2 broadband options is being target in front of blackspots.  Turnbull was critical of this type of rollout pre election, so why is it now acceptable?


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Saying that the numbers don't matter is akin to saying you'd be happy with 12v electricity to your house, because so long as it's electricity then discussing the actual numbers is irrational nonsense.
> ].




That quote isn't as silly as it sounds, 12v for the house may be sooner than NBN for everyone.

Financialy it would make a lot more sense, the only electrical appliance that isn't feasable for domestic 12v operation is the airconditioner.
Hot water can be solar/gas and gas cooking. Most other things, lights, t.v, computer and fridge could be easily operated on 12v.
All we need is better energy density from batteries for storing the power to run overnight.
Think how much that would save.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> That quote isn't as silly as it sounds, 12v for the house may be sooner than NBN for everyone.
> 
> Financialy it would make a lot more sense, the only electrical appliance that isn't feasable for domestic 12v operation is the airconditioner.
> Hot water can be solar/gas and gas cooking. Most other things, lights, t.v, computer and fridge could be easily operated on 12v.
> All we need is better energy density from batteries for storing the power to run overnight.
> Think how much that would save.




Many data centres are now moving back to DC power.  It always seemed silly to me to have AC feeding into UPS that then sent DC to be converted back to AC and then back to DC for the equipment to use.

Supposedly seeing 10-20% cut in electricity consumption.  Another advantage is roughly a 25-40% reduction space for distribution equipment, a massive savings when you actually looking to build a new DC.

As gfor battery density, for a home / building application I'd say low cost, hgih reliability is more key than density.  The old nickle iron (edison) batteries seem to tick many boxes for battery storage.  They cope well under load, can be discharged to 95% and have no problems being partially recharged, rated for around 25 year life span.  Only downside is they loose about 30% of their charge within a month, but not really an issue if you are always charging and discharging them.  Shame only the Chinese and Russians make them any more.


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> That quote isn't as silly as it sounds, 12v for the house may be sooner than NBN for everyone.
> 
> Financialy it would make a lot more sense, the only electrical appliance that isn't feasable for domestic 12v operation is the airconditioner.
> Hot water can be solar/gas and gas cooking. Most other things, lights, t.v, computer and fridge could be easily operated on 12v.
> All we need is better energy density from batteries for storing the power to run overnight.
> Think how much that would save.




Offtopic, but apart from gas not being everywhere, the major downside is that when you lower the voltage, you increase the required current to do a given job. Higher current increases loss through resistance. Thus, the power lines would probably not be sufficient to do the job.

Oh, and have you ever tried to boil water with a 12v kettle? You need to plan ahead!


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> The frustration gets to me too.
> 
> One moment it's about guesswork and ifs and the next it's about numbers.




You don't think that the plan to buy Telstra's copper and HFC and Optus' HFC, and what price they may cost (and therefore what the CBN will ultimately cost) isn't all about guesswork and ifs?


----------



## drsmith

My goodness!

Over both their heads with daylight to spare.



NBNMyths said:


> If I may lob another spanner….(purely *guesswork*)…. If I were running Foxtel, then I'd have ensured when contracting Telstra to operate the HFC cable for me, that I had exclusive rights to provide TV content over that network. Any such agreement would have to be changed in the event of the HFC moving to NBN, because all of the ISPs would then be using it to provide IPTV services over that cable, in competition to Foxtel. I can't imagine Foxtel would be too receptive to that idea.
> 
> So *if* they can only get the Optus HFC network, they're back to needing ~70% of leadins….






NBNMyths said:


> The NBN is all about *numbers*. That's the whole point. The 'numbers' surrounding Australia's broadband are amongst the lowest in the OECD. If the numbers make no sense to you, then I'd suggest you either learn about them or move on.
> 
> Saying that the numbers don't matter is akin to saying you'd be happy with 12v electricity to your house, because so long as it's electricity then discussing the actual numbers is irrational nonsense.
> 
> I didn't know _rational_ was a synonym for _technologically illiterate_.






drsmith said:


> The frustration gets to me too.
> 
> One moment it's about *guesswork* and *ifs* and the next it's about *numbers*.




My bolds.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Offtopic, but apart from gas not being everywhere, the major downside is that when you lower the voltage, you increase the required current to do a given job. Higher current increases loss through resistance. Thus, the power lines would probably not be sufficient to do the job.
> 
> Oh, and have you ever tried to boil water with a 12v kettle? You need to plan ahead!




Ah but your missing the point, with the introduction of led lighting, advances in lower power consumption devices such as led/lcd t.v's and soft start 12v refridgerators. the requirement for 250v is diminishing.
But as you said, it's off thread.


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> No, connections currently taking place were started about 12 months ago (it takes ~12 months from the issue of construction orders for an area to activation of that area).
> 
> The Coalition have indeed kept FTTP rollout going with new construction orders, but they won't be activated for another ~6 months yet.




Reading this article in the West, it sounds as though it could be years before the NBN gets up and running here.

http://www.opieoils.co.uk/c-789-acea.aspx


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> My goodness!
> 
> Over both their heads with daylight to spare.
> 
> Quote Originally Posted by NBNMyths
> If I may lob another spanner….(purely guesswork)…. If I were running Foxtel, then I'd have ensured when contracting Telstra to operate the HFC cable for me, that I had exclusive rights to provide TV content over that network. Any such agreement would have to be changed in the event of the HFC moving to NBN, because all of the ISPs would then be using it to provide IPTV services over that cable, in competition to Foxtel. I can't imagine Foxtel would be too receptive to that idea.
> 
> So if they can only get the Optus HFC network, they're back to needing ~70% of leadins….
> Quote Originally Posted by NBNMyths  View Post
> The NBN is all about numbers. That's the whole point. The 'numbers' surrounding Australia's broadband are amongst the lowest in the OECD. If the numbers make no sense to you, then I'd suggest you either learn about them or move on.
> 
> Saying that the numbers don't matter is akin to saying you'd be happy with 12v electricity to your house, because so long as it's electricity then discussing the actual numbers is irrational nonsense.
> 
> I didn't know rational was a synonym for technologically illiterate.
> Quote Originally Posted by drsmith  View Post
> The frustration gets to me too.
> 
> One moment it's about guesswork and ifs and the next it's about numbers.
> My bolds.
> 
> Over both their heads with daylight to spare.
> 
> My bolds.




Are you being deliberately obtuse, or do you really not understand the difference in topic between these two posts?

The purpose of the NBN project is all about numbers. It's about giving Australia a broadband network comparable (or even better than) most other countries in the OECD. The measure of a broadband network is made in numbers…. Mbps, ms etc. You cannot have make an effective argument about broadband without using and understanding those numbers.

The numbers (Mbps) deliverable over FTTP are known and consistent. By contrast, the numbers deliverable via FTTN and HFC are unknown and variable based on distance, condition etc. You only need to look at Turnbull's farce (aka _mybroadband_) to see that.

You complain about my other quoted arguments being "ifs" and "guesswork". Yet you don't seem to acknowledge that the Coalition's ability to acquire copper and HFC, the cost, and the condition/capability of those networks is also a huge "if", based on guesswork. ~70% of the coalition's plan is based on _ifs and guesswork_.


----------



## Bintang

NBNMyths said:


> ….The purpose of the NBN project is all about numbers. It's about giving Australia a broadband network comparable (or even better than) most other countries in the OECD….




But WHY?

Is it for the same reason that we needed more pink batts in Australian houses than most other countries in the OECD or more solar panels on Australian roofs than most other countries in the OECD or more asylum seekers sucking on our welfare system than most other countries in the OECD. 
Besides,WHY is doing anything '_comparable or even better than most other countries in the OECD_' a criterion/justification for spending billions of Australian tax payer dollars.:shake:


----------



## NBNMyths

Bintang said:


> But WHY?
> 
> Is it for the same reason that we needed more pink batts in Australian houses than most other countries in the OECD or more solar panels on Australian roofs than most other countries in the OECD or more asylum seekers sucking on our welfare system than most other countries in the OECD.
> Besides,WHY is doing anything '_comparable or even better than most other countries in the OECD_' a criterion/justification for spending billions of Australian tax payer dollars.:shake:




First, you're using many strawmen…. as I suspect that the penetration of insulation is well behind most countries in the OECD, because (particularly in Europe) they're well aware of the cost benefits of properly insulating their homes. It seems that reducing energy consumption through efficient insulation is a rather apparent reason.

The benefit of increasing solar power generation I would have thought was equally obvious.

And we take well below the OECD average of refugees too.


But, to the point, why have better broadband?

Because our lives increasingly revolve around it. Businesses send terabytes of data around the world every second. The slower the network, the greater the lost productivity while people wait for data. For example, when I send files to Sydney, it takes so long that it's faster to put it on a stick and drive there, costing me 3 hours of time and $30 in fuel. With fast broadband I could send it in 20 minutes.

Fast broadband facilitates teleworking, which for many people is not possible over ADSL2 or even HFC due to slow upload speeds.

Fast broadband facilitates HD video conferencing, which can be used for business, education and medical purposes.

Those (and other known) uses aside, new uses for broadband are being developed every day. It's inevitable that with improving connectivity, our way of life will continue to evolve around it and more uses will be found.

Could you have imagined 30 years ago that you would be able to shop, research documents, learn or look up news the second it happens, while sitting at home in front of your computer or tablet? Do you really think that after only ~15 years, the possible uses for broadband have all been invented? We didn't even get cat videos on youtube until 10 years ago!

On funding….. The NBN will ultimately be paid for from user revenue, not tax revenue. Exactly the same way the Telstra (nee Telecom nee PMG) network was built….. I wonder, would you have opposed that as well? I mean, just because the rest of the World was rolling out a telephone network, there's no reason we should have. What was the benefit back in 1909 of spending millions of pounds just so housewives could gossip all day?


----------



## Bintang

NBNMyths said:


> First, you're using many strawmen…. as I suspect that the penetration of insulation is well behind most countries in the OECD, because (particularly in Europe) they're well aware of the cost benefits of properly insulating their homes. It seems that reducing energy consumption through efficient insulation is a rather apparent reason.
> 
> The benefit of increasing solar power generation I would have thought was equally obvious.
> 
> And we take well below the OECD average of refugees too.
> 
> 
> But, to the point, why have better broadband?



We have already heard all these qualitative arguments ad nauseam.
Nowhere in my post did I say that a NBN has no benefits (or even that increasing solar panels or house insulation etc have no benefits). I questioned your assertion as to why Australia needs to have a system _"comparable to or better than most other countries in the OECD_". So you didn't answer my question because apparently you cannot.


----------



## Bintang

NBNMyths said:


> …..
> 
> On funding….. The NBN will ultimately be paid for from user revenue, not tax revenue. Exactly the same way the Telstra (nee Telecom nee PMG) network was built….. I wonder, *would you have opposed that as well*? I mean, just because the rest of the World was rolling out a telephone network, there's no reason we should have. What was the benefit back in 1909 of spending millions of pounds just so housewives could gossip all day?




What kind of system did Australia build back in 1909 relative to most other OECD countries. Was it fit for purpose or was it 'gold-plated'. Did we build a system based on its cost effectiveness or did we build one based on having something that was '_comparable to or even better than most other countries in the OECD_".


----------



## NBNMyths

Bintang said:


> We have already heard all these qualitative arguments ad nauseam.
> Nowhere in my post did I say that a NBN has no benefits (or even that increasing solar panels or house insulation etc have no benefits). I questioned your assertion as to why Australia needs to have a system _"comparable to or better than most other countries in the OECD_". So you didn't answer my question because apparently you cannot.




I told you why we need a fast broadband system. Comparing the capability/quality of our broadband network to the networks in other similar countries (i.e. the OECD) is an obvious comparison. If you have no basis for comparison, then you have no way of benchmarking yourself. We compare our nation against the OECD all the time, on hundreds of different criteria. Why should broadband capability be any different?



Bintang said:


> What kind of system did Australia build back in 1909 relative to most other OECD countries. Was it fit for purpose or was it 'gold-plated'. Did we build a system based on its cost effectiveness or did we build one based on having something that was '_comparable to or even better than most other countries in the OECD_".




Why, thanks for asking. 

When we decided on the telephone network, we did 'gold plate' it. We decided on the best and most expensive option available at the time: Copper pairs.

Of course then as now, there were people complaining about the cost….
http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/19571372

…and arguments in Parliament about using cheaper iron wires, instead of wasting money on expensive copper....
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2013/06/p...wires-in-1910-makes-for-some-amazing-reading/

We were ahead of the game. It took the UK some time to change to copper, and (some years earlier) we even had the boss of the British post office saying that the telephone wash't needed at all, because there are plenty of messenger boys…
http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/453.html


The more things change, the more they stay the same. No matter what new technology comes along, there's always a bunch of rusted-on conservatives complaining that change isn't needed, the current system works perfectly, it's a waste of money, a white elephant etc etc. History rarely judges them well.


----------



## sydboy007

Turnbull caught out lying AGAIN

http://delimiter.com.au/2014/04/17/turnbull-lies-nbn-triple-j-listeners/


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Turnbull caught out lying AGAIN
> 
> http://delimiter.com.au/2014/04/17/turnbull-lies-nbn-triple-j-listeners/






> The only case where NBN Co would not make a return on the Government’s investment, according to the company’s Strategic Review, is in one revenue projection case for Labor’s original FTTP policy; but even then it would be expected to make only a modest loss — meaning the project would still not be listed as an expense for the Federal Government, and the Government would take only a small hit to its finances.




One problem here is that a small loss Labor style is typically not that small.

For Myths, I have a number he would do well to remember that's not based on his ifs and guesswork.

*26.5%*


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> One problem here is that a small loss Labor style is typically not that small.
> 
> For Myths, I have a number he would do well to remember that's not based on his ifs and guesswork.
> 
> *26.5%*




Lets just hope the Liberals have a better team of negotiators with Telstra and Optus than they do for managed trade deals.  Hopefully they can do better than what they've been able to achieve on say beef, let alone rice access 

The Liberal's CBN - a project without a target end date, just a request to build it ASAP.

If Howard hadn't been so short term in his thinking with the Telstra sale, and had sold separate wholesale and retail companies, pretty much all this debate would have never occurred.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

And back to the real world comrades.

Many people in Aitkenvale, Townsville Q. distressed by NBN.

Either can't get connected or can't understand the concept. 

What a fubar.

And in 1 week they lose their phone access.

gg


----------



## So_Cynical

Bintang said:


> But WHY?
> 
> Is it for the same reason that we needed more pink batts in Australian houses than most other countries in the OECD or more solar panels on Australian roofs than most other countries in the OECD or more asylum seekers sucking on our welfare system than most other countries in the OECD.
> Besides,WHY is doing anything '_comparable or even better than most other countries in the OECD_' a criterion/justification for spending billions of Australian tax payer dollars.:shake:




You must of missed this post from 5 pages back.



So_Cynical said:


> New Bureau of Statistics internet usage figures out today, to 31st Dec 2013
> 
> Surprise surprise the 20 year trend continues with Aussies Downloading more than ever, 55% up on the same period last year with *fixed line downloads more than 22 times greater than wireless*, and wireless at close to capacity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnet.com.au said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the three months leading up to 31 December 2013, Australian internet users downloaded 860,000TB of data (823,000TB through fixed line connections and 37,400 via wireless). While that's a big figure in and of itself,* it's a 55 per cent increase on the volume of data downloaded just one year earlier.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://m.cnet.com.au/australians-downloading-more-and-at-greater-speeds-339347031.htm
Click to expand...


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

More bloody numbers.

Nobody cares about people anymore. 

gg


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> And back to the real world comrades.
> 
> Many people in Aitkenvale, Townsville Q. distressed by NBN.
> 
> Either can't get connected or can't understand the concept.
> 
> What a fubar.
> 
> And in 1 week they lose their phone access.
> 
> gg




Well, they've only had 18 months to get their head around it. I realise it may be a difficult concept, to reply to the letter sent by their existing phone/internet provider, or to give them a call.

I can understand why people are so confused by such an overly complicated process, especially given the ridiculously short time they've had to address the issue. How on earth will they cope with buying clothes for next summer? It's only 8 months away!


----------



## sydboy007

http://yathink.com.au/article-display/mybroadbandvreality-super-sized-survey,117

you can add in your real world sync speeds and compare them to the mybroadband web site, and also say what you use the internet for.

I doubt Turnbull will be bothered by real world sapling of broadband in Australia, but hopefully the media will take it up, well hopefully the non newscorp media.


----------



## boofhead

http://delimiter.com.au/2014/04/22/att-deploy-gigabit-fibre-100-us-cities/

Even AT&T seems to be getting in to the FTTP. Buy cheap, buy twice.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> Well, they've only had 18 months to get their head around it. I realise it may be a difficult concept, to reply to the letter sent by their existing phone/internet provider, or to give them a call.
> 
> I can understand why people are so confused by such an overly complicated process, especially given the ridiculously short time they've had to address the issue. How on earth will they cope with buying clothes for next summer? It's only 8 months away!




Many of the people having problems with signing on for the NBN are vulnerable, e.g pensioners, mental health clients, migrants and are unable to cope with the muppet process. 

It's all a breeze for yuppies who want to download movies.

Difficult for citizens in danger of losing their landlines.

gg


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> Well, they've only had 18 months to get their head around it. I realise it may be a difficult concept, to reply to the letter sent by their existing phone/internet provider, or to give them a call.
> 
> I can understand why people are so confused by such an overly complicated process, especially given the ridiculously short time they've had to address the issue. How on earth will they cope with buying clothes for next summer? It's only 8 months away!




Well I don't know about the issues in Townsville. 
But in Mandurah W.A, they are saying the same thing, change over or be disconnected.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/media/news/countdown-started-for-mandurah-to-switch.html

The funny thing is, my place falls in the mapped area and they can't connect me and don't know when they will be able to.lol


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Many of the people having problems with signing on for the NBN are vulnerable, e.g pensioners, mental health clients, migrants and are unable to cope with the muppet process.
> 
> It's all a breeze for yuppies who want to download movies.
> 
> Difficult for citizens in danger of losing their landlines.
> 
> gg




But it's not a "muppet" process. It couldn't be any easier. Residents have been told through ads and letters for 18 months that the NBN would replace their copper line. The care agencies in the area are all aware of the process.

Their ISP/phone provider will do all the work. If they stay with them, then the will pay the same or less per month. There is no cost for the connection. All they have to do is authorise their provider to swap the connection for them. Job done.

It's true that it doesn't matter how easy something is though, there will always be some people who can't do it, for whatever reason. Such is the relentless march of progress. You have to turn it off eventually, just like analogue TV and analogue mobile networks were switched off. 18 months seems like a more-than adequate time. Or do you think the old network should continue to operate indefinitely, with the increasing maintenance costs and decreasing revenue that goes with that decision?

Perhaps gg you'd care to identify ways the changeover process could be made easier?


----------



## drsmith

Another media update on the state of the rollout in Tasmania,



> THE National Broadband Network rollout in Tasmania — which Labor promised would be the first state fully connected to lightning-fast internet services — has been “so shambolic” and failed “so abysmally” to meet its targets that urgent political intervention is needed.
> 
> The Weekend Australian can reveal the state’s peak IT business group, a longstanding supporter of Labor’s original “Rolls-Royce” NBN, has warned there is “no realistic chance” the project will be completed by the end of 2015, as once promised by former communications minister Stephen Conroy and NBN Co.
> 
> The Tasmanian ICT sector peak body, known as TASICT, says the process for connecting new customers to the optic fibre network is failing.
> 
> The warnings have nation*al significance as the NBN Co prepares a new corporate plan for the entire $41 billion project to give effect to the Coali*tion’s promise of a “multi-tech*nology mix” to deliver the project sooner and more cheaply.
> 
> A devastating strategic review found cost blowouts and delays had plagued the nation’s biggest infrastructure project, with “significant queues” in connections and disputes over construction-related contracts.
> 
> Tasmania is considered a testbed for the national rollout of high-speed broadband, with Senator Conroy having said it would provide “valuable learnings” for the wider mainland build. The Coalition has not put a deadline on the Tasmanian project. But the office of Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull said yesterday that the rollout had started again at the end of last year after being “completely stalled” under Labor.
> 
> The NBN Co said it now had commitments to “fibre” as many Tasmanian premises this year as had been passed in the previous five years — but the rollout would not be achieved “by continuing to set heroic targets”.
> 
> In a submission obtained by The Weekend Australian, *TASICT says that without “urgent political intervention, the project will continue to fail Tasmania” and laments that the project has been used a “political tool” by all major parties.
> 
> “The first-mover NBN advantage once trumpeted as an economic saviour for Tasmania, is gone,” the submission says.
> 
> The submission was written by the group’s executive officer, Dean Winter, who ran as an ALP candidate for the 2012 Tasma*nian upper house seat of Hobart.
> 
> It also warns that Tasmanians “now wonder if they will ever get the NBN”.
> 
> “Business has lost enthusiasm for the project ...
> 
> “Tasmania, already dealing with an inadequate communi*cations infra*structure, faces lengthy delays to ever see the project completed.”
> 
> The submission says the rollout is still not back on track, but backs Mr Turnbull’s move to trial the use of overhead cables on Aurora’s power poles as *potentially faster and cheaper. and a way to have more direct fibre connections. It also says telephone and internet service providers — who sell the NBN to homes — are frustrated by “the lack of certainty about which technology will be used, the slow pace of the rollout and the failing process for connecting new customers to the network”.
> 
> Under the rollout, the NBN is connected to a utility box on the outside of a home or business. People who want to switch their phone and internet to the NBN contact a retail service provider, who makes an appointment for an NBN installer to put in equipment.
> 
> But the submission says the connection process in Tasmania has been “farcical”.
> 
> Customers were being hit with long wait times between ordering and connecting to the NBN and there were estimates up to 50 per cent of appointments with customers are being missed by NBN contractors.
> 
> “There is anecdotal evidence that some of these appointments are being ignored because *contractors arrive at the appointment, identify a difficult or time-consuming job and make an assessment it is not worth the rate being offered,” the submission says.
> 
> Last year an asbestos shutdown delayed the project. Also, there were disputes *between *Visionstream — lead contractor on the island — and subcontractors over pay. While there were 20,065 premises passed by the NBN by June 1, 2013, the rollout all but came to a complete halt over the following months.
> 
> By December 2, there were 32,271 passed. For the week to April 21, there were 36,117 brownfields passed. In December, *Visionstream said it was accelerating its rollout of fibre to more than 200,000 premises.
> 
> The TasICT submission says it was clear by June last year there were significant “issues” in Tasmania, but these “were never dealt with by the government of the day”.
> 
> “In fact, they were completely ignored and the rollout had almost stopped by September 2013. It was hoped these issues would be addressed by a new government and the rollout could get back on track. To date, this has not happened.”
> 
> Yesterday, Mr Turnbull’s spokesman said since the rollout started again at the end of last year, more than 4000 extra premises have been passed in brownfields areas. Visionstream had been *issued with build contract instructions for 17,000 premises, while advanced planning was under way in areas with a further 19,000.
> 
> “With premises already passed that brings the number of homes and businesses committed to NBN fibre by the end of the year to about a third of premises in the state,” Mr Turnbull’s spokesman said.
> 
> NBN Co spokesman Andrew Sholl said construction standards were being improved so homes were connected at the same time that fibre was rolled down the street and existing infrastructure was being incorporated into the network.
> 
> Before the federal election, TasICT lobbied for Labor’s fibre-to-the-premises model to stay on the island, rather than the *Coalition’s model that uses Telstra’s copper for the final few hundred metres to homes.
> 
> TasICT has made its comments in a submission to a private bill proposed by Tasmanian ALP Senator Anne Urquhart that would force the NBN Co to provide only FTTP to at least 200,000 premises on the island. The group opposes the bill.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/tec...bns-first-state/story-e6frgakx-1226896452411#


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> Another media update on the state of the rollout in Tasmania,
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/tec...bns-first-state/story-e6frgakx-1226896452411#






> THE National Broadband Network rollout in Tasmania — which Labor promised would be the first state fully connected to lightning-fast internet services — has been “so shambolic” and failed “so abysmally” to meet its targets that *urgent political intervention is needed*.




I though that they got urgent political attention 7 months ago? what a political beat up that story is...disgraceful, Conroy gets 2 mentions and he has been out of the job for 7 months...what a crock.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> Conroy gets 2 mentions and he has been out of the job for 7 months.



Just goes to show how long it takes to fix a Labor mess.

He's actually been out of that job for longer than 7 months.


----------



## sptrawler

It sounds as though Tassie, the early roll out, is still a mess.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/nbn-co-to-lag-tpg-in-fibre-to-basement-roll-out-20140505-37se1.html

Looks as though Conroy has pulled the reds over his head, to keep some relevance in the media.IMO


----------



## sydboy007

http://www.zdnet.com/nbn-co-cannot-offer-fttb-in-tpg-serviced-buildings-morrow-7000029094/

the future is coming to an MDU near you.

brought to you by labor not accepting to use FTTB in their original rollout and enhanced by the L+NP not making a decision on if what TPG is doing should be allowed

_Testifying before the Senate Select Committee on the NBN this week, Morrow – supported on technical details by outgoing NBN Co chief technology officer Greg McLaren – said the company would be forced to roll out fibre-to-the-premises (FTTP) services directly to multi dwelling units (MDUs) to bypass FTTB equipment that TPG had already installed.

That did not mean all MDUs serviced by TPG would get NBN Co FTTP, however.

Commercial, not technical imperatives would guide NBN Co's decision about whether to deploy infrastructure in such buildings, Morrow said, because if TPG were able to cherry-pick the most profitable buildings the lost revenues would affect NBN Co's revenues "considerably"._

Wont be long before Optus Telstra iiNet start to fight over which MDU they can get exclusive access to.

Yay for Labor being so pedantic about fiber.  Yay for the current Govt thinking private investment would lead to a better outcome.  Glad I'm not in an MDU and should in theory have a choice of NBN providers sometime by 2016 ah sorry by 202X.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Yay for Labor being so pedantic about fiber.



But does it make commercial sense for NBN co to compete with another service provider at the infrastructure level ?

Labor couldn't even get that right.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> But does it make commercial sense for NBN co to compete with another service provider at the infrastructure level ?
> 
> Labor couldn't even get that right.




I suppose when we get multiple power / water / sewer lines into each building then I'll accept it makes economic sense to have multiple telecoms pipes into buildings too.

The future is looking like islands of monopolies for residents of MDUs.  Residents can't actually stop a telco from installing equipment in their building, so either they have to somehow legally delay long enough for NBN to get their FTTB in first, or accept that TPG or another company will have monopoly rights for providing high speed broadband into the building.  If the strata management does somehow manage to delay other companies long enough for NBN to get in then I can see the lawyers making lots of $$$ over it.

Once the internal cabling is being used for VDSL anyone wishing to stay on ADSL will have to accept a very degraded service since the signal from VDSL will interfere with the ADSL signal.  It'll be a perfectly legal way to force everyone onto the VDSL service.  Yay for market forces.

So we've moved from single network that provides retail level competition to what is starting to look like a gold rush era dash to be the first to stake a claim and be relatively assured of having a monopoly within an MDU.  You can't have multiple FTTB nodes otherwise you can't do vectoring so the magical 100Mbs speeds Malcolm had been promising wont be possible.  I can see property values being affected if TPG is the sole provider.  They're cheap and nasty with many users complaining on whirlpool of peak time slow downs.  An MDU with NBN infrastructure will be a preferable place to live, all else being equal.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I suppose when we get multiple power / water / sewer lines into each building then I'll accept it makes economic sense to have multiple telecoms pipes into buildings too.



Isn't that the NBN framework Labor created despite the fact it was aiming for a monopoly ?


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Isn't that the NBN framework Labor created despite the fact it was aiming for a monopoly ?




There's a massive difference between an infrastructure monopoly that is legally obligated to provide open access and an infrastructure monopoly that locks out all competition, or charges access fees so high as to make it uneconomic for competition.

This is the competition Malcolm was calling for prior to the election.  If private companies cherry pick the top 10% of revenue earning MDUs that will be more than enough to send NBNs revenue down far enough that there can no longer be a city to bush cross subsidy.


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> There's a massive difference between an infrastructure monopoly that is legally obligated to provide open access and an infrastructure monopoly that locks out all competition, or charges access fees so high as to make it uneconomic for competition.
> 
> This is the competition Malcolm was calling for prior to the election.  If private companies cherry pick the top 10% of revenue earning MDUs that will be more than enough to send NBNs revenue down far enough that there can no longer be a city to bush cross subsidy.




Yet Telstra had to allow competitors to piggy back on their system, and cherry pick high density population areas. While not offering a service in low population areas.
This was also multinational companies with much deeper pockets than Telstra and its shareholders.
Funny how what is right and wrong, depends on which outcome suits you personaly.


----------



## sptrawler

sptrawler said:


> Ah but your missing the point, with the introduction of led lighting, advances in lower power consumption devices such as led/lcd t.v's and soft start 12v refridgerators. the requirement for 250v is diminishing.
> But as you said, it's off thread.




Here you go NBNMyths.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/business/wa/a/23208846/solar-power-saps-energy-groups-take/

And the pertinent sentence.
*With marketable battery storage devices as little as five years away, experts claim it is only a matter of time before some customers disconnect from the grid.*
Sorry of thread, just a follow up on a post. Appologies


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> Yet Telstra had to allow competitors to piggy back on their system, and cherry pick high density population areas. While not offering a service in low population areas.
> This was also multinational companies with much deeper pockets than Telstra and its shareholders.
> Funny how what is right and wrong, depends on which outcome suits you personaly.




* Telstra refused to provide ADSL2+ in an exchange unless a competitor had installed their own equipment.

* ADSL only became widely available after it was declared by the ACCC and ULL rental was forced to a rate at which it was economical for Telstra competitors to provide services by installing their own equipment.

* Telstra has used it's monopoly muscle is so many anti competitive ways.  Give you an example.  For every tech you want to have access to a TEBA (exchange) you have to fill in an access form.  Access only lasts for 3 months.  So say you have 10 staff needing access to an average of 50 exchanges each.  Imagine the cost for every retail provider that has to comply with this.  Then we have Telstra charging for interference investigations which is usually the only way we're able to get a tricky copper fault fixed.  Can you imagine the water company telling you that if you want issues with your water supply fixed you have to lodge a special investigation that is billed at $150/ hour and even if it is the water company's fault you will still have to pay them to fix it?

* It was the Howard Govt that sold a vertically integrated Telstra and turned it into a private monopoly.  We'd not be havingthis debate if Howard hadn't wanted top $$$ and instead split the company into an open access wholesale company and a retail company.  Instead we've had the anti competitive Telstra doing it's best to use it's monopoly power to maximise profits.  The Australian economy is poorer for it and every telephone and internet user in the country is paying more.  It's a productivity issue as much as anything else.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Isn't that the NBN framework Labor created despite the fact it was aiming for a monopoly ?




No. The framework they created was for a single open-access network with retail competition.

TPG are trying to use a loophole in the legislation which allows small extensions of existing networks, which made sense because banning any addition could leave new premises 'at the end of the line' without a service until the NBN went through.

It was never the intention to allow TPG (or anyone else) to light up their installed commercial dark fibre, then 'extend' it into hundreds of premises and turn it into a vertical monopoly FTTN network. The legality of those actions is yet to be tested, but in any case could be easily overcome with an amendment to the NBN legislation.

The problem is that banning it would go against Turnbull's public demands for infrastructure competition, while allowing it will destroy his business case. Decisions, decisions.



sptrawler said:


> Here you go NBNMyths.
> 
> https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/business/wa/a/23208846/solar-power-saps-energy-groups-take/
> 
> And the pertinent sentence.
> *With marketable battery storage devices as little as five years away, experts claim it is only a matter of time before some customers disconnect from the grid.*
> Sorry of thread, just a follow up on a post. Apologies




Not really related to the original analogy. Even going off-grid, you'd still have a 240v system via an inverter or in-series battery bank.

But yes, going off-grid will only get more viable. I could do it now for maybe $15k, and battery tech is only getting cheaper. We'll probably end up with a situation similar to water, where you have to pay whether you connect to the grid or not. /topic


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> No. The framework they created was for a *single* open-access *network* with retail competition.



Splitting hairs to say no perhaps. That's a monopoly at the network level.



NBNMyths said:


> TPG are trying to use a loophole in the legislation which allows small extensions of existing networks, which made sense because banning any addition could leave new premises 'at the end of the line' without a service until the NBN went through.
> 
> It was never the intention to allow TPG (or anyone else) to light up their installed commercial dark fibre, then 'extend' it into hundreds of premises and turn it into a vertical monopoly FTTN network. The legality of those actions is yet to be tested, but in any case could be easily overcome with an amendment to the NBN legislation.
> 
> The problem is that banning it would go against Turnbull's public demands for infrastructure competition, while allowing it will destroy his business case. Decisions, decisions.



In essence, an oversight by Labor that leaves MT with an ideological dilemma.

My bolds.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Splitting hairs to say no perhaps. That's a monopoly at the network level.
> 
> 
> In essence, an oversight by Labor that leaves MT with an ideological dilemma.
> 
> My bolds.




Probably more due to the ACCC forcing the NBN to moved from an 8 POI rollout to have 121 POIs, so I doubt the ACCC would have made it easy to "strand" all the fibre within metro areas from being used in the way TPG has.

As for splitting hairs, I'd prefer an infrastructure monopoly that HAS to provide open access and that the industry wont need to go through time consuming and costly negotiations every step of the way like has occurred with Telstra.

Are you advocating an NBN model that doesn't have a monopoly infrastructure provider?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

I can tell you that the NBN will deliver more seats to the LNP, Libs, and Nationals at the next election than any other hair-brained scheme thought up by the ALP Rudd/Gillard Government.

It is an atrocious burden on the population, physically, financially and economically.

Time alone will tell whether it will be a worthwhile infrastructure project in terms of cost/benefit.

I doubt it.

It is a half baked pie.

gg


----------



## sydboy007

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I can tell you that the NBN will deliver more seats to the LNP, Libs, and Nationals at the next election than any other hair-brained scheme thought up by the ALP Rudd/Gillard Government.
> 
> It is an atrocious burden on the population, physically, financially and economically.
> 
> Time alone will tell whether it will be a worthwhile infrastructure project in terms of cost/benefit.
> 
> I doubt it.
> 
> It is a half baked pie.
> 
> gg




Is this along with your prediction that Abbott will turn out to be the best PM Australia has ever had?


----------



## overhang

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I can tell you that the NBN will deliver more seats to the LNP, Libs, and Nationals at the next election than any other hair-brained scheme thought up by the ALP Rudd/Gillard Government.
> 
> It is an atrocious burden on the population, physically, financially and economically.
> 
> Time alone will tell whether it will be a worthwhile infrastructure project in terms of cost/benefit.
> 
> I doubt it.
> 
> It is a half baked pie.
> 
> gg




Yes I'm sure those voters will see a greater benefit from fighter jets......


----------



## sydboy007

overhang said:


> Yes I'm sure those voters will see a greater benefit from fighter jets......




They might have to hire the same group from Iran who did their stealth plane photoshop just to convince other countries we'll have a flight capable airforce.


----------



## DB008

sydboy007 said:


> Is this along with your prediction that Abbott will turn out to be the best PM Australia has ever had?




Lets be 100% honest here.

At least the Libs have their heads screwed on when it comes to looking after the nations finances.

The ALP had a mantra of spend, spend, spend without thinking....'How are we going to afford this (now) and pay it back later?' Paying ~$12 Billion a year, just in 'interest', is crazy, because they wanted to win votes.


----------



## sydboy007

DB008 said:


> Lets be 100% honest here.
> 
> At least the Libs have their heads screwed on when it comes to looking after the nations finances.
> 
> The ALP had a mantra of spend, spend, spend without thinking....'How are we going to afford this (now) and pay it back later?' Paying ~$12 Billion a year, just in 'interest', is crazy, because they wanted to win votes.




So you fully supported Howard freezing the fuel excise which has taken roughly $50 in 2014 $$ from the budget since the decision was made?

You fully support the rolling out of a FTTN network when the Government hasn't completed negotiations with Telstra and Optus and has no idea as to what it will cost to gain access to the copper and HFC networks.  If you can't put a $$ figure to what could be a major cost to the rolling out of the network, then how can you say it will be cheaper than the Labor FTTP network?  How do they have an credibility left when within 3 months of getting into power their iron clad promise was dropped and the network had over 100% blowout in time?


----------



## DB008

sydboy007 said:


> So you fully supported Howard freezing the fuel excise which has taken roughly $50 in 2014 $$ from the budget since the decision was made?
> 
> You fully support the rolling out of a FTTN network when the Government hasn't completed negotiations with Telstra and Optus and has no idea as to what it will cost to gain access to the copper and HFC networks.  If you can't put a $$ figure to what could be a major cost to the rolling out of the network, then how can you say it will be cheaper than the Labor FTTP network?  How do they have an credibility left when within 3 months of getting into power their iron clad promise was dropped and the network had over 100% blowout in time?




Hey Syd. Lets not start a tit-for-tat sptrawler debate here.

I suport FFTH for a start.

Telstra should have been split/sold off as a commodity like the NBN.Co (wholesaler). Selling/moving the biggest telecommunications monopoly to another entity and keeping all the infrastructure to themselves was a mistake.

Drawing out a national scheme bigger than the Snowy Hydro on the back of a paper napkin was doomed to fail from the start (aka - Pink Batts brain fart), even though it was probably what Australia needed at the time. I support the NBN, but not the way it has been rolled out.

Every other industry is dying right now. We need to innovate in something. Technology is a good way to move as the whole world is heading that way. In typical ALP fashion (probably both side of Gov tbh), it has been done in a wasted way. Lets roll out to the country first - get no return...then scratch our heads in why there is no uptake.

Roll out to the most populated areas and business too (CBD - SYD/MEL/BNE/ADL).
Get returns that people can see.
Measure these returns.

Hell, I had faster broadband in Budapest a few years ago (on copper) than I have right now in Sydney.


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> Lets roll out to the country first - get no return...then scratch our heads in why there is no uptake.
> 
> Roll out to the most populated areas and business too (CBD - SYD/MEL/BNE/ADL).
> Get returns that people can see.
> Measure these returns.
> 
> Hell, I had faster broadband in Budapest a few years ago (on copper) than I have right now in Sydney.




Your point is made on a false premise…. Or several.

First, it has not been rolled out to the country _first_. It has been rolled out simultaneously in numerous city/suburban/regional/rural and remote areas. The 5 test areas comprised one each of five various topography and density types, so it could be seen what issues would be faced once the volume rollout began. The selection options and criteria are all documented (as opposed to being a brain fart). Likewise, the volume rollout order was essentially dictated by the ACCC's decision on where the 121 POI would be located, which was in turn dictated by the location of existing transit backhaul.

Second, your assumption that metro areas would result in a faster take-up is false. By far the fastest take-up occurred in the regional areas of Kiama and Willunga. Both achieved about double the take-up rate of the metro trial area in Brunswick.

Third, the claim that "there is no uptake" is also false. The take-up of the NBN (even in the slowest take-up areas) is far, far ahead of the standard tech curve (and any network like it anywhere in the World). In Kiama and Willunga for example, the take-up of the NBN after _18 months _was about *300% higher* than the take-up of Optus cable in their (metro) footprint after a _decade_. It was also about double the take-up of Verizon FTTP (USA) after 5 years. NBN take-up after 18 months was 10-20 times higher than the take-up of ADSL in Australia (also after 18 months of availability).


----------



## sydboy007

Got to love how stuck in the dialup lane the Coalition parliament members are.

Steve Ciobo (seat of Moncrief in Queensland) now parliamentary secretary to Ponzi Joe.

Last Tuesday he decided to yet again engage his mouth without getting his facts into gear

_“We understand, when you look at the costs of Labor’s rollout ”” how slow it was, how many targets were missed, how many inefficiencies were built into the system, how many disputes there were with contractors ”” that we saw the actual cost of Labor’s NBN rollout forecast to reach over $90 billion. I see in recent media reports that Telstra on their 4G wireless communications network are providing speeds of ”” you guessed it ”” 100 gigabytes.”_

Labor MP and former Telstra employee Tim Watts interjected to Ciobo’s speech, stating: “You’re rewriting the laws of physics!” In addition, a member of the Coalition also corrected Ciobo, claiming that the correct term was “megabytes”. However, what appeared to be a different member of the Coalition was then forced to correct that initial correction, noting, correctly, that the appropriate term for measuring broadband speed was ‘megabits’.

So lets do some fact checking:

* $90B for labors NBN?? False.  The Government funded review showed with some tweaking the full FTTP network could be rolled out for $54B

* Telstra network hitting 100 gigabytes?  False. Real world speeds on the Telstra network tend to max out at on average around 40-60Mbs with a high degree of variability on time of day and location.

Surely members of parliament have to uphold their code of ethics.  How can they continually get away with blatant lies, ignoring the information provided by the reviews they themselves sometimes organised?


----------



## sptrawler

DB008 said:


> Hey Syd. Lets not start a tit-for-tat sptrawler debate here.
> .




That's a bit rough Danny, I resemble that remark.


----------



## sydboy007

It will be very interesting to see what Turnbull decides to do now that Morrow has been named in a law suit from his time at PG&E.  9 deaths, over $100M diverted from gas safety and operations.  

“For its part, the CPUC has roundly criticised PG&E for inadequate safety practices, internal cost-cutting practices outside industry norms, and the alleged diversion of maintenance funds to executive bonuses and shareholder returns.” (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/may/23/nbn-executive-legal-action-disasters).

Considering how Turnbull spend over 18 months attacking Quigley, possibly defaming him by claiming he'd been sacked from NBN, hopefully he will be just as determined in extracting answers from Morrow.  Somehow I doubt News Corp or Turnbull will be as nearly interested in the past events of Morrows' career as they were with Quigleys'


----------



## sptrawler

sptrawler said:


> Well I don't know about the issues in Townsville.
> But in Mandurah W.A, they are saying the same thing, change over or be disconnected.
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/media/news/countdown-started-for-mandurah-to-switch.html
> 
> The funny thing is, my place falls in the mapped area and they can't connect me and don't know when they will be able to.lol




Latest update on real life NBN connection.

A mate rang tonight spitting chips, he has taken two days annual leave to connect to the NBN, also foregone an overtime shift.

Apparently this is the third attempt to organise a connection, the previous two were cancelled.

This booking through Telstra was organised a month ago, after their last cancellation, there was an initial visit organised for Friday. Then a further visit next Tuesday for Telstra to intergrate the house appliances eg modem, phone.
They rang him today to say they will have to re schedule, well he is ropeable.lol
Told them they either turn up or f off.
Sounds like a really well oiled machine this NBN.

By the way, he has recieved the change over within 15 months notice.lol


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> Latest update on real life NBN connection.
> 
> A mate rang tonight spitting chips, he has taken two days annual leave to connect to the NBN, also foregone an overtime shift.
> 
> Apparently this is the third attempt to organise a connection, the previous two were cancelled.
> 
> This booking through Telstra was organised a month ago, after their last cancellation, there was an initial visit organised for Friday. Then a further visit next Tuesday for Telstra to intergrate the house appliances eg modem, phone.
> They rang him today to say they will have to re schedule, well he is ropeable.lol
> Told them they either turn up or f off.
> Sounds like a really well oiled machine this NBN.
> 
> By the way, he has recieved the change over within 15 months notice.lol




Question is is it Telstra stuffing up or NBN?

I deal with Telstra, and lesser extent Optus, on a daily basis and can testify to the large number of times appointments are missed / cancelled by them at the last minute, so if it is NBN causing the problem they're in good company with the current main players.  The issue could very well be that Telstra hasn't processed the order properly, which I can understand as NBNs systems are not the most user friendly, even when compared to Telstra LOLS.

-----------

Possibly because my parents and relatives were in an early release area but they were connected to the NBN via their ADSL provider with practically no effort on their part.  If an 82 year old pensioner who still refers to an ATA as the cheap voice box for overseas calls can do it, then I would say things ain't too bad.

Would be interesting to see how NBN is comparing to new ADSL installs.  Considering Telstra has been caught AGAIN using wholesale data to help it's retail arm try to poach customers it just reinforces why we need a neutral wholesale provider.


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> Question is is it Telstra stuffing up or NBN?
> 
> I deal with Telstra, and lesser extent Optus, on a daily basis and can testify to the large number of times appointments are missed / cancelled by them at the last minute, so if it is NBN causing the problem they're in good company with the current main players.  The issue could very well be that Telstra hasn't processed the order properly, which I can understand as NBNs systems are not the most user friendly, even when compared to Telstra LOLS.
> 
> .




I am catching up with him on the weekend, i will find out more.


----------



## sydboy007

I wonder why MT isn't highlighting the issues of delayed trials?  If they're having trouble getting power to 1 node what does that say about their chances with tens of thousands of them?  It also seems not quite as easy for Telstra to hand over the copper and HFC networks for free as MT lead us to believe.

http://www.zdnet.com/au/nbn-fibre-to-the-node-trials-delayed-7000030026/

NBN Co was due to commence live trials of fibre-to-the-node technology in Umina in New South Wales, and Epping in Victoria at the start of May, however neither trial has yet commenced.

"The Epping trial in Victoria has slowed down a bit, while we work with the utility there to find a power solution. We're working through that," he said.

It comes as reports suggest Telstra and NBN Co will miss the mid-year target for the completion of the negotiations to overhaul the existing AU$11 billion agreement to allow NBN Co to access Telstra's copper and cable networks as part of the multi-technology mix model NBN.


----------



## sydboy007

Some background on what the new NBNCo board had been trying to get away with

In its document, NBN Co noted that it planned to offer five speed tiers for the FTTN/B infrastructure ”” 12/1Mbps (download/upload), 12/5Mbps, 25/10Mbps, 50/20Mbps and 100/40Mbps. These tiers mimic NBN Co’s existing speed tiers for its Fibre to the Premises infrastructure. However, NBN Co noted that selecting the correct speed tier would be “the responsibility of the end user and the provider”.

“For example, NBN Co does not intend to prevent end users and/or providers from ordering the ‘Up to 100Mbps’ speed tier for a service that would typically experience speeds of less than 50Mbps,” the document states. “To assist in ordering FTTN/B services, NBN Co will consider developing a service qualification tool that enables providers to check the estimated speeds available to premises.”

Note they're only considering building a tool to help customers choose the appropriate speed plan.  Hopefully they come up with some a bit more accurate than the Government myboradband website that says my 10Mbs connection is in a 17Mbs median speed area.

So yesterday at the Senate Economics Legislation Committee former Communications Minister and Labor Senator Stephen Conroy asked ACCC chair Rod Sims for his opinion on the matter.

“If in ideal conditions, a [Retail Internet Service Provider or RSP] determines that it can deliver a VDSL service of say 38Mbps to an end user, would it be appropriate for an RSP to market that product as an up to 100Mbps service?” asked Conroy. *“Well, the circumstance that you’re describing, if I accept the facts as you put them, Senator, would suggest that’s misleading,”* responded Sims.

Conroy also asked Sims again to confirm if, under Australian law, it would be “misleading and deceptive” for a RSP to sell a customer a 100Mbps product when the RSP was aware that it could only provide a service of 38Mbps, and the RSP had a product it could sell at up to 50Mbps.

*“That would at its face, given those facts, be misleading,” Sims responded again.*

Conroy then read out the specific section from NBN Co’s consultation paper dealing with this issue, with Sims confirming that the ACCC had seen the document. “This is NBN Co in writing, saying we don’t mind if you defraud Australian consumers,” Conroy said. “This is NBN Co itself stating that they don’t mind selling a service of up to 100Mbps, when they know the typical experienced speeds are less than 50Mbps. That’s just fraud.”

“Under our terms it’s misleading,” responded Sims.

It's amazing how fast corporate culture can change.  It might explain why so many senior staff at NBNCo have left.  They couldn't bring themselves to work in a company that is doing it's best to allow customers to pay for services that cannot be provided.  Gone from guaranteed speed tiers to an up to and no legislated right as to what you can actually get.  Even Ziggy Switkowski has come out and said they can't guarantee anything via FTTN / FTTB.  In the USA this kind of practice would have class action written all over it.


----------



## So_Cynical

A bit of NBN work has been going on in my street over the last couple of months, started with Telstra pit rehabilitation and has now moved on to actual cable replacement, pulling out the 40 year old copper and replacing it with brand new copper  concrete saws to cut through the foot path, digging trenches, laying new conduit, a big job and finished with copper cables. 

Crazy to be going to all that expense to save so little on the Copper v Fibre.


----------



## sydboy007

So_Cynical said:


> A bit of NBN work has been going on in my street over the last couple of months, started with Telstra pit rehabilitation and has now moved on to actual cable replacement, pulling out the 40 year old copper and replacing it with brand new copper  concrete saws to cut through the foot path, digging trenches, laying new conduit, a big job and finished with copper cables.
> 
> Crazy to be going to all that expense to save so little on the Copper v Fibre.




Be thankful they're doing copper remediation in your area.  I'd be interested to know what suburb.

I believe they were budgeting for about 10% remediation over the FTTN footprint.   If they can honestly get away with around 50% I'd be surprised.


----------



## So_Cynical

sydboy007 said:


> Be thankful they're doing copper remediation in your area.  I'd be interested to know what suburb.
> 
> I believe they were budgeting for about 10% remediation over the FTTN footprint.   If they can honestly get away with around 50% I'd be surprised.




Western Sydney but not the far west, Parramatta area...they are fair dinkum digging up half the street, they replaced every pit due to Asbestos and have now replaced all the 6 neighboring unit block property's, junction or pit to property building...completely replacing the old Telstra line, copper for copper = crazy.


----------



## sydboy007

So_Cynical said:


> Western Sydney but not the far west, Parramatta area...they are fair dinkum digging up half the street, they replaced every pit due to Asbestos and have now replaced all the 6 neighboring unit block property's, junction or pit to property building...completely replacing the old Telstra line, copper for copper = crazy.




I had hoped MT would see sense and if initial testing o the copper showed a majority would need to be replaced they'd just do fibre instead since the costs are comparable.

Seems that hope is for nought.

In the years ahead this will be viewed as the greatest economic vandalism to tax payers.


----------



## Calliope

sydboy007 said:


> In the years ahead this will be viewed as the greatest economic vandalism to tax payers.




Actually it is now.I'm not surprised seeing that is was devised by two clowns on the back of a paper napkin during a four hour vip flight. Cost Benefit Analysis was a foreign language to these guys.

But it is good to see that you have a new-found concern for taxpayers which is normally alien to your Labor/Greens.


----------



## drsmith

The latest update has the brownfields network now passing 373,708 premises.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco/documents/nbnco-rollout-metrics-15062014.pdf


----------



## drsmith

$150m FTTN rollout pilot signed between Telstra and NBN Co.



> NBN Co and Telstra have signed a deal worth about $150 million to connect 206,000 homes and businesses with the Coalition’s preferred fibre-to-the-node technology.
> 
> The deal, whose negotiation was first revealed by The Australian Financial Review , means Telstra builds the national broadband network in mostly regional areas across NSW and Queensland with construction taking around 12 months.
> 
> These include Gympie and Bundaberg in Queensland as well as Hamilton and Warner in NSW.
> 
> If successful, Telstra’s pilot will be one of the biggest fibre-to-the-node rollouts and could help it win billions of dollars worth of NBN deals.




http://www.afr.com/p/technology/telstra_in_nbn_fibre_deal_2UhvyideUybBooTZ3nXFBI


----------



## sydboy007

http://www.zdnet.com/is-the-nbn-strategic-reviews-terminal-value-terminally-wrong-7000030856/

_That whole objective was all but rubbished by NBN Co chairman Ziggy Switkowski, who has publicly conceded that the project needs to ramp up so aggressively as to be all but impossible to achieve under current guidelines. The Coalition has yet to offer a clear strategy about how and when the company is going to ramp up to roll out what Switkowski has conceded must be 100,000 premises per month for the next eight years.

The NBN Strategic Review addresses terminal-value calculations on just one page (p107), explaining that its internal rate of return (IRR) calculation of 5.3 percent is based on a terminal value of $45 billion in FY2040.

This valuation is “mechanically” calculated as being six times EBITDA for the theoretical revenues of NBN Co some 25 years from now – and 15 years after 2025, when by Ziggy Switkowski's own reckoning NBN Co will have already started to transition to a FTTP model.

By 2040, the actual NBN – the one based on the fibre that the Coalition refuses to pay for now – will have been built and will be based fully on fibre. *Real revenues will therefore be based not on the services the government wants to build over its MTM model now, but on those that will have become capable over the FTTP network as it comes online.*

The question to ask, then, is simple: Does the $45 billion terminal value assigned in the NBN Strategic Review seem reasonable?

In other words, in 1997, 1999 and 2006 the market valued Telstra at 6.5, 17 and 8.2 times EBITDA to give it market values of $43 billion, $100 billion, and $33 billion on revenues of $15,983b, $17.571b, and $22.75b respectively.

These figures would seem to support the 6-times-EBITDA metric – but can we therefore assume that NBN Co in 2040 will have an EBITDA of $7.5 billion?

*That terminal value basically depends on NBN Co becoming a money-spinner on the scale of what Telstra was when it was sold off to the market. And that's a big ask – but a necessary one if the NBNSR is to hold water. Were the actual terminal value to be, say, 25 percent lower by that point, the Coalition's entire revenue model would be thrown into chaos – and its decision to forego a more-profitable FTTP network revealed as being highly questionable indeed.*_


----------



## drsmith

Brownfield premises passed to June 30 is 381,146.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco2/documents/nbnco-rollout-metrics-30062014.pdf


----------



## bellenuit

*New Internet speed record blows past Google Fiber*

_Bell Labs researchers just broke the broadband Internet speed record.
It is eight times faster than the previous record -- *and it was done over copper landlines.*
_
http://money.cnn.com/2014/07/10/tec...ternet-speed-record/index.html?iid=SF_T_River


----------



## Knobby22

Wow!

_Bell Labs says that XG-FAST can provide up to 10 gigabits per second over a distance of up to *30 meters*.

Bell Labs' test was done in -- you guessed it -- a lab. In the real world, there are plenty of factors that can reduce Internet speeds traveling over copper lines, including the thickness of the cable, signals picked up by other nearby cables and the length of the wire. _

Wake me up when they can do it over 300 metres in real world conditions. Still good though. Also nice to see the US using the metric system.


----------



## boofhead

Did you read the details? 30 metre length of copper, bonded pair. In a lab. I can see it being beneficial for apartment blocks, office blocks etc but for stand alone dwellings I can't see it being overly practical with many cabinets needed per street. Then add in extra electricity costs, $89 million for FTTN power


----------



## bellenuit

boofhead said:


> Did you read the details? 30 metre length of copper, bonded pair. In a lab. I can see it being beneficial for apartment blocks, office blocks etc but for stand alone dwellings I can't see it being overly practical with many cabinets needed per street. Then add in extra electricity costs, $89 million for FTTN power




Of course I read the details. It has uses as you mentioned and the whole point about Turnbull's alternative implementation strategy is to use technology that is available where it is cost effective to do so. This isn't yet available, but may become usable at some stage.

The other point worth noting is that even though the 10 gigabits per second was achieved in lab condition on a 30M length, the technology does not appear to be limited to 30M stretches. What if they can get acceptable speeds, but not 10 gigabits per second, on 200M+ stretches. That would avoid having more cabinets than are currently planned.


----------



## So_Cynical

bellenuit said:


> *Of course I read the details.* It has uses as you mentioned and the whole point about Turnbull's alternative implementation strategy is to use technology that is available where it is cost effective to do so. This isn't yet available, but may become usable at some stage.
> 
> The other point worth noting is that even though the 10 gigabits per second was achieved in lab condition on a 30M length,* the technology does not appear to be limited to 30M stretches.* What if they can get acceptable speeds, but not 10 gigabits per second, on 200M+ stretches. That would avoid having more cabinets than are currently planned.




The devil is in the detail...



			
				http://www.extremetech.com/ said:
			
		

> As always with new copper wire technologies,* XG.fast’s massive speeds mostly stem from its use of a larger frequency range.* While VDSL2 only uses a 17 or 30MHz block of spectrum, G.fast allows for up to 212MHz, and XG.fast uses a massive 500MHz. It’s pretty much the same thing as WiFi: You could only squeeze so much data into the small 20MHz channel available in the 2.4GHz band — but you can cram a whole lot more into the 80MHz and 160MHz channels available at 5GHz.
> 
> *The problem with squeezing 500MHz over a copper wire, though, is that higher frequencies attenuate (weaken) very quickly.* Couple this with crosstalk (interference from the other copper wire in the twisted pair) and your effective range becomes very short. For VDSL2, max wire length is around 400 meters if you want 150Mbps; for 1.25Gbps G.fast, max distance drops to just 70 meters. For 10Gbps XG.fast, Bell Labs is reporting a max distance of just 30 meters (100 feet). *For the slower version of XG.fast, clocked at 1Gbps symmetrical (2Gbps total), the researchers managed a range of 70 meters (230 feet).*




And its a record for speed over copper.

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/...hone-line-a-new-world-record-set-by-bell-labs



			
				http://au.pcmag.com/ said:
			
		

> *Alcatel-Lucent's Bell Labs has managed to set a new world record for data transmission over copper lines* — you know, the presumably "crappy" copper connection between your house and a local node, and the very thing that your ISP is likely balking at ever replacing with fiber-optic connectivity, due to the cost.




http://au.pcmag.com/news/13100/bell-labs-hits-10gbps-on-copper-lines


----------



## sydboy007

bellenuit said:


> Of course I read the details. It has uses as you mentioned and the whole point about Turnbull's alternative implementation strategy is to use technology that is available where it is cost effective to do so. This isn't yet available, but may become usable at some stage.
> 
> The other point worth noting is that even though the 10 gigabits per second was achieved in lab condition on a 30M length, the technology does not appear to be limited to 30M stretches. What if they can get acceptable speeds, but not 10 gigabits per second, on 200M+ stretches. That would avoid having more cabinets than are currently planned.




Yet G.PON already does this over vastly longer cable lengths NOW.  GPON doesn't require bleeding edge technology.  What the original FTTN was rolling out was off the shelf 3rd to 4th generation technology.  Cheap and reliable with well known performance chacteristics due to millions upon millions of installations around the world.

The other main issue is the use of bonded pairs ie using 2 copper lines for a 4 wire service.  To achieve that in the real world would require massive investment in laying more copper.  Why go down that path when fibre provides a superior service?

So pretty much any copper tech that requires bonded pairs will have little use for a country wide FTTN project.  It MAY be useful in an office building, but only small ones.  30M is really barely useful for the internal cabling of a building.  Unless it was possible to install mini media converters in the building you'd MAYBE get a few of the offices closest to the MDF within 30M, a few more at 100M, assuming there's enough spare copper pairs to make the service possible.


----------



## drsmith

Some senate committee action yesterday,



> THE company cha*rged with *delivering Australia high-speed broadband could still provide fibre-to-the-premises to more than 80 per cent of homes, despite the government’s pre-election preference for a fibre-to-the-node network.
> 
> NBN Co chief executive Bill Morrow told a senate committee hearing neither the government nor voters would be “upset” if 80 per cent or 90 per cent of customers received broadband through fibre-to-the premises *instead of fibre-to-the-network ”” provided it was the cheapest.
> 
> “We are not giving up on fibre-to-the-prem, I’ve heard no one say fibre-to-the-prem is bad,” he said. “ It’s just more costly than fibre-to-the-node in the analysis that was done that I’ve trusted and (am) running with.
> 
> “I don’t think it would upset anybody; in fact, I think people would be proud and happy with that fact that we’re not taking a technology-specific option, we’re agnostic.”






> Mr Turnbull’s spokesman said Mr Morrow had done “a magnificent job” and that NBN Co had met its June 30 targets “for the first time in its history”.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...o-reach-majority/story-e6frgaif-1226986152979


----------



## drsmith

bellenuit said:


> *New Internet speed record blows past Google Fiber*
> 
> _Bell Labs researchers just broke the broadband Internet speed record.
> It is eight times faster than the previous record -- *and it was done over copper landlines.*
> _
> http://money.cnn.com/2014/07/10/tec...ternet-speed-record/index.html?iid=SF_T_River



The AFR in a recent article has expanded a little more in this,

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/broadband_race_shifts_up_gear_M1xovZkYk07iE0LqjdEM5L

Meanwhile, NBN Co loses a $200m court case with Telstra over their original deal,

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/telstra_beats_nbn_co_in_case_oLeJCf791cxhlxdVl13mtN


----------



## sydboy007

Hopefully the ACCC decides to keep protecting consumers rather than giving Telstra and the Govt a free kick.  Got to laugh they still haven't been able to get power to the trial nodes in Epping VIC as yet.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...l&utm_content=844223&utm_campaign=kgb&modapt=

So what does the government do? Turnbull and Cormann write to Sims arguing that the 2011 agreement between NBN Co and Telstra should be ignored during the ACCC’s public inquiry into making Final Access Determinations (FADs) for the declared fixed-line services.

Arguing that a determination by the ACCC leading to a downward adjustment of fixed-line service pricing is bad for consumers beggars belief. What a ham-fisted attempt to influence the ACCC, a regulator that is required to take into account all reasonable information and industry pricing agreements when setting regulated prices.

To fail to include the 2011 agreement would lead to chaos where other companies will argue that their pricing agreements should be ignored.

If the ACCC complies with the government’s wishes then it is important that the decision be tested in court. Any suggestion that consumers should pay higher prices to utilise the obsolete and degrading CAN is unacceptable and demonstrates the level of desperation surrounding Turnbull’s office at the moment.

*You might think the government would be interested in protecting the interests of 22 million Australian consumers... but you would be wrong.*

The government letter states, “the terms agreed by Telstra, NBN Co and the government were approved by Telstra’s 1.4 million shareholders in October 2011. It will undermine the integrity of this deal if Telstra shareholders are deprived of the benefit of arrangements they did not initiate but negotiated in good faith.”

Wait a minute. Why would the government intervene to protect Telstra shareholder interests?

Can you remember the last time a Coalition government espousing an 'open and competitive market' mantra intervened to protect the interests of shareholders in what might be considered to be a regulated monopoly fixed-line infrastructure provider?


----------



## Bintang

sydboy007 said:


> Wait a minute. Why would the government intervene to protect Telstra shareholder interests?




It would be interesting to know the collective TLS holdings (if any) of our Federal members.

Ethically I agree with you sydboy but how many politicians these days actually make any decisions or act based on what is best ethically.

I've given up on all of them - both sides of the political divide as well as the ones on the fringe. They all walk around with the same hats on their heads labelled - SELF INTEREST. 

So as a substantial TLS shareholder I'm inclined to don the same hat that they wear and say 'bravo Mr. Turbull'.


----------



## DB008

The Libs still want copper hey?


*Danish researchers break fibre-optic data transfer record*



> Researchers in Denmark have broken the record for the high-speed transmission of data across a fibre-optic cable.
> 
> Using a new type of optical fibre supplied by Japanese telecoms company NTT, the High-Speed Optical
> 
> Communications (HSOC) team at DTU Fotonik transferred data at 43Tbps.
> 
> It was achieved using a single laser with a new type of optical fibre cable that contains seven cores made of glass instead of the single core used in standard fibres, allowing it to squeeze through more data.
> 
> The achievement smashes the previous record set by the German research team at the Karlsruhe Institut fur Technologie, which stood at 32Tbps.
> 
> Researchers at DTU first broke the 1Tbps barrier in March 2009 using a single laser. Their progress was swift, seeing that figure rise to 5.1Tbps five months later, going on to hit 9.5Tbps in 2011.




http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/web/danish-researchers-break-fibre-optic-data-transfer-speed-record-1259938


----------



## noco

The NBN....just another botched Green/Labor left wing socialist thought bubble.........$43 billion planned on the back of a beer coaster in 11 weeks by Conroy and Rudd......how shambolic.....What a disgrace!!! 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...aotic-says-audit/story-e6frgaif-1227013441446


----------



## sydboy007

noco said:


> The NBN....just another botched Green/Labor left wing socialist thought bubble.........$43 billion planned on the back of a beer coaster in 11 weeks by Conroy and Rudd......how shambolic.....What a disgrace!!!
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...aotic-says-audit/story-e6frgaif-1227013441446




The Liberal FTTN.  Stalled in Epping VIC because they can't get power to the nodes.  Now that's incompetency for ya.  I wonder how many other suburbs will face the same fate as Epping??  Supposedly they had a fully worked out plan to do a nation wide rollout in 3.3 years.  Not looking so good on that score now.  Close to a year in office and they've got 1 test result for the public of FTTN and another for FTTB.

Then we have a $150M money throw to Telstra.  No open tender for the work.  For a Government all about open free markets and competition, how does that stand up with giving a very large amount of money to Telstra without seeing if they could get a better deal from someone else?  Maybe they could have done a deal with TPG / Optus, or tendered out for FTTB trials.  I'd love to know what Turnbull was expecting in return from Telstra on awarding them such a lucrative contract.

Only good thing about this report is the call for any Govt investment over $1B to have a full CBA done.  Hopefully that includes Abbott's broken promises on roads funding.  Why invest in a Melbourne road tunnel that provides 80c in economic return for every $ invested??  If the debt ain't self liquidating then it just increased the burden on the rest of us.


----------



## icedtrade

Cannot be long now until the Government rolls over and commits to FTTP. (They have basically rolled on everything else good and bad)

Morrow is now saying having 80% to 90% FTTP wouldn't be a bad outcome.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...o-reach-majority/story-e6frgaif-1226986152979

Turnbull is saying what a fabulous job he is doing for his up to $3m a year salary.

So good that he cannot even arrange for a single Node to get power after a year, but that couldn't be due to privatised power companies could it? (If so then no problem because consumers love the lower electricity prices, and network reliability that this brings...must like the trusty old copper phone line I guess)


----------



## Smurf1976

sydboy007 said:


> Only good thing about this report is the call for any Govt investment over $1B to have a full CBA done.




Wow, just wow......

$1B is a lot of money in any terms and you'd think the cost benefit analysis would come in a lot lower than that. Heck, the Tas state government was doing it at very much lower levels many years ago and at least one state-owned company puts basically all capital expenditure through such a process, the only difference being the extent of analysis depending on the amount being spent. The bigger the cost, the more effort goes into analysis before committing too it, a process which is entirely logical.

If a business is going to spend on a new fixed asset then, regardless of the actual cost, it's not unreasonable to expect that a decent analysis would be done before committing to it. If the federal government is throwing around $ billions with no proper analysis well then that truly amazes me.


----------



## sydboy007

Smurf1976 said:


> Wow, just wow......
> 
> $1B is a lot of money in any terms and you'd think the cost benefit analysis would come in a lot lower than that. Heck, the Tas state government was doing it at very much lower levels many years ago and at least one state-owned company puts basically all capital expenditure through such a process, the only difference being the extent of analysis depending on the amount being spent. The bigger the cost, the more effort goes into analysis before committing too it, a process which is entirely logical.
> 
> If a business is going to spend on a new fixed asset then, regardless of the actual cost, it's not unreasonable to expect that a decent analysis would be done before committing to it. If the federal government is throwing around $ billions with no proper analysis well then that truly amazes me.




I was happy with Abbott's pre election promise for a CBA on projects of $100M or more, that is untill he broke it twice before getting elected.

More importantly, as Turnbull said, the CBAs need to be made public.  Too often the information is classified as some sort of state secret and we mere voters are kept in the dark.  So far there's been none of the open and transparent Govt we were promised.


----------



## So_Cynical

icedtrade said:


> Cannot be long now until the Government rolls over and commits to FTTP. (They have basically rolled on everything else good and bad)




They are putting a lot of effort into re-branding it, turning it into something that they can get the credit for.


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> They are putting a lot of effort into re-branding it, turning it into something that they can get the credit for.




Which is understandable, as they are the ones who have to make good, on a Labor Party brain fart idea.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> Which is understandable, as they are the ones who have to make good, on a Labor Party brain fart idea.




Yet you gloss over the broken 2016 promise, the stalled FTTN rollout, the inability to get to power to some nodes, a $150M contract to Telstra that wasn't tendered with no proof they couldn't get a better deal from another company.

Yes, the Coalition are supremely competent at managing the network rollout.


----------



## So_Cynical

sptrawler said:


> Which is understandable, as they are the ones who have to make good, on a Labor Party brain fart idea.




They had 10 years under Howard to do something and decided to do nothing....so Labor played catch-up, forcing the Noalition to re-brand and attempt to take credit...get a positive Noalition spin on a Labor/Green/independent initiative.

Its all same old form the right, knighthoods, work for the dole, tax breaks for the rich, work choices or what ever they will call it this time.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

sptrawler said:


> Which is understandable, as they are the ones who have to make good, on a Labor Party brain fart idea.




Thanks spt,

You have summarised the NBN in one sentence.

And in three words, " brain fart idea "

gg


----------



## noco

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Thanks spt,
> 
> You have summarised the NBN in one sentence.
> 
> And in three words, " brain fart idea "
> 
> gg




There is no doubt in my mind, the COALITION would not have entered into such a hare brain scheme in the first place without some accurate cost benefit analysis.........It certainly would not been done on the back of a beer coaster in 11 weeks as Rudd and Conroy did.......Australia is such a large country to cover......by the time they get it finished, new technology will supersede  what we now have.

I cannot see any problem with wireless or satellite because optic fibre is not going to produce 100gbs as originally stated.


----------



## boofhead

Where was it stated at 100 Gb/s? Fibre technologies can already transfer more than that (will be used for backbones etc though).


----------



## sydboy007

noco said:


> There is no doubt in my mind, the COALITION would not have entered into such a hare brain scheme in the first place without some accurate cost benefit analysis.........It certainly would not been done on the back of a beer coaster in 11 weeks as Rudd and Conroy did.......Australia is such a large country to cover......by the time they get it finished, new technology will supersede  what we now have.
> 
> I cannot see any problem with wireless or satellite because optic fibre is not going to produce 100gbs as originally stated.




They're just investing in Meloburne's $1M / M tunnel where the CBA has shown to provide just an 80c return for each $ spent.  With economic management like that we'll be rooned in no time.


----------



## sydboy007

so many missed targets


----------



## drsmith

That's cute coming from the Minister of Missed Targets.

How many NBN corporate plans were there that missed targets by miles under his fine ministership ?

6-years in office and it was missed target after missed target and even at the end of that 6-years, Labor was too afraid to release NBN Co's final corporate plan in the lead up to last year's election because it once again revealed wildly missed targets.

The problem for Stephen Conroy is that his own legacy as Communications Minister is completely indefensible.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> That's cute coming from the Minister of Missed Targets.
> 
> How many NBN corporate plans were there that missed targets by miles under his fine ministership ?
> 
> 6-years in office and it was missed target after missed target and even at the end of that 6-years, Labor was too afraid to release NBN Co's final corporate plan in the lead up to last year's election because it once again revealed wildly missed targets.
> 
> The problem for Stephen Conroy is that his own legacy as Communications Minister is completely indefensible.




Nearly a year in office and the Abbott Govt has achieved 50 FTTB trial connections and 1 order in the umina and Epping rollout.  This from the team promising a nation wide rollout by the next election.


----------



## drsmith

That's right Syd.

Not yet a year in office for the Coalition compared to 6-years for Labor and their Minister of Missed Targets. There's a long way to go yet before any meaningful comparison can be made.

I don't think there's too many even within Labor now that bow at the shrine of Stephen Conroy.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Should any defenders of the disastrous ALP driven NBN debacle be still extant, it would bear them well to read this.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/cost-benefit-analysis-shows-turnbull-plan-has-16b-advantage-20140826-108nvi.html

It proves the gross dereliction of governance embarked upon by Rudd and Conroy. 



> Mr Vertigan said the findings of his report show that cost benefit analyses should be mandatory before construction begins on major public infrastructure projects.
> 
> Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-advantage-20140826-108nvi.html#ixzz3BVR9czTF




gg


----------



## overhang

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Should any defenders of the disastrous ALP driven NBN debacle be still extant, it would bear them well to read this.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/cost-benefit-analysis-shows-turnbull-plan-has-16b-advantage-20140826-108nvi.html
> 
> It proves the gross dereliction of governance embarked upon by Rudd and Conroy.
> 
> 
> 
> gg




Are we meant to be surprised that a former staffer of Malcolm Turnbull and former advisers to Malcolm Turnbull have concluded that MT is right?

The report obviously has some weight however they have left out the most crucial component and that's that they haven't taken into account future upgrades to FTTP under the coalition plan which would seem inevitable in the long term picture.  They also will not give a figure as to how much they have allowed for the ongoing copper maintenance.


----------



## orr

Garpal Gumnut said:


> ALP driven NBN
> 
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/cost-benefit-analysis-shows-turnbull-plan-has-16b-advantage-20140826-108nvi.html
> 
> It proves the gross dereliction of governance embarked upon by Rudd and Conroy.
> 
> 
> 
> gg




As opposed to the Howard/Costello,   Decade of nothing... Dereliction writ large.   Their was Sol's Massive pay cheque's as three amigo's plotted to stitch up a monopoly network that would have see the $$$ figures touted above being spilt in Champaign coke on the marble floors of their yachts...

It's amazing how much incompetence you can hide behind such small ideological blinkers. 

Dereliction of governance... that's for democracy to take care of... along with a couple of other  things, Much to Merde-ochs dissappiontment... "The ALP's NBN" say it again slowly.

I would have been just as happy to to have been able to say the Coalitions NBN but I never had the chance.


----------



## drsmith

It will be interesting to see Labor's broadband policy going into the next election.


----------



## sydboy007

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Should any defenders of the disastrous ALP driven NBN debacle be still extant, it would bear them well to read this.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/cost-benefit-analysis-shows-turnbull-plan-has-16b-advantage-20140826-108nvi.html
> 
> It proves the gross dereliction of governance embarked upon by Rudd and Conroy.
> 
> gg




So why aren't you calling for Abbott to provide public CBAs for his election promises for road funding?  So far nothing even though he's committing billions.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> That's right Syd.
> 
> Not yet a year in office for the Coalition compared to 6-years for Labor and their Minister of Missed Targets. There's a long way to go yet before any meaningful comparison can be made.
> 
> I don't think there's too many even within Labor now that bow at the shrine of Stephen Conroy.




http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_work_grinds_to_halt_in_some_8xnphrriSnRSZMDQNEzL0O

But analysis of statistics from the company reveal that most of the progress has been in NSW, Victoria and Queensland. The *rollout has dramatically slowed down in all other states and territories.

In Tasmania, Western Australia, South Australia and ACT, only 141 existing homes and businesses have been passed with fibre-optic cabling since June 30 – an average of just 21 premises per week across all four states and territories.

South Australia has been one of the hardest hit, with 86 new brownfield premises passed since March 23 – an average of just 4.2 homes and businesses per week.

In contrast, NBN Co has passed an average of 952 premises per week in Victoria over the same period.

The ACT’s brownfield premises passed count has remained stagnant since June 2014 with a weekly average of 2.4 premises passed over the past six and a half weeks.

*The national rate of construction has also slowed down. Where the rollout was hitting an average of 4152 existing premises passed per week in the six months ending June 30, it has slowed to 2714 premises per week since then.*


----------



## DB008

*Malcolm Turnbull on the NBN, economics and your internet speed: whiteboard explainer - video*

http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2014/aug/26/malcolm-turnbull-nbn-internet-speed-whiteboard-video


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Should any defenders of the disastrous ALP driven NBN debacle be still extant, it would bear them well to read this.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/cost-benefit-analysis-shows-turnbull-plan-has-16b-advantage-20140826-108nvi.html
> 
> It proves the gross dereliction of governance embarked upon by Rudd and Conroy.
> 
> gg




Well, what a surprise. A hand-picked team (many of whom had a long-standing opposition to the NBN), found that the Coalition's version was better. Who could possibly have foreseen such an outcome? 

What's _really_ surprising is that even with Ergas on board, they still found that Labor's NBN had a _positive_ cost-benefit outcome!

I wonder what happened to the promise of an independent CBA by the Prod Comm, or infrastructure Australia? 

All that aside, as I've written previously, a CBA for an enabling tech like the NBN is totally worthless, because it cannot possibly value uses for the project that are unknown at this time. And there is nothing surer than the idea that there will be uses for the NBN that cannot be imagined today, just as today there are uses for electricity that were not imagined 100 years ago, uses for the copper that were not imagined 30 years ago, and even uses for the internet that were not imagined just 5 years ago.

It's not like doing a CBA on a road, because the chance that we'll suddenly discover a previously-unknown use for roads in the next 20 years is unlikely.

The other side of course is that the CBA compares tech that is currently available. Turnbull lamented that a CBA wasn't done by Labor. Yet if it had been, then the fast technologies Turnbull is now touting as part of his policy (Gfast, wholesaled HFC) did not exist, and therefore could not have been part of a ~2009 CBA in any case. A 2009 CBA could only have compared ~20Mbps FTTN to 100Mbps FTTP. Not the proposed ~50-100Mbps FTTN and 100-1000Mbps FTTP.


----------



## Tisme

I am so troubled I through out my Mum's old Astor wireless ( http://nostalgicwireless.com.au/?p=147 ). If I'd kept it I would be 100% internet ready for the Turnbull NBN. 

Malcolm must be such a sentimentalist for the old times, a time when life was uncomplicated, when Menzies told us what we wanted for the good of empire and we happily obeyed. What would a country of people who farm sheep, wheat and iron ore want with an internet thingy that apparently Malcolm invented in the first place, but sold it as a passing fad.


----------



## drsmith

Myths,

Uses for a project that are unknown at this time are of little fundamental value. To suggest otherwise is to take on an enormous risk as demonstrated in practice on improvements in speed via copper over time as outlined in the last paragraph of your post.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Myths,
> 
> Uses for a project that are unknown at this time are of little fundamental value. To suggest otherwise is to take on an enormous risk as demonstrated in practice on improvements in speed via copper over time as outlined in the last paragraph of your post.




Those speed improvements are very much at the shorter cable lengths, so probably 25-30% of those on copper will likely not see much better than the 20-25Mbs that pre g.fast could provide.

So far the Govt has yet to release any speed results of customers at close to maximum cable distance - say 500M - though as yet Turnbull hasn't actually defined what the deigned maximum will be.

With no actual agreement with Telstra, no costing on owning / renting the copper network, how do you say the MTM is cheaper?  NBN and Telstra are spending millions in the high court over $200M, so it's not hard to imagine Telstra fighting tooth and nail for a much larger pot of money.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Myths,
> 
> Uses for a project that are unknown at this time are of little fundamental value. To suggest otherwise is to take on an enormous risk as demonstrated in practice on improvements in speed via copper over time as outlined in the last paragraph of your post.




With an attitude like that, nothing would ever get built. You must make some assumptions, based on what you do know. And what you *know* is that since the internet was first invented, new uses requiring ever higher bandwidth have been developed incessantly. What you *know* is that internet speeds have increased 10000% in the last 10 years. What you do *know* is that average user volume has doubled every 6 months for a decade, and shows no sign of slowing.

Only a fool would build a broadband network to meet the needs of today.


The cost of rolling out the copper network was (in adjusted terms) about the same per connection as FTTP. But ~50-100 years ago, the only benefit was personal conversation.

~100 years ago, the only use for electricity was lighting.

There is no doubt that a CBA for copper now would be positive. But do you honestly think that a CBA which could only have valued _personal conversation_ and _lighting_, would have recommended the spending of tens or hundreds of billions rolling out the electricity and telephone grids (respectively) in their time?

As for the enormous risk.... But it isn't enormous, and there is risk both ways. No matter the improvements in copper, fibre is still (and will always be) faster (basic physics). The only 'risk' is the _additional cost_ of doing fibre v copper, which (according to the Coalition's original and CBA reports) comes to (at worst) $14bn. On the other side, the risk is that the MTM will only have a useful life of ~10 years before needing an FTTP upgrade, which would cost far more than $14bn to rectify.


----------



## drsmith

On the topic of risk, there's a risk Labor's FTTP wouldn't have been built in 10 years.


----------



## Smurf1976

NBNMyths said:


> There is no doubt that a CBA for copper now would be positive. But do you honestly think that a CBA which could only have valued _personal conversation_ and _lighting_, would have recommended the spending of tens or hundreds of billions rolling out the electricity and telephone grids (respectively) in their time?




Back in 1914, 100 years ago, the Australian Government issued a very dire warning to the Tasmanian state government to the effect that under no circumstances would the state be bailed out financially should its' electricity venture fail. Noted in particular was that only one significant consumer of electricity, a zinc smelter, existed and that in the event that business failed there was unlikely to be an alternative use for large amounts of electricity.

25 years later the whole thing was deemed of sufficient importance at the national level to warrant it's own defence patrols and even an army of sorts lest someone tried to bomb it during WWII.

50 years later approximately 1 in every 5 jobs in the state were directly due to energy-intensive industry and the generation of electricity.

100 years later and the zinc works is still in operation and it's still the state's largest overseas exporter and second largest energy user. And needless to say, plenty of other uses of electricity have emerged over the past century too. And despite the warnings, the state never went broke owning a business that makes a profit.

A key difference with the internet however is the pace of development. 20 years ago, few people had ever used the internet or even really understood what it was. It is now almost as essential to modern life as electricity or transport, having displaced or radically altered many other industries in that time. In contrast, neither electricity nor motor cars achieved anywhere near that level of impact in the first 20 years of commercial usage.


----------



## Tisme

Anyone picked up on how the audit estimates the cost to taxpayer was net $20bn ish, while before the election the LNP told us hand on heart they had independent costings of $70bn ish?

Does that mean the projected deficit, with interest, was way too ambitious?


----------



## So_Cynical

The CBA is a joke, told us nothing we didn't already know, im sure we were all surprised that rural connections would be more expensive to roll out than urban fibre, i like the bit about future proofing the NBN by not committing to any one technology  because not going with the best proven technology is future proofing.


----------



## SirRumpole

Tisme said:


> Anyone picked up on how the audit estimates the cost to taxpayer was net $20bn ish, while before the election the LNP told us hand on heart they had independent costings of $70bn ish?
> 
> Does that mean the projected deficit, with interest, was way too ambitious?




In an election period, anything goes. Wasn't Malcolm saying $96 bn  maximum cost of the ALP's NBN ?


----------



## Tisme

And they wonder why the population is cynical about the "debt crisis".

I was really looking forward to the various LNP govts reducing red tape and throwing out the myriad of Gillard/Rudd laws that basically turned us all into public servants (public servants know they are getting into a paperwork nightmare, scrutiny and stringent procedures). Instead little Napoleons like Campbell Newman and his boy blunder have elevated big brother and cronyism to all time highs.

No wonder Clive is attracting a large vote.


----------



## sydboy007

Some interesting reading material

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco2/documents/fttn-construction-fact-sheet.pdf

How Big is the Cabinet?
The cabinets being supplied by Alcatel-Lucent are, in their words, the smallest possible to minimise visual impact. The actual size is 850mm wide x 1150mm high x 500mm deep and are planned to be installed on a concrete plinth that is expected to sit a few centimetres above the ground. Each cabinet can support up to 384 lines

I'll be interested to see how they're able to fit the above where the pillars are in my area.  Considering there's already little space to walk off the road it's going to be a very tight fit .

The fact sheet states that NBN Co is “using Alcatel-Lucent ISAM 7330 VDSL2 Vectoring hardware.” Each cabinet can support 384 lines and that FTTN nodes “can be installed on the street near the [existing Telstra] pillar to house new broadband equipment and enable the physical connection to existing copper in the pillar.”

The existing Telstra telecommunication pillars are “dome-topped metal cylinders that contain connections to copper services for around 200 premises.” What this means is the FTTN cabinets could be only 60 per cent utilised, and this adds up to a significant under-utilisation and cost blow-out for a national FTTN rollout.

There is a degree of optionality with the nodes, but it is still quite likely there will be an high level of underutilisation.  

It will also be interesting to see how they are provisioning the back-haul back to the NBN POI.  The ISAM 7330 supports up to 8 * gig-e lines.  That should be plenty of capacity to ensure congestion is minimised IF it's used.  The problem is it starts to get expensive for every extra gig-e port you use as it will be a separate fibre for each port used.  It might have been cheaper to have moved to 10G to minimise the fibre rollout costs.

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_vows_to_use_telstra_rivals_NobsOfoYxzbtJHt5Z7KEKM

Just so no one thinks we're seeing Telstra moving back as the spider in the centre of the web pulling the strings of the telco industry.


----------



## So_Cynical

games.on.net said:
			
		

> The sixth (!) review of the National Broadband Network is now complete, and the results are in: *by 2023, the average Australian household should only need 15 Mbps.*




http://games.on.net/2014/08/15-mbps...australian-household-according-to-nbn-review/

The beauty of a CBA that makes such blatantly stupid claims is that the Nolaition can later distance itself from such stupidity by saying that it was the opinion/conclusion of the CBA experts...thus shifting blame.

They demand a CBA, appoint (hand pick) the panel, implement the findings then distance themselves from any negative repercussions.


----------



## sydboy007

http://www.itnews.com.au/Feature/391548,nbn-cba-proves-turnbulls-mtm-is-fraudband.aspx

1. Your bandwidth needs will decrease over time – and Malcolm Turnbull will tell you how much you need

According to Turnbull’s cost-benefit analysis, in 2023 – that’s less than 10 years’ time - the bandwidth requirements of the median household will be 15 Mbps. 

Yet as noted in the report itself, NBN Co figures show that 57.8 percent of NBN fibre-connected premises have already taken up speed bands of 25 Mbps or higher.

Even if one were to try and dismiss these take-up rates as reflective of early adopters electing the highest speed packages, the even more recent figures in the NBN Co annual report 2013-14 belies this. 

As at 30 June 2014, the average speed ordered and provisioned across all fibre end-users was 36 Mbps. Early adopters could account for the slight decrease in average speed of 3 Mbps in the previous year, but there the explanation ends. 

It is impossible to reconcile the assumptions of a cost-benefit analysis which purports a bandwidth requirement in the next decade which is less than half that of today’s reality.

And don’t forget, this is coming from a bloke who stood next to his leader when he announced on 9 April 2013: “[We] are absolutely confident that 25 megs is going to be enough, more than enough, for the average household.”

Maybe that’s the reason why Turnbull denies he has broken any promises, including this one made the very same day:

“Under the Coalition, by 2016…there will be minimum download speeds of 25 megabits… We will deliver a minimum of 25 megabits…by the end of our first term.”  

After all, you’re only going to need 15 Mbps, so who’ll even notice?


----------



## NBNMyths

Yes, written by a Labor MP. But he's right on the money. 

https://www.businessspectator.com.a...logy/turnbulls-nbn-vision-has-no-future-sight

Some highlights:

_*Turnbull's NBN vision has no future in sight*

For all the complexity of the great debate over the national broadband network, the arguments boil down to two world views:

We have those who say yes, invest now, because all the evidence points to exponentially increasing requirements for fast broadband. They recognise that if you’re reacting to the here and now, you’re too late; 
...
Then we have the naysayers who want the broadband equivalent of replacing gas flames with electric lights on our streets.
...
Turnbull’s plan is the equivalent of building a one-lane highway when you know three lanes are going to be needed in a few years’ time. It will be cost-effective this year and efficient next year, but out of date as soon as an election is out of the way.

Why?  Because Turnbull wants to incorporate Telstra’s old copper network into the NBN. In fact he boasts he’s negotiated with Telstra to acquire the copper network at “zero cost”. 

This is the same 80-year-old network that Telstra’s own regulatory guru Tony Warren described as being “five minutes to midnight” in terms of its useful life at a Senate Committee hearing 11 years ago in 2003.
....
*It beggars belief that Turnbull will build Australia’s vital telecommunications future on a technology that frequently ceases to work when it rains! *_


----------



## ghotib

This article http://www.businessspectator.com.au.../what-nbn-cost-benefit-review-doesnt-tell-you seems to leave the Vertigan cost benefit analysis floating somewhere between Utopia and LaLa Land. 



> The relationships between total network and link capacity, traffic class management, upload speeds and symmetric transmission requirements are not adequately covered in the CBA. Neither are the operational and maintenance costs, new applications and consumer expectations





> Let’s not forget that FTTP connections provide the advertised speed while FTTN connections provide “up to” the advertised speed and often less than 25 per cent of FTTN connections will achieve a speed between 75 and 100 per cent of the advertised speed (CBA page 189).





> The relationships between total network and link capacity, traffic class management, upload speeds and symmetric transmission requirements are not adequately covered in the CBA. Neither are the operational and maintenance costs, new applications and consumer expectations.




I can't tell how solid this critique really is. What do people who know about the technology think of it? Or of the CBA?


----------



## sydboy007

ghotib said:


> This article http://www.businessspectator.com.au.../what-nbn-cost-benefit-review-doesnt-tell-you seems to leave the Vertigan cost benefit analysis floating somewhere between Utopia and LaLa Land.
> 
> I can't tell how solid this critique really is. What do people who know about the technology think of it? Or of the CBA?




_The relationships between total network and link capacity, traffic class management, upload speeds and symmetric transmission requirements are not adequately covered in the CBA. Neither are the operational and maintenance costs, new applications and consumer expectations_

The focus has been on download speeds, yet migration to the cloud will require much higher upload speeds than we currently have.  

Telstra copper maintenance costs somewhere between $500-1000M a year at present.  I'd argue proper maintenance is at the upper end of that figure as Telstra has not invested in the copper network for a very long time.

There's no analysis as to estimates on how much the cost of copper remediation will be.

_Let’s not forget that FTTP connections provide the advertised speed while FTTN connections provide “up to” the advertised speed and often less than 25 per cent of FTTN connections will achieve a speed between 75 and 100 per cent of the advertised speed (CBA page 189)._

The Govt has backed away from their pre election 25Mbs minimum guarantee.  NBN has been forced to back peddle from selling the 50Mbs and 100Mbs plans without adequately testing to ensure the customer is able to at least over 50Mbs on the top speed and close to the 50Mbs mark for the next tier.  The dreaded up to will be brought back into use as compared to FTTP which provides the speed you pay for.

We will also see with FTTN that someone who'd be willing to pay for a 100 Mbs wont be able to get that service because they're too far from the node.  Plenty of people are willing to pay for 50 / 100Mbs speed tiers at present so this will be a reasonably significant issue as the FTTN rollout occurs.


----------



## NBNMyths

We've been saying since before it was released that Malcolm's CBA was worthless. Now the man Mal appointed to head NBN Co has dismissed some of the key planks on which the CBA is based, namely that 15Mbps will be sufficient for most users in 2023, and that only 5% of users will need 43Mbps by 2023.

Mr Morrow says 15Mbps isn't enough for his family TODAY, and NBN figures reveal that over half of NBN customers already choose speeds of >25Mbps, and 28% are already choosing 50-100Mbps.

How can anyone take seriously a report that predicts broadband demand will be lower in 9 years than it is today?


http://www.jasonclare.com.au/media/...-thinks-malcolms-mates-report-is-rubbish.html


----------



## sptrawler

NBNMyths said:


> We've been saying since before it was released that Malcolm's CBA was worthless. Now the man Mal appointed to head NBN Co has dismissed some of the key planks on which the CBA is based, namely that 15Mbps will be sufficient for most users in 2023, and that only 5% of users will need 43Mbps by 2023.
> 
> Mr Morrow says 15Mbps isn't enough for his family TODAY, and NBN figures reveal that over half of NBN customers already choose speeds of >25Mbps, and 28% are already choosing 50-100Mbps.
> 
> How can anyone take seriously a report that predicts broadband demand will be lower in 9 years than it is today?
> 
> 
> http://www.jasonclare.com.au/media/...-thinks-malcolms-mates-report-is-rubbish.html




I think, from experience, what you think will happen and what actually happens will be poles appart.
And I'm not talking about demand.


----------



## NBNMyths

On the topic of demand...

I hadn't seen this before, but research has been done to test the takeup of Google Fiber in Kansas. A city that already has "high speed" FTTN and HFC broadband available.

Yet, between 27% and 83% (low-high socioeconomic areas respectively) of passed premises have taken up Google's 1Gbps FTTP service.


....But _we'll_ only want 15Mbps in a decade....


----------



## NBNMyths

sptrawler said:


> I think, from experience, what you think will happen and what actually happens will be poles appart.
> And I'm not talking about demand.




Are you implying that Mal's NBN will be faster than promised, or use more FTTP?


----------



## drsmith

Kansas City 1gb $70/month.

https://fiber.google.com/cities/kansascity/plans/#plan=gigabit


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Kansas City 1gb $70/month.
> 
> https://fiber.google.com/cities/kansascity/plans/#plan=gigabit




Yes, it's cheaper than our broadband. But it's comparatively expensive in their market, where unlimited FTTN/HFC is ~$50/month.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Yes, it's cheaper than our broadband. But it's comparatively expensive in their market, where unlimited FTTN/HFC is ~$50/month.



Their plans appear to be cheaper across the board and hence more affordable. 

----------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile, NBN Co board member Simon Hackett has released another presentation,



> Rebooting the NBN: (Personal) Reflections on the journey thus far
> 
> Posted on September 6, 2014
> 
> On 4th September 2014 I delivered a talk at the AusNOG 2014 technology conference in Sydney about the NBN called “Rebooting the NBN: (Personal) Reflections on the journey thus far”.




http://simonhackett.com/2014/09/06/rebooting-the-nbn/#more-1633

On matters re-recent rollout stats, there's also this,

http://www.zdnet.com/au/clean-up-job-stops-nbn-rollout-stats-showing-the-full-picture-7000033237/


----------



## DB008

drsmith said:


> Their plans appear to be cheaper across the board and hence more affordable.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------
> 
> Meanwhile, NBN Co board member Simon Hackett has released another presentation,
> 
> 
> 
> http://simonhackett.com/2014/09/06/rebooting-the-nbn/#more-1633
> 
> On matters re-recent rollout stats, there's also this,
> 
> http://www.zdnet.com/au/clean-up-job-stops-nbn-rollout-stats-showing-the-full-picture-7000033237/




Great to hear some 'truth' from Simon Hackett regarding the NBN and rollout and maps. Shows how much the ALP lied to the public.


----------



## NBNMyths

http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/gov...ooner-pilot-results-show-20140905-10cgdg.html

*NBN fibre rollout was going to be cheaper, sooner, pilot results show*

Some highlights:

_Labor's all-fibre national broadband network could have been delivered faster and for less money than originally forecast, according to the confidential results of a  pilot study completed last month.

The pilot took into account design changes formulated by network builder, NBN Co, last year as then chief executive Mike Quigley undertook a substantial review of the project and identified initiatives to reduce its cost and length.

The evaluation, contained in an internal presentation document dated August 2014 and seen by Fairfax Media, shows a team combining telecommunications firms Cemetrix, CommsConnect and Linktech Telecom was on track to complete the Melton rollout in just 104 days, compared with an average of 344 days in other areas.

Ninety per cent of buildings were serviceable by fibre by the end of August - *61 per cent faster and 50 per cent more cheaply than in areas* using previous rollout models, the document said.

Boring, trenching, pit installation, cable hauling and other building work were being completed between *22 per cent to 400 per cent faster* than the average by using new procedures including thinner and lighter cables, visiting premises only once and better managing contractor relationships.

The results confirm Labor's NBN was improving in the lead-up to the election, a point Mr Quigley had pressed in a speech to industry group TelSoc in December.
_



I wonder why Mal has kept this under wraps?


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> I wonder why Mal has kept this under wraps?



I feel sorry for Mike Quigley. He had to try and ride Stephen Conroy's one trick pony with red underpants on his head. 

You will have noted that Simon Hackett in the above presentation offers his own views in the state the rollout (and NBN Co itself) was in under Labor and how the organisation is being reconfigured to be more flexible, both to be able to respond to technological and political change.   

The dates in the above Fairfax story make that report look very recent.


----------



## IFocus

Why would the Australian oppose fibre roll out so fiercely...........oh thats why


Foxtel cuts prices amid new competition 



> Foxtel is facing unprecedented pressure to cut prices and boost content because of the growing availability of cheaper alternatives delivered over the internet.
> 
> US giant Netflix, which is not officially available in Australia, is thought to have some 200,000 Australian subscribers, each of whom can access TV and videos on demand for as little as $US10 ($A10.82) per month.



Foxtel is also facing a host of other new competitors. 



http://www.perthnow.com.au/business...-new-competition/story-fnhohek5-1227047817264


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> I feel sorry for Mike Quigley. He had to try and ride Stephen Conroy's one trick pony with red underpants on his head.
> 
> You will have noted that Simon Hackett in the above presentation offers his own views in the state the rollout (and NBN Co itself) was in under Labor and how the organisation is being reconfigured to be more flexible, both to be able to respond to technological and political change.
> 
> The dates in the above Fairfax story make that report look very recent.




You also would have noted the many times Simon has mentioned he believes we should be building the FTTP and it's the superior network. The good thing seemed to be that NBN co would seem well prepared to switch to a full FTTP model for the remaining network if Labor took that policy to the next election and won. It's an interesting mess that he goes into about TPG running fibre to the basement in MDUs, MT didn't really think that one through. 

The worst part is that the strategic review took none of that data from NBN Myths link into consideration even though it was available.  They used the figure of 2k a premises to connect even though before these changes the figure was $1200-$1500.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> You also would have noted the many times Simon has mentioned he believes we should be building the FTTP and it's the superior network. The good thing seemed to be that NBN co would seem well prepared to switch to a full FTTP model for the remaining network if Labor took that policy to the next election and won. It's an interesting mess that he goes into about TPG running fibre to the basement in MDUs, MT didn't really think that one through.
> 
> The worst part is that the strategic review took none of that data from NBN Myths link into consideration even though it was available.  They used the figure of 2k a premises to connect even though before these changes the figure was $1200-$1500.



IIRC, he said FTTP would cost $60bn so the point he was making was that FTTP is the superior network if cost is no object. 

The fact that NBN Co is being structured to move with the tech demonstrates that under this government, there's much less political interference than the previous government's and its one trick pony option.

As for TPG, who's legislation was responsible for that ?

http://delimiter.com.au/2013/09/17/screw-nbn-says-tpg-well-fttb/

The above article is dated 17/9/2013 whereas the Abbott Government was sworn in on the 18/9/2013.

With regard to the Fairfax article Myths has linked, the dates look very recent as I have previously noted.


----------



## drsmith

DB008 said:


> Great to hear some 'truth' from Simon Hackett regarding the NBN and rollout and maps. Shows how much the ALP lied to the public.



He even mentioned something about a napkin.

Overall, it remains something the true believers are very keen to overlook.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The slides from Simon Hackett's above presentation,

https://simonhackett.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/ausnog14-nbn-hackett.pdf


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

NBNMyths said:


> http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/gov...ooner-pilot-results-show-20140905-10cgdg.html
> 
> *NBN fibre rollout was going to be cheaper, sooner, pilot results show*
> 
> Some highlights:
> 
> _Labor's all-fibre national broadband network could have been delivered faster and for less money than originally forecast, according to the confidential results of a  pilot study completed last month.
> 
> The pilot took into account design changes formulated by network builder, NBN Co, last year as then chief executive Mike Quigley undertook a substantial review of the project and identified initiatives to reduce its cost and length.
> 
> The evaluation, contained in an internal presentation document dated August 2014 and seen by Fairfax Media, shows a team combining telecommunications firms Cemetrix, CommsConnect and Linktech Telecom was on track to complete the Melton rollout in just 104 days, compared with an average of 344 days in other areas.
> 
> Ninety per cent of buildings were serviceable by fibre by the end of August - *61 per cent faster and 50 per cent more cheaply than in areas* using previous rollout models, the document said.
> 
> Boring, trenching, pit installation, cable hauling and other building work were being completed between *22 per cent to 400 per cent faster* than the average by using new procedures including thinner and lighter cables, visiting premises only once and better managing contractor relationships.
> 
> The results confirm Labor's NBN was improving in the lead-up to the election, a point Mr Quigley had pressed in a speech to industry group TelSoc in December.
> _
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder why Mal has kept this under wraps?




This post hoc analysis bears little credence.

The conditions set, at the beginning of the trial, and the subsequent projections made, would make a witch looking in to her bubbles more credible. 

Please desist from un-enlightening massage of effort and result. 

I despair sometimes of my fellow Australians' nous at running trials and making strategic decisions of the results. 

The NBN was and remains a timely reminder that politicians need a good and vigorous public service to prevent them from beggaring us all.

gg


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> IIRC, he said FTTP would cost $60bn so the point he was making was that FTTP is the superior network if cost is no object.
> 
> The fact that NBN Co is being structured to move with the tech demonstrates that under this government, there's much less political interference than the previous government's and its one trick pony option.
> 
> As for TPG, who's legislation was responsible for that ?
> 
> http://delimiter.com.au/2013/09/17/screw-nbn-says-tpg-well-fttb/
> 
> The above article is dated 17/9/2013 whereas the Abbott Government was sworn in on the 18/9/2013.
> 
> With regard to the Fairfax article Myths has linked, the dates look very recent as I have previously noted.




Well I don't recall him ever saying it would cost 60 billion but I do concede he made the point that with unlimited funds FTTP would be the way to go but with limited resources available then we would have to make do with a mixed network.

It's a little early to say that there is less political interference going on given MT sacked most the existing board, we would probably need someone who has been on both boards to give us insight on which one had less political interference but Hacketts words certainly portray the current board in good light.

Did you read the article you linked? 







> Under the previous Labor administration, it is unlikely that TPG would have been allowed to pursue its FTTB plans, given that Labor’s policy would have prohibited private operators from overbuilding the NBN in most cases



No this one is well and truly MT's problem.


----------



## Knobby22

Does anyone know whether you can pay to get the fibre run to the home if you wish?


----------



## overhang

Knobby22 said:


> Does anyone know whether you can pay to get the fibre run to the home if you wish?




In Simon Hacketts presentation that Dr Smith linked he indicates they will be able to provide fibre on demand for any business or house that would like to pay for FTTP.  He mentions that they'll look at charging people what it would cost to run the fibre x distance to x point on a case by case basis, similar to those building in new areas that require the power to be ran to their house. So it seems if you lived beside the node it would be a bit cheaper than if you were 150m away.


----------



## Knobby22

Thanks.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> Well I don't recall him ever saying it would cost 60 billion but I do concede he made the point that with unlimited funds FTTP would be the way to go but with limited resources available then we would have to make do with a mixed network.



I listened to part of it again last night and the context of the $60b he mentioned was essentially a reference to unlimited financial resources rather than the cost.



overhang said:


> It's a little early to say that there is less political interference going on given MT sacked most the existing board, we would probably need someone who has been on both boards to give us insight on which one had less political interference but Hacketts words certainly portray the current board in good light.



They've been given a budget and a timeframe and the adaptability to mix technologies as they evolve over time. I'm not necessarily saying there's no political interference, but on that alone, it's clearly not what existed under the napkin and Stephen Conroy's red underpants.

With regard to the former board, Simon made it clear there wasn't the right mix of experience for the project and that it was essentially a train wreck.



overhang said:


> Did you read the article you linked?
> No this one is well and truly MT's problem.



It was an oversight on Labor's part and only MT's issue now only by virtue of the fact that Labor was booted out at the last election.


----------



## sydboy007

http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...tbenefit-analysis-report-20140907-10dqu0.html

The dotted straight lines in the chart are the projected average download and upload speeds from 2013 to 2023, extracted from graphs on Pages 55 and 57 of the Communications Chambers report as supplied to the Vertigan Panel. Communications Chambers obtained their data by statistically analysing the usage patterns of a variety of known applications in a variety of household types. The data point indicated with an asterisk is the Communications Chambers 15 Mbps prediction for 2023 that found its way into the Vertigan report.

*Amazingly, this 15 Mbps prediction for 2023 is less than Ookla's reported actual average download speed in Australia, today, in September 2014 (16 Mbps).*

In other words, Communication Chambers is saying the rapid growth in internet access speed that we have seen in recent years is about to suddenly come to an abrupt end and there is no need for any increase in download speeds in Australia for the next nine years. This defies logic, and it's a mystery why the Vertigan panel didn't ask Communications Chambers to check the calculations and fix the data.

Serious flaws in the Vertigan report
But what happens if we use my projections of real bandwidth growth rather than the highly questionable Communication Chambers data? If we multiply my projected average download speed of 34 Mbps by the three-times ratio used by Vertigan between high-end users and average users, we find that high-end users will require download speeds of 102 Mbps. If I replace my conservative linear projection by an exponential projection, the required download speed for high-end users will be more than 200 Mbps. A FTTN network cannot provide these speeds; a FTTP network can.

*The Vertigan report includes a sensitivity analysis that shows an FTTP network can provide a better net cost-benefit outcome than a FTTN network if the growth in bandwidth demand is higher than used in their analysis. If they had used realistic data for growth in demand, their cost-benefit analysis may well have shown that a FTTP network will provide Australia with the best long-term value for money.*


----------



## Tisme

Getting the maths wrong is always going to be a possibility when the answer is cast in stone by the person requesting the report. 

They wouldn't have the problem of rubbery calcs if Peter Costello had been asked to do it. He managed to get the exact same debt figure the QLD Govt letter of appointment asked him to verify and he included lots of references to Standard and Poor. Of course his was easy :-

he merely took the known level of liabilities and owner's equity and devalued the state's assets to whatever it needed to be come up with the debt figure.... $2m fee doesn't get much these days. This of course was at odds with the detailed $173bn asset surplus the Comm Govt Finance dept had on it's books. Some say the LNP don't tell the truth, but why would they tell fibs?


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> It was an oversight on Labor's part and only MT's issue now only by virtue of the fact that Labor was booted out at the last election.




Not sure how you come to that conclusion unless you mean it was an oversight by Labor to expect fibre to be run to each premises inside the MDU which was their initial plan I believe.  But I think it's pretty obvious that TPG's plan was a direct result of the Coalition's botched NBN plan otherwise why would they wait until just before they election to make the announcement and not the years before?   TPG wouldn't have made this plan if this train wreck of a mix technology excuse for an NBN ever took place.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> Not sure how you come to that conclusion unless you mean it was an oversight by Labor to expect fibre to be run to each premises inside the MDU which was their initial plan I believe.




http://www.itnews.com.au/News/375418,tpg-lobbies-govt-to-keep-fttb-loophole.aspx



> *TPG's plan exploits a loophole in anti-cherry picking legislation introduced by the former Labor Government*, laws which were designed to protect the NBN from private operators looking to build or upgrade fibre-to-the-premises (FTTP), fibre-to-the-node (FTTN) or hybrid fibre-coaxial (HFC) networks in low-cost, high-density areas.
> 
> TPG is able to fall back on exemptions to the legislation by either limiting extensions to existing networks (built before January 2011) to less than 1km, limiting speeds offered on the service to under 24 Mbps, or allowing wholesale access to others to offer retail services on the network.




My bolds.


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> http://www.itnews.com.au/News/375418,tpg-lobbies-govt-to-keep-fttb-loophole.aspx
> 
> 
> 
> My bolds.




Fair enough.  I still think TPG wouldn't have made this move if it wasn't for the dogs breakfast NBN the coalition plan on delivering.


----------



## drsmith

Garpal Gumnut said:


> This post hoc analysis bears little credence.



Picked like a nose. From NBN Co today,



> Late Friday afternoon we were approached by a journalist seeking a response to what he claimed were the "confidential results of a pilot study" undertaken by NBN Co in an area containing 2484 homes and businesses in Melton in Victoria.
> 
> This 'study', the reporter informed us, purported to show that the old all-fibre NBN could be rolled out in its entirety much sooner and far less expensively than had previously been envisaged. The implication of all this was that, if this study was true, then it was unnecessary to have to transition the NBN to the multi-technology mix.
> 
> The story duly appeared in Fairfax publications the following morning and it was carried widely on social media. Except there was one small problem: the work underway in Melton delivered no such conclusions.




http://nbnco.com.au/corporate-infor...es/two-sides-to-every-story.html#.VA2NHG8cRaS



NBNMyths said:


> http://www.theage.com.au/it-pro/gov...ooner-pilot-results-show-20140905-10cgdg.html
> 
> *NBN fibre rollout was going to be cheaper, sooner, pilot results show*



It's never too late to adopt a little pragmatism. 

Without it, you're only going to find the shrine of Stephen Conroy an increasingly lonely place.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...tbenefit-analysis-report-20140907-10dqu0.html



Apologies if you feel like I've left you out. 

The intention is to deliver more than 15mb/s.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

A question for those who insist on war dancing around the soiled red underpants of Stephen Conroy till doomsday,



> NBN Co board member Simon Hackett last week said that NBN Co's structure changes under the new management and board would allow the company to weather changes in government policy, and potentially switch back to a full fibre-to-the-premises rollout if a future government mandated it.




Under which government is NBN Co being allowed to adopt this more flexible approach with choice of technology ?

http://www.zdnet.com/au/nbn-co-denies-claims-of-cost-saving-fibre-pilot-study-7000033404/


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> Under which government is NBN Co being allowed to adopt this more flexible approach with choice of technology ?
> 
> http://www.zdnet.com/au/nbn-co-denies-claims-of-cost-saving-fibre-pilot-study-7000033404/




More flexable, half arsed approach...as Hackett clear states, the NBN board is there to implement policy, good or bad.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Apologies if you feel like I've left you out.
> 
> The intention is to deliver more than 15mb/s.
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> A question for those who insist on war dancing around the soiled red underpants of Stephen Conroy till doomsday,
> 
> 
> 
> Under which government is NBN Co being allowed to adopt this more flexible approach with choice of technology ?
> 
> http://www.zdnet.com/au/nbn-co-denies-claims-of-cost-saving-fibre-pilot-study-7000033404/




Intention is fine, but they've dropped reference to any minimum speed guarantee.

You've disregarded the fact that the rubbery figures the govt is using to prove FTTN is cheaper are based on slower average speeds than currently available along with a speed increase freeze till 2023. If figures based more on the kind of growth experienced for the last decade had been used it's likely FTTP would have been the preferred technology.

The fact the network is now a lot more complex and harder to support is also glossed over.


----------



## drsmith

On matters rubbery figures,

http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...tbenefit-analysis-report-20140907-10dqu0.html



> Amazingly, this 15 Mbps prediction for 2023 is less than Ookla's reported actual average download speed in Australia, today, in September 2014 (16 Mbps).
> 
> In other words, Communication Chambers is saying the rapid growth in internet access speed that we have seen in recent years is about to suddenly come to an abrupt end and there is no need for any increase in download speeds in Australia for the next nine years. This defies logic, and it's a mystery why the Vertigan panel didn't ask Communications Chambers to check the calculations and fix the data.




The graphic from which the above conclusion is drawn is below.

The problem with the above conclusion is that it's drawn from comparing two different parameters, a measure of availability (solid blue line) and a measure of demand (dashed blue line).

For further information, the measure of availability is outlined on page 103 of the CBA and the measure of demand is outlined on page 34. 

http://www.communications.gov.au/__...enefit_Analysis_-_FINAL_-_For_Publication.pdf


----------



## Tisme

I visited a block of flats being refurbished in Hendra today and was in awe at the install methods the NBNco had employed to get the light pipes into each apartment.

It started with a 65mm plastic pipe coming from the Telstra pit , which ran under the cattle grate of the driveway drain, under the lawn and up the front the building, where it split off Foxtel fashion as black cables running in the corner of the soffit and wall, with some Ozzieduct here and there finally finding a home in one of those grey polycarbonate Foxtel style boxes.

I'm fairly sure the B in NBN is not meant to be "bodge", but I must say I'm impressed at how well they are keeping up with a third world country quality install.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Picked like a nose. From NBN Co today,
> 
> 
> 
> http://nbnco.com.au/corporate-infor...es/two-sides-to-every-story.html#.VA2NHG8cRaS
> 
> 
> It's never too late to adopt a little pragmatism.
> 
> Without it, you're only going to find the shrine of Stephen Conroy an increasingly lonely place.




The PR from NBN Co is written far more like a statement from Turnbull than from a corporate media type. Heavy on rhetoric and light on details. But let's take a look anyway...

*Strawman:*
NBN Co say _



			"The efficiencies that our construction crews had applied to construction in Melton - such as smaller diameter cables and smaller multiports (or splitters) - are already being employed in the NBN build across Australia."
		
Click to expand...


_
Yes. The Fairfax article implies that. Specifically it says 







> "The pilot took into account design changes formulated by network builder, NBN Co, *last year* as then chief executive Mike Quigley..... "



 and 







> The results confirm Labor's NBN was improving in the lead-up to the election, a point Mr Quigley had pressed in a speech to industry group TelSoc in December.




*Red Herrings:*
NBN Co say: 







> _"For instance, it's well known that it is costly and time consuming to deliver the fibre NBN to office blocks and apartments. Entire buildings have to be rewired. Yet in this particular part of Melton there are fewer than 25 tall buildings (or "multi dwelling units" in NBN jargon)."_




Yet the vast majority of the fibre footprint would be the same. I would hazard a guess that most outer suburban and regional areas have zero MDUs fitting the above 'definition'. Certainly in my suburb, other than a few SEPP5 developments (ie single level ~10 units per premises) there are no MDUs. Even the huge growth areas of western Sydney, for example, only have a handful of tall buildings compared to the number of detached or semi-detached dwellings.

NBN Co say: 







> "Further, our construction crews tell us there have been rollouts elsewhere in Victoria which cost less per premises and which have suffered fewer defects and had fewer design variations."




Great, so FTTP can be even cheaper than the (undenied) 50% improvement in Melton!

Additionally, I note that the NBN statement fails to deny numerous other figures/advantages listed in the Fairfax article. If fairfax only gave one side of the story, NBN Co's 'comeback' only gave 20% of the other side....


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> On matters rubbery figures,
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...tbenefit-analysis-report-20140907-10dqu0.html
> 
> The graphic from which the above conclusion is drawn is below.
> 
> The problem with the above conclusion is that it's drawn from comparing two different parameters, a measure of availability (solid blue line) and a measure of demand (dashed blue line).
> 
> For further information, the measure of availability is outlined on page 103 of the CBA and the measure of demand is outlined on page 34.
> 
> http://www.communications.gov.au/__...enefit_Analysis_-_FINAL_-_For_Publication.pdf




The demand predictions by _Communication Chambers_ (run by Turnbull's mates, BTW) are significantly out of step with pretty much everyone else in the industry. No-one in their right mind could possibly think that bandwidth demand in 10 years will be lower than actual speeds today. Yet that's what commcham and the CBA want you to believe. 

For a start, they based all their demand predictions around HDTV (and compressed at double the current best-standard), even though 4kTV is now available, and 8kTV is just around the corner. Do they really think that there will be zero uptake of 4kTV over the next decade, even though we went from zero to massive downloading of HD content in the last 5 years, and huge 4kTVs are now within reach of middle-class incomes?

They also make zero assumption for any unknown use for broadband whatsoever, even though history tells us that new uses arrive on a regular basis. It would be naive to think that all uses for broadband have now arrived.

Your attempt to differentiate between figures for _demand_ and _availability_ is highly questionable, because demand very closely follows availability. It always has, and there's no reason to think that will change.

Also, the Ookla current figures are not precisely _availability_, they are actual speeds achieved. For example, if a person has an NBN connection, but have only chosen a 12/1 plan, then their speed will be shown as 12, not 100. I would suggest they more accurately resemble _demand_, because they show the speed people have actually chosen, although that is tempered by the fact than some people have no choice of the tech or speed available to them.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> The demand predictions by _Communication Chambers_ (run by Turnbull's mates, BTW) are significantly out of step with pretty much everyone else in the industry. No-one in their right mind could possibly think that bandwidth demand in 10 years will be lower than actual speeds today. Yet that's what commcham and the CBA want you to believe.
> 
> For a start, they based all their demand predictions around HDTV (and compressed at double the current best-standard), even though 4kTV is now available, and 8kTV is just around the corner. Do they really think that there will be zero uptake of 4kTV over the next decade, even though we went from zero to massive downloading of HD content in the last 5 years, and huge 4kTVs are now within reach of middle-class incomes?
> 
> They also make zero assumption for any unknown use for broadband whatsoever, even though history tells us that new uses arrive on a regular basis. It would be naive to think that all uses for broadband have now arrived.
> 
> Your attempt to differentiate between figures for _demand_ and _availability_ is highly questionable, because demand very closely follows availability. It always has, and there's no reason to think that will change.
> 
> Also, the Ookla current figures are not precisely _availability_, they are actual speeds achieved. For example, if a person has an NBN connection, but have only chosen a 12/1 plan, then their speed will be shown as 12, not 100. I would suggest they more accurately resemble _demand_, because they show the speed people have actually chosen, although that is tempered by the fact than some people have no choice of the tech or speed available to them.



When someone choses 12, that's obviously what they want, but that technicality aside, the two are different.



> Coalition's NBN speed forecasts are on the right track
> Robert Kenny |
> 8 hours ago |
> 8
> Technology|
> NBN Buzz|
> Telecommunication
> 
> The Vertigan Panel has, on behalf of the Government, recently published a cost benefit analysis of various approaches to the NBN. One input to their work was a forecast of Australian bandwidth needs prepared by my firm. We found that by 2023 the top five per cent of households would require at least 43 Mbps, and the median household would require 15 Mbps.
> 
> At first blush these numbers may seem low. But it’s worth remembering that most Australian households have just one or two people. A household where two people were both watching their own HDTV stream, each surfing the web and each having a video call all simultaneously, then (in part thanks to improving video compression) the total bandwidth for this somewhat extreme use case is just over 14Mbps in 2023.
> 
> Understanding future speed requirements is vital to planning the NBN, because if you need to provide very high speeds (over a 100 Mbps, say), then, with today’s technology at least, you need to deploy fibre-to-the-premises (FTTP), a much more expensive solution than fibre-to-the-cabinet. Perhaps surprisingly, given the criticality of this issue, ours was the first serious attempt to forecast Australian speed requirements. Billions have already been spent without such a forecast.
> 
> Given that our forecast calls into question the rationale for spending those billions, it is perhaps unsurprising that those who were instrumental in leading Australia down the path of an FTTP NBN have attacked our work. For instance, in a recent article Professor  Rodney Tucker claims that “it is simply wrong”.
> 
> Punting on past trends
> 
> The sole evidence he offers in his article for this claim is a comparison of our numbers to historic bandwidth numbers from Ookla, an internet measurement firm. The Ookla figures are (roughly) for capacity - the capability of the line in question. Our figures are for demand - how much a line is used. The two are completely different things, and to confuse the two is a gross error.
> 
> For example, Tucker uses the historic Ookla capacity trends to predict future needs for Australia. But in doing so he effectively says "because broadband speeds have been improving, we must need evermore speed in future". If you applied this logic to roads, you'd say "we've built some roads, therefore we must build some more roads", and before you know it, the entire country is covered with empty tarmac.
> 
> Bandwidth demand forecasts need to be much more subtle than this, not least because growth is likely to slow for a number of reasons. Once everyone in a household is online, more people can't create a need for more bandwidth; once people have devoted a certain number of hours per day to the internet, they won't have more time to give; video compression allows us to steadily reduce the bandwidth we need for a given video quality; video resolution can’t usefully outstrip the resolution of the human eye; and so on. Any serious attempt to forecast long term needs must take account of these effects. Simply punting on past trends (as Tucker does) just doesn't work - even if Tucker were looking at the right metric (which he isn't).
> 
> Too much faith in Ookla figures?
> 
> Tucker also claims that because our average number for 2023 is lower than the Ookla number for today, we are saying that "there is no need for any increase in download speeds". This is simply nonsense. Firstly, the Ookla numbers Tucker places such faith in are just not very accurate - they're based on a self-selected sample of people who happen to show up to do speed tests of their connection. In the UK there is accurate data from Ofcom (the regulator) of broadband speeds to compare to the Ookla figures. Over the last three years, Ookla's UK figures have, on average, overestimated by 54 per cent. In other words, the Ookla figures that Tucker uses for current Australian average bandwidth may be too optimistic, and current capacity much lower. Thus in reality our forecasts certainly would imply a need for an upgrade (though not to expensive FTTP).
> 
> Secondly (as Tucker himself acknowledges later in his article) we made it very clear in our forecast that networks shouldn't be built for the median user - by definition you'd be disappointing half the people if you did so. If you were building for (say) 95 per cent of users, our forecasts suggest you'd to roll out a network capable of providing 43 Mbps in 2023. Ookla's average line speed for Australia today is 16 Mbps. How Professor Tucker can look at those two figures and claim we're saying no increase is required is a mystery.
> 
> No-one is saying that broadband demand forecasting is easy or certain. As we said in our report, our forecast is "at best a mid-point projection", and we genuinely welcome a thoughtful debate. Sadly we're still waiting for that thoughtful debate to begin.
> 
> Robert Kenny is the co-founder of UK-based telecom consultancy Communications Chambers.




http://www.businessspectator.com.au...oalitions-nbn-speed-forecasts-are-right-track


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> When someone choses 12, that's obviously what they want, but that technicality aside, the two are different.
> 
> http://www.businessspectator.com.au...oalitions-nbn-speed-forecasts-are-right-track




Let me summarise your post:

_Robert Kenny_ of _Communications Chambers_ agrees totally with _Robert Kenny_ of _Communications Chambers_. 

It sounds like a quote from the 13th man!


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Additionally, I note that the NBN statement fails to deny numerous other figures/advantages listed in the Fairfax article. If fairfax only gave one side of the story, NBN Co's 'comeback' only gave 20% of the other side....



So, the latest war dance around Stephen Conroy's soiled red underpants is that NBN Co itself under the dark lord is now on the dark side.

Have you listened to Simon Hackett's recent presentation yet ?

More broadly, his view on how well the rollout was going under Labor isn't quiet as rosy as,



> The results confirm Labor's NBN was improving in the lead-up to the election, a point Mr Quigley had pressed in a speech to industry group TelSoc in December.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Let me summarise your post:
> 
> _Robert Kenny_ of _Communications Chambers_ agrees totally with _Robert Kenny_ of _Communications Chambers_.
> 
> It sounds like a quote from the 13th man!



What about the points he makes ?

Let me guess,

Dark side too.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> So, the latest war dance around Stephen Conroy's soiled red underpants is that NBN Co itself under the dark lord is now on the dark side.
> 
> Have you listened to Simon Hackett's recent presentation yet ?
> 
> More broadly, his view on how well the rollout was going under Labor isn't quiet as rosy as,




It stands to reason, does it not, that the attitude of NBN Co reflects the wishes and direction of the 'owner' (ie the minister), and his appointed board? You didn't believe NBN Co's statements under ALP 'rule', why would you expect me to believe them now?

No. I've read pieces, but haven't listened to the whole thing yet.



drsmith said:


> What about the points he makes ?
> 
> Let me guess,
> 
> Dark side too.




I thought I addressed his points quite well in my previous post. Robert Kenny has long campaigned against FTTP and the general consensus of increasing bandwidth growth.

His response to Prof. Tucker still doesn't address the current reality, or 4kTV, or currently unknown uses. 

His roads analogy is ridiculous. He implies that the roads are currently empty, so there's no point building more. The reality is somewhat different. The roads are (in many cases) full, and traffic is growing at 50% every year.

The Ookla figures represent demand as much as capability, because of the point I mentioned earlier. NBN customers can _choose_ 12/1. The fact that 75% of them _choose_ to pay more for higher speeds than that suggests that _demand_ far exceeds 12Mbps. Because if it didn't, then people could save money by choosing the lower speed.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> It stands to reason, does it not, that the attitude of NBN Co reflects the wishes and direction of the 'owner' (ie the minister), and his appointed board? You didn't believe NBN Co's statements under ALP 'rule', why would you expect me to believe them now?
> 
> No. I've read pieces, but haven't listened to the whole thing yet.



His appointed board has Simon Hackett.

Dark side too ??

His full presentation is well worth a listen. There's commentary in there you won't like (in particular about the state of the rollout under Labor) but there's also some from your perspective that will offer a little hope.

The fact the company is now in the process of being structured to respond to change (whether political or technological) is a positive in my view and that's being allowed to happen under the current minister.

http://simonhackett.com/2014/09/06/rebooting-the-nbn/


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> What about the points he makes ? Hackett




NBN co board is there to implement policy not make it, therefore discussion about good and bad is pointless.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> NBN co board is there to implement policy not make it, therefore discussion about good and bad is pointless.



That post you've quoted doesn't refer to or mention Hackett. You've obviously added that to misrepresent.


----------



## Smurf1976

NBNMyths said:


> NBN customers can _choose_ 12/1. The fact that 75% of them _choose_ to pay more for higher speeds than that suggests that _demand_ far exceeds 12Mbps. Because if it didn't, then people could save money by choosing the lower speed.




Go to any service station and watch people filling cars with petrol.

Now realise that the vast majority of cars on Australian roads are built and tuned to run on 91 RON petrol, a small number require 95 and very, very few require 98. 

But you won't have to wait at the servo for long to find someone filling a vehicle with 98. A vehicle that runs a compression ratio of 8.5:1 and which has the ignition timing already set to minimal advance in order to comply with emissions requirements. But it costs more so it's automatically better, right?  

Likewise with the NBN, there's zero practical benefit in a high speed connection if you're just going to read a few emails and visit forums like ASF. That won't stop such people choosing to pay more in a "mine's bigger than yours" type of logic however, just as it doesn't stop them putting slower burning fuel in cars because they think it's somehow better.

The notion that consumers do what is most efficient and economical works in theory but we've got an entire industry, marketing, to persuade them to do otherwise and it's effective in practice. A minority of consumers will consistently make the "right" choice in any given area of spending, and practically nobody will do it across everything they buy.

No doubt there will be some people who have done a rational analysis of their internet needs. But for most, it's either "pick the cheapest" or it's "pick the most expensive" with no real effort to get it right as such.


----------



## sptrawler

Smurf1976 said:


> Go to any service station and watch people filling cars with petrol.
> 
> Now realise that the vast majority of cars on Australian roads are built and tuned to run on 91 RON petrol, a small number require 95 and very, very few require 98.
> 
> But you won't have to wait at the servo for long to find someone filling a vehicle with 98. A vehicle that runs a compression ratio of 8.5:1 and which has the ignition timing already set to minimal advance in order to comply with emissions requirements. But it costs more so it's automatically better, right?
> 
> Likewise with the NBN, there's zero practical benefit in a high speed connection if you're just going to read a few emails and visit forums like ASF. That won't stop such people choosing to pay more in a "mine's bigger than yours" type of logic however, just as it doesn't stop them putting slower burning fuel in cars because they think it's somehow better.
> 
> The notion that consumers do what is most efficient and economical works in theory but we've got an entire industry, marketing, to persuade them to do otherwise and it's effective in practice. A minority of consumers will consistently make the "right" choice in any given area of spending, and practically nobody will do it across everything they buy.
> 
> No doubt there will be some people who have done a rational analysis of their internet needs. But for most, it's either "pick the cheapest" or it's "pick the most expensive" with no real effort to get it right as such.




It's somewhat like buying a Lamborghini, to go to work in the city,
You have something that can do 300klm/hr, but you can only go as fast as the Hyundia Getz, sitting in front of you.
Untill everything is connected to bling speed, you are still reduced to the lowest common denominator.


----------



## sydboy007

https://twitter.com/TurnbullMalcolm/status/513557154796539904

_Donald MacKenzie on high frequency trading and the importance of geography and limits of fibre optics_

It's laughable that he's taking an issue for high frequency traders, a few ms can mean the difference between winning and losing a trade, and trying to make out it's a limit for optical fibre.  It's a fundamental law of the universe - the speed of light.

For most people it's not so much the latency, but how much data you can get in a particular time period, and nothing beats fibre on that score.


----------



## sptrawler

Turnbull seems to have done a good job, of calming down the hysteria.

There seems to be a fair bit of connection activity, around my area.


----------



## Logique

sptrawler said:


> Turnbull seems to have done a good job, of calming down the hysteria.
> 
> There seems to be a fair bit of connection activity, around my area.



Yep, same here, connections are coming.


----------



## Tisme

Smurf1976 said:


> Go to any service station and watch people filling cars with petrol.
> 
> Now realise that the vast majority of cars on Australian roads are built and tuned to run on 91 RON petrol, a small number require 95 and very, very few require 98.
> 
> But you won't have to wait at the servo for long to find someone filling a vehicle with 98. A vehicle that runs a compression ratio of 8.5:1 and which has the ignition timing already set to minimal advance in order to comply with emissions requirements. But it costs more so it's automatically better, right?




Being one of those tragics who modifies cars and mechanicals I can't agree with the premise of your post, but I know what you are trying say. I mentor young lads in car mechanicals and allow them the use of my personal workshop to rebuild and blue plate engines/cars and prosecute the idea of new over old (e.g. injected over carbs).  

The internet on 50 megs is so much better than even 30 megs, and ADSL2+ on 20 megs is like a Ron91 in a 95 engine without auto retune = pinking and poor response. It isn't so much the peak power that counts but the dependent variable torque curve that results from a good power curve through the range.-

The basic tune method these days is to have automatic spark advance in response to a couple of knock sensors, EGT and CO (via O2 sensing). Putting 98 in a modern engine does raise the curve and on a personal bias the Shell Ultra is the better fuel to me, although I'm no wedded to it. Factory ECUs have been quite smart for some time now, unfortunately politics hasn't IMO.


Vive the NBN


----------



## SirRumpole

Its been said about computers that programs expand automatically to consume all available memory space, ie the more you can do with a given system, the more people try to do.

I scanned my PC yesterday. There were millions of files on it. What do they all do ? How many are actually needed ?

Seems to me that we actually use a lot less of our computer than we think, and the rest of the stuff on it is just unnecessary and used to justify the high price of computer software. So to with the NBN. As smurf said, people will buy the fastest they can get, so they can say that they have got it, not because they need the capability.

The idea of a national fibre connected NBN seemed attractive at first. Certainly, everyone should have the ability to connect to the internet, but we should consider if we are being sold a Rolls Royce when a Commodore may suit us better.


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> It's somewhat like buying a Lamborghini, to go to work in the city,
> You have something that can do 300klm/hr, but you can only go as fast as the Hyundia Getz, sitting in front of you.
> Untill everything is connected to bling speed, you are still reduced to the lowest common denominator.




Not everyone is confined to the city, there are places like Brisbane that some rather onerous hills, poor roads and reasonable freeways. None of those are serially connected nor dependent on each other, but each compromises an econobox. Add in road noise, over steering, s41te gear trains, pcb poisoning from cheap plastics, poor seating support, price compromised handling geometry and it's a challenge for those who are accustomed to well engineered cars to even contemplate the stooping to that level.

The corollary of course is to understand how the internet works and how the human brain works in forever striving for better. The internet is in no way a serial pipe, the rest of the world is rapidly moving to high speed while we debate the inevitable need to join, meanwhile bandaiding old soldered copper wire top hat IDF based infrastructure that was the primary reason for selling it off in the first place (before it lost it's usefulness). I wonder if the aversion of light pipes to the door is all about keeping the Howard's battlers happy they bought Telsra shares and the dividends that flow because of LNP govt policy to sink billions of money into a dreadnought instead of missile cruisers.


For years Ralph Nader was vilified for using California to clean up car pollution for the rest of the world, I think it was Liberal premier Richard Court who mandated the cessation of leaded fuel in WA, two people most probably politically opposed, but not stupid to the need for progress in the face of apathy, antipathy and lethargy of intelligence.


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> Its been said about computers that programs expand automatically to consume all available memory space, ie the more you can do with a given system, the more people try to do.
> 
> I scanned my PC yesterday. There were millions of files on it. What do they all do ? How many are actually needed ?
> 
> Seems to me that we actually use a lot less of our computer than we think, and the rest of the stuff on it is just unnecessary and used to justify the high price of computer software. So to with the NBN. As smurf said, people will buy the fastest they can get, so they can say that they have got it, not because they need the capability.
> 
> The idea of a national fibre connected NBN seemed attractive at first. Certainly, everyone should have the ability to connect to the internet, but we should consider if we are being sold a Rolls Royce when a Commodore may suit us better.




The idea that the NBN is Rolls Royce is a nonsense insofar as it is already being outpaced by other installs in other countries.  While we determine our future with obsequious devotion to a political party, the rest of the world, who haven't discovered Australia on the map yet and do not know the pleasure our elected leaders, will continue to evolve and so will the need for bandwidth and computer power.

I myself was an early participant in the technology game, using the same processors and memory that put men of the moon. The programming was done using assembly (or worse) and because of the small memory we had to be very clever with what instructions we used, what we pushed on to stacks and what we discarded. We used rudimentary networks that had likewise rudimentary error checking, we polled at agonisingly slow speeds and anyone who saw a factory, building, telemetry system running marvelled at the idea computers were controlling things. Those same e.g.  56kbyte Z80 based systems have long gone, replaced with enormous amounts of computing power by comparison, they are invariably web based, factory/building owners can program themselves and that is because of evolution of technology.

We have apps that are so easy to write now we have the computing power and less of a need to be frugal with the memory. There are programming standards that require licencing from developer kits, there are open protocol conventions, etc that eventually build into a synergy that spawns the next evolution. We are on the cusp of the next big thing and the internet is going to be central to that theme...lets hope we can handle the leap with a multiplexed system of Rims that fool the end user into thinking the speed is something it isn't


----------



## SirRumpole

Tisme said:
			
		

> The idea that the NBN is Rolls Royce is a nonsense insofar as it is already being outpaced by other installs in other countries.




Doesn't that just bring up the question of whether our NBN will be outdated before it's installed ?

I doubt I will ever get fibre as I live on a dirt road  and the vastness of the country means that it will be a long time before fibre coverage exists outside the major cities.


----------



## So_Cynical

SirRumpole said:


> The idea of a national fibre connected NBN seemed attractive at first. Certainly, everyone should have the ability to connect to the internet, but we should consider if we are being sold a Rolls Royce when a Commodore may suit us better.




For a decade Telstra told us we only needed a push bike...they were wrong.

The history of computer and internet development is littered with instances of people getting it wrong, these people were often very smart and often made significant contributions to development without knowing the significance at the time.


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> Doesn't that just bring up the question of whether our NBN will be outdated before it's installed ?
> 
> I doubt I will ever get fibre as I live on a dirt road  and the vastness of the country means that it will be a long time before fibre coverage exists outside the major cities.




I remember back in 1985 I was involved in fibre rollout to a multifunction polis. That fibre is still in use and has a long life ahead. My sister had fibre run to her greenfield house in WA in the nineties and Telstra still doesn't have the infrastructure pipes in place that it promised way back then. I was net savvy way back when it was freed up from the universities to domestic consumption. None of that was Rolls Royce, but 

The NBN as it is now designed is already redundant old technology. The NBN MkI would have had the necessary hardware in place to allow privateers black fibre speed already available in other countries in excess of gigabyte speed.... not now.

The knock down effect of the junior system we are getting will be the loss of foreseeable ubiquitous net telephony, ubiquitous net media streaming, ubiquitous educational tools, ubiquitous domestic automation, etc. The privileged few will enjoy the ability to adopt the new technologies already being rolled out worldwide that are web based.

For you Rumpole it may mean the top wire of the paddock fences for some time to come, but the idea was to put the urban dwellers on fibre to allow enough wireless bandwidth to give rural districts decent services.... that ain't gonna happen now.


----------



## Tisme

Something some of you may not know is that when Telstra rollout fibre in a suburb, you have 18 months to change to NBN before your ADSL is disconnected.


----------



## sydboy007

So one of Turnbulls biggest gripes of the Labor NBN was the lack of infrastructure competition.

TPG decide to step in after the last election and use it's fibre network to offer FTTB to apartments in major urban centres.

You'd think Turnbull would have lauded this since he seemed to think internet access is the only utility that should have competing pipes into your home.

But no, he did an eleventh hour conversion and changed the rules to force any company offering high speed internet services on their own infrastructure will have to structurally separate and provide wholesale access to their competitors.

So mid December he's given a Jan 1 2015 deadline for the new rules to come into effect from July 1 for any company currently offering such services to be compliant with the new license conditions.

So TPG has withdrawn their FTTB services from public offer till they meet the short deadline, or they may decide that creating a totally separate wholesale entity, complete with independent board, would make their FTTB service uncompetitive.

It seems so much of what the Govt said in opposition was the opposite of what they planned to do once they go into office.


----------



## Tisme

sydboy007 said:


> So one of Turnbulls biggest gripes of the Labor NBN was the lack of infrastructure competition.
> 
> TPG decide to step in after the last election and use it's fibre network to offer FTTB to apartments in major urban centres.
> 
> You'd think Turnbull would have lauded this since he seemed to think internet access is the only utility that should have competing pipes into your home.
> 
> But no, he did an eleventh hour conversion and changed the rules to force any company offering high speed internet services on their own infrastructure will have to structurally separate and provide wholesale access to their competitors.
> 
> So mid December he's given a Jan 1 2015 deadline for the new rules to come into effect from July 1 for any company currently offering such services to be compliant with the new license conditions.
> 
> So TPG has withdrawn their FTTB services from public offer till they meet the short deadline, or they may decide that creating a totally separate wholesale entity, complete with independent board, would make their FTTB service uncompetitive.
> 
> It seems so much of what the Govt said in opposition was the opposite of what they planned to do once they go into office.




Telstra monopoly again!! What is it with that company that it wields so much power within the LNP? We might as well appoint a Postmaster General and forget about competition


http://www.tpg.com.au/fttb


----------



## SirRumpole

Australia's Broadband scheme slips to 44th in world



> Internet speeds: Australia ranks 44th, study cites direction of NBN as part of problem
> 
> 
> A US study has delivered an unwelcome finding about Australian internet speeds, finding that they are well behind the international pack.
> 
> One engineering expert said the nation would continue to tumble down in world rankings if the rollout of the National Broadband Network (NBN) continues in its current form.
> 
> The State of the Internet Report from cloud service provider Akamai ranks Australia 44th for average connection speed.
> 
> The US-based company produces the quarterly report looking at connection speeds and broadband adoption around the world.
> 
> Dr Mark Gregory, a network engineering expert from RMIT University, said the Akamai report was a reputable review.
> 
> "In the latest report, Australia has dropped a couple of places down to the 44th position, which is a pretty big drop really over such a short period of time," he said.
> 
> 
> Dr Gregory said Australia's relative decline was because many other countries were moving forward apace with new and upgraded networks.
> 
> "The drop is happening because a lot of other countries over this period are moving towards fiber-based access networks, or they've already completed rollouts of what we would call the multi-technology mixing/mixed networks," he said.
> 
> "Whatever way you look at it, what it means is that the average speeds that Australians are enjoying are slowly becoming less than most of our competitors around the world."
> Copper-based network slowing Australia down: expert
> 
> Dr Gregory said the Federal Government's decision to switch from fibre-to-the-home to a mixed fibre/copper network was part of the reason for the decline.
> 
> "One of the reasons is that we're falling down the list [is] that we're moving towards utilising a copper-based access network," he said.
> 
> "Whereas previously, under the Labor government, we were moving towards an all cyber-based network, which is what most of our competitors are now doing.
> Average connection speed by country
> 
> 1. South Korea
> 
> 2. Hong Kong
> 
> 3. Japan
> 
> 4. Switzerland
> 
> 5. Sweden
> 
> 6. Netherlands
> 
> 7. Ireland
> 
> 8. Latvia
> 
> 9. Czech Republic
> 
> 10. Singapore
> 
> 44. Australia
> 
> Source: Akamai's State of the Internet Report
> 
> "And we're also seeing this drop because, as we keep changing direction with the NBN, we're putting in large delays before the rollout is actually occurring."
> 
> New Zealand is one of the nations now ranked ahead of Australia, with faster average internet speeds.
> 
> Dr Gregory said that was largely because it has stuck with a fibre-to-the-home network.
> 
> "The key difference between New Zealand and Australia is that New Zealand made the decision to do fibre-to-the-premise, they've stuck with that decision," he said.
> 
> Even though Australia is much larger geographically, Dr Gregory said fibre-to-the-home should be financially viable for a network to cover the vast bulk of the population.
> 
> "Fibre-to-the-premise is viable in Australia, mainly because most Australians are clustered around the coast," he said.
> 
> "If you look at the density of Australians, then really we don't differ very much from most other countries in the world, we're just a large country, but with the technologies that we've got today to actually roll out fibre systems, the cost is not that different from most other countries in the world."
> Quality of streamed video 'much lower' than overseas
> 
> Dr Gregory said many households will notice the deficiencies in Australia's internet when they try to watch television over the internet, such as through the Netflix service coming to Australia this year, or its local rivals.
> 
> "Even though the suppliers say they are giving us high definition of 4K steaming, to actually be able to stream over Australia's connection and our connections will be a lot slower than the rest of the world," he said.
> 
> "What they will do is that they will increase the compression ratio on the video.
> 
> "Even though they are saying that we are getting high definition, or 4K TV, the actual compression will be far more in other countries and therefore the quality of the video that we are viewing at home will be much lower."
> 
> Dr Gregory added that another development may push Australia even further down the rankings for internet speed.
> 
> "The most important change is occurring in the United States where the FCC chairman - and that's their body that looks after telecommunications - has decided to redefine broadband to 25 megabits per second download speed," he said.
> 
> "So what that means is that, in Australia, the Government has been saying that they're going to provide every Australian with high-speed broadband.
> 
> "In the future they'll be able to say that they're providing Australians the bare minimum broadband under the new FCC determination on what broadband will be called.
> 
> "For many other countries around the world of course, they're moving towards gigabit broadband now and that is super-fast broadband under the new definitions."
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-01-12/australian-internet-speeds-rank-44th-in-the-world/6012570


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> Australia's Broadband scheme slips to 44th in world




If you want to correspond faster there's a perfectly good Post Office you can use. 

No good complaining Rumpole, we are getting what you voted for.... a politician.

Third quarter last year and 1st place Hong Kong was 84.6Mpbs average peak connection speed and 10th place Luxembourg was 54.4Mbps

Now 4k is rolling out we shall see if Malcolm's prediction of copper and wireless suitability for the future will provided the 15Mbps metric req'd.....given that ADSL2+ general consumer quality is way lower than that and ADSL2+ business quality is just bouncing around that figure.


----------



## SirRumpole

Tisme said:


> If you want to correspond faster there's a perfectly good Post Office you can use.
> 
> No good complaining Rumpole, we are getting what you voted for.... a politician.
> 
> Third quarter last year and 1st place Hong Kong was 84.6Mpbs average peak connection speed and 10th place Luxembourg was 54.4Mbps
> 
> Now 4k is rolling out we shall see if Malcolm's prediction of copper and wireless suitability for the future will provided the 15Mbps metric req'd.....given that ADSL2+ general consumer quality is way lower than that and ADSL2+ business quality is just bouncing around that figure.




Sorry, Im a bit of a dummy when it comes to speeds. 4k ? Do you mean 4G ?


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> Sorry, Im a bit of a dummy when it comes to speeds. 4k ? Do you mean 4G ?




That's the new video resolution that is taking over hi def. Of course I'm sure there are those here who will parade black and white letterbox format as being perfectly adequate.


----------



## SirRumpole

Tisme said:


> That's the new video resolution that is taking over hi def. Of course I'm sure there are those here who will parade black and white letterbox format as being perfectly adequate.




You're not talking about me I hope ?


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> You're not talking about me I hope ?




Do you Donkey vote LNP?


----------



## Smurf1976

sydboy007 said:


> So one of Turnbulls biggest gripes of the Labor NBN was the lack of infrastructure competition.




We've been down that road before. It failed then and it will fail now for the same reasons.

100 years ago we had electricity in major cities. But it was chaotic, inefficient and disorganised with numerous infrastructure owners each competing for business and running at a scale far too small to be efficient. And so we built the grid as it is today, most places did it in earnest after WW2 with Victoria and Tasmania starting well before that (Tas made the decision in 1914, Vic in 1918, others took another 30 years to follow).

The same could be said for roads. There were cars a century ago. Not too many, and they were primative by today's standards, but we had self-powered road vehicles as such. In due course it became readily apparent that existing roads weren't up to the task of accommodating such vehicles in large numbers and that we needed to do something drastic if it was to work. And so we set up entire government departments with the purpose of building highways and doing other road traffic-related things.

Can anyone seriously tell me that competing private owners would have built Yallourn (Vic) or Waddamana (Tas) power stations and a statewide electricity grid to distribute the power? No, they wouldn't because by its' very nature the grid is a single network and that doesn't lend itself well to having multiple competing owners.

South Australia tried doing electricity privately. They struggled for decades trying to make it work but AESCO (Adelaide Electric Supply Co) was just too worried about minimising commercial risk and making a profit. It wasn't working, SA was hamstrung by constant rationing and blackouts amidst the refusal to build a proper grid and power stations whilst industry was booming in Victoria and Tasmania on the back of cheap and abundant power. And so AESCO was nationalised, ETSA was created and promptly went about building new generation and the grid. Most of the manufacturing industries around Adelaide started up shortly afterward.

Can anyone seriously tell me that we'd have developed the road network as it is today if we insisted that everything made a profit from day one and that there had to be competition in infrastructure? Five competing roads running straight past your door and a dozen competing highways between Sydney and Melbourne? No, that's not going to work because it destroys the scale of economy.

But we built the grid and we built roads. Directly and indirectly, they became the most dominant feature of the 20th Century economy and lifestyle built upon them. If you were to contrast life and the economy in the late 20th Century with that of a century earlier then private vehicles and the ubiquitous use of electricity are standout features of the change.

Today it's about communications infrastructure but the same principles still apply. We're never going to build an economical, efficient network if we only build the bits that are individually profitable. And you can be pretty sure that competing private owners won't be building anything that doesn't make a big enough profit. Hence the need for government to be involved if we're going to build it.

Naysayers said that electricity wouldn't work. The Tas government was warned pretty bluntly by the Commonwealth a century ago about that with arguments very similar to those being used against the NBN today. A century later and it's still working pretty nicely, having employed tens of thousands of people over that time and lead to overseas exports with many $ billions via industry.

The question with the NBN isn't whether we're going to build it. At some point we will. It's about whether we do what Vic and Tas did a century earlier with electricity and do it now, or whether we do what SA did and wait until we're crippled by ongoing crises with the present infrastructure and finally bite the bullet sometime down the track. But we'll build it eventually, no doubt about that (well, assuming we're to remain a first world, developed country then we'll build it).

The question, of course, is how to pay for it. That's the big problem. But we had a very workable answer to that one a century ago. Borrow money and repay the loans via sale of the product.


----------



## drsmith

sptrawler said:


> Turnbull seems to have done a good job, of calming down the hysteria.
> 
> There seems to be a fair bit of connection activity, around my area.



The NBN non longer seems to be in the news on a regular basis with something else having gone wrong.

There's not too many of his critics here at least commenting on Simon Hackett's September presentation.


----------



## SirRumpole

Smurf1976 said:


> The question, of course, is how to pay for it. That's the big problem. But we had a very workable answer to that one a century ago. Borrow money and repay the loans via sale of the product.




Another excellent post Smurf, you just keep rolling out the facts and maybe one day the Conservatives on this board will get the message.

Australia just doesn't have the population and therefore the market size to attract competing commercial interests for large scale infrastructure. It always has to be government supplying the $$$ subcontracted out to private firms to do the actual building. No commercial enterprises want to take the private risk of large scale investment for a small market.

The Snowy Mountains scheme was partly funded by a loan from the world bank, and was sold to its staff (SMEC) in the 1990's as a going concern, and now sells its skills to countries around the world. That seems to be the best model we could have for this type of infrastructure, government funding, acquire skills and knowledge and then apply these to projects in other countries to recoup the investment.


----------



## SirRumpole

SirRumpole said:


> Another excellent post Smurf, you just keep rolling out the facts and maybe one day the Conservatives on this board will get the message.
> 
> Australia just doesn't have the population and therefore the market size to attract competing commercial interests for large scale infrastructure. It always has to be government supplying the $$$ subcontracted out to private firms to do the actual building. No commercial enterprises want to take the private risk of large scale investment for a small market.
> 
> The Snowy Mountains scheme was partly funded by a loan from the world bank, and was sold to its staff (SMEC) in the 1990's as a going concern, and now sells its skills to countries around the world. That seems to be the best model we could have for this type of infrastructure, government funding, acquire skills and knowledge and then apply these to projects in other countries to recoup the investment.




This makes the following story particularly sad:

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2014/s4147887.htm

and this:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-01-12/ret-clean-energy-sector-uninvestable-analyst-says/6013090


----------



## sydboy007

Smurf1976 said:


> We've been down that road before. It failed then and it will fail now for the same reasons.
> 
> 100 years ago we had electricity in major cities. But it was chaotic, inefficient and disorganised with numerous infrastructure owners each competing for business and running at a scale far too small to be efficient. And so we built the grid as it is today, most places did it in earnest after WW2 with Victoria and Tasmania starting well before that (Tas made the decision in 1914, Vic in 1918, others took another 30 years to follow).




I full agree.  It's just the sheer hypocrisy to oppose the Labor NBN based on the lack of infrastructure competition, to only then bring in last minute regultory changes to enforce pretty much the same thing.

I mean, how can you say with a straight face that introducing major changes a couple of weeks before Christmas is enough time to allow companies to reorganise themselves.  Telstra's had years to do it, and they weren't required to go nearly as far as having separate boards for the retail and wholesale side.


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> Australia just doesn't have the population and therefore the market size to attract competing commercial interests for large scale infrastructure. .




Even when there is competition it turns into an oligopoly, collusion and higher prices. There was a time when Ansett and TAA were viable  only because of this.


The NBN is a classic example of one govt trying to build a valuable (saleable) future asset and another letting its contempt or jealousy get in the way of fulfilling that aim. Instead we see a monopoly handed to an organisation that has a history of price gouging and slow uptake of world trend technology. 

The days of men with grand visions and an enthusiastic population have been shoehorned out by our maturation from pioneers to arm chair critics it seems.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> The NBN non longer seems to be in the news on a regular basis with something else having gone wrong.
> 
> There's not too many of his critics here at least commenting on Simon Hackett's September presentation.




Close to halfway through the current term and the promise of 25Mbs for all broken within what 3 months, with no retail HFC services till maybe 2016, no retail FTTN services till maybe 2 years after the election.

The quiet is because too many people don't believe they're going to get any kind of upgrade before 2019.  The only growth in NBN connections is via the Labor NBN rollout.

I'm sure next year the Govt will trumpet the million plus HFC customers as now connected onto the NBN, though no mention as to when any network upgrades will occur to actually provide them with decent speeds.  Systems designed to wholesale HFC may not even be available till after the next election, so using the HFC may not even help to speed up the rollout much for a few more years.

To top it all off, we've got Telstra back as the dominant party in telecommunications.  They'll have a high level of control for the rolout with the competitive advantage that provides them for signing up customers.  Extra rivers of Govt funds flowing to them, while off loading the costs of upgrading the copper network that they chose to underinvest in for the last decade.

Only a Liberal Govt could think selling off a reasonable quality asset , the CAN, and buying it back in a seriously degraded state is somehow a good deal for tax payers.

I'll also note that the Govt has stopped calling Labor's satellite plans the rolled gold route.  Interesting how quiet the Nationals are over this, but their rural constituents are getting a superior service compared to anything the Coalition would have been willing to offer.


----------



## sydboy007

this is the kind of competitive bonus the Govt is willing to Give Telstra

http://www.zdnet.com/article/competitors-fear-telstra-hfc-nbn-coup/#ftag=RSSbaffb68



> The revised migration plan explicitly prohibits Telstra from accepting an order to supply HFC services if it is outside of the network footprint, and any new customer it adds on the HFC network in the interim period must be on a flexible plan with the ability to switch providers once migrated to the NBN.




So basically Telstra will be the only company able to provide a new HFC service untill it is taken over by NBN - so far no details on how that process will work.

Law of inertia says that a large chunk of those customers migrated to HFC will stay with Telstra, or at least get an offer for a locked in contract long before competitors are able to offer their own services.

So tax payers will fund Telstra to connect new customers to the HFC, provide Telstra with a monopoly signup period,  while watching potential competitors wither away because of their being practically shut out of the NBN.

I'm expecting Telstra will still want the set of steak knives thrown in for free though.


----------



## Tisme

sydboy007 said:


> this is the kind of competitive bonus the Govt is willing to Give Telstra
> 
> http://www.zdnet.com/article/competitors-fear-telstra-hfc-nbn-coup/#ftag=RSSbaffb68
> 
> 
> 
> So basically Telstra will be the only company able to provide a new HFC service untill it is taken over by NBN - so far no details on how that process will work.
> 
> Law of inertia says that a large chunk of those customers migrated to HFC will stay with Telstra, or at least get an offer for a locked in contract long before competitors are able to offer their own services.
> 
> So tax payers will fund Telstra to connect new customers to the HFC, provide Telstra with a monopoly signup period,  while watching potential competitors wither away because of their being practically shut out of the NBN.
> 
> I'm expecting Telstra will still want the set of steak knives thrown in for free though.




I had a need for a new service recently. It was in a transitional type village (I think many are on the lamb) where people don't earn much, but I am migrating there for a year or two to enjoy the riparian pleasures. Consequently asking the various providers (Dodo, etc) for ADSL2+ resulted in zip success, with only ADSL1 available and on a RIM. When I rang Telstra and explained I wanted a ADSL2+ business quality line, one was available no probs. My choice was easy.


----------



## sydboy007

Tisme said:


> I had a need for a new service recently. It was in a transitional type village (I think many are on the lamb) where people don't earn much, but I am migrating there for a year or two to enjoy the riparian pleasures. Consequently asking the various providers (Dodo, etc) for ADSL2+ resulted in zip success, with only ADSL1 available and on a RIM. When I rang Telstra and explained I wanted a ADSL2+ business quality line, one was available no probs. My choice was easy.




Sounds very much like the isues we have where Telstra is unable to get a reliable ULL for a customer on our DSLAM, but when we migrate them to a Telstra wholesale service magically the line become stable.

It happens far to often to be pure chance


----------



## So_Cynical

Tisme said:


> The NBN is a classic example of one govt trying to build a valuable (saleable) future asset and another letting its contempt or jealousy get in the way of fulfilling that aim.




Absolutely, the Noalition turned infrastructure into a political issue...a disgrace.

-----------------------



So_Cynical said:


> *(18th-June-2014) A bit of NBN work has been going on in my street over the last couple of months,* started with Telstra pit rehabilitation and has now moved on to actual cable replacement, pulling out the 40 year old copper and replacing it with brand new copper  concrete saws to cut through the foot path, digging trenches, laying new conduit, a big job.




Update: 7 months on and still no NBN but the digging has continued in bursts of activity over the last 7 months....and turns out im getting Fibre, old school Labor NBN Fibre, that's what i get for asking a lollipop man what was going on.


----------



## Smurf1976

Tisme said:


> The days of men with grand visions and an enthusiastic population have been shoehorned out by our maturation from pioneers to arm chair critics it seems.




Just about every "great" thing that's been done or built in this country came about due to the determined efforts of someone with a vision. It doesn't just happen, someone made it happen.

We seem to have completely lost that spirit these days unfortunately. It's not that we can't do the 21st Century equivalent of the power grid, highways, copper phone network or the Snowy scheme, it's that we're too frightened to actually get on and do it.

Ask the government's road department in 1960 to build a new highway. They'd set about designing and building it.

Ask the same question in 2015 and they'll pay a fortune to a consultant to produce a report saying how to get someone else to design and build a highway. The idea of actually knowing how to do it, and then actually doing it, seems to have been completely lost.

A big part of the problem with the NBN is that government simply doesn't know how to build it. There's very few people left in government, at any level, who really know how to do physical things these days. As such, government is completely at the mercy of consultants and contractors to get things done.

In theory that can work, but think "pink batts" if you want to understand the problem. It's like any situation in life, if you have no idea what you really want and what needs to be done to provide it, then you are at the mercy of those selling it. And that's a pretty sure fire way to end up being ripped off, especially given the "easy money" that's generally associated with government work on account of the political aspects.

A private developer (of anything) will be heavily focused on cost. But government also has the political aspect of time. They need it done, and it needs to be done so as to suit political time frames. Government tends not to end up in court with those doing the work when costs start to rise, they just can't afford the political risk of (1) being seen as incompetent managers and (2) time blowing out. And so they pay.

I am not a communications expert, I have qualifications in the electrical field not comms, but I know how to physically build the NBN apart from actually splicing fibre and making connections. Pits and conduits - I've installed plenty of those in my time, dealing with asbestos included, and I know what happens. 

Now, I've had a look at the work being done. I know that the taxpayer isn't getting good value. Cables installed poorly which will lead to early failures. Pits being replaced that don't actually need replacing since they never contained asbestos to start with. And so on. And of course the horror stories, unfortunately true, about asbestos being dumped in the suburbs and so on.

But government doesn't know what to do in a physical sense, they only know how to write contracts and pay the bills. There's the problem.

I'm not suggesting that government ought to employ a huge workforce and build the whole lot themselves (though that is one possible option) but they ought to have a decent sized works crew, from engineers through to skilled labourers, in order to keep the contractors in check. By failing to do so, well they may just as well write a blank cheque to be honest.

So where's the money going? Well I'm fairly sure that it's not going into the worker's pockets. They're being paid yes, but the info I have suggests that they're not getting rich doing NBN work. Where its' going is into things that were completely unnecessary to start with, or which are done in a truly ridiculous manner that nobody in their right mind would contemplate, or which are poorly done and won't last.

There's a similar problem in Adelaide at the moment. A few years ago they extended the tram line from Victoria Square (right in the centre of the Adelaide CBD) through to the Entertanment Centre (a few km away). It works, trams do indeed run on that line, but a recent report finds that the underground work (that's pits, conduits and cables) isn't up to scratch. It wasn't done properly, it won't last as long as it should. It's not an easy fix given that it involves digging up large sections of a recently built project, on major roads in the CBD and close by, in order to fix it.

The same problems will happen with the NBN for sure with the approach being taken. Government just isn't sufficiently informed about what needs to be happening, and that's not a way to get good value.

Overall, I'm very much in favour of the NBN as a concept and nationally important project. But I'm not keen on the private profit maximising manner in which this "public" project (and others) is being built. I'm sure we could do it cheaper and better than what's actually being build in practice.


----------



## Tisme

Smurf1976 said:


> Just about every "great" thing that's been done or built in this country came about due to the determined efforts of someone with a vision. It doesn't just happen, someone made it happen.
> 
> We seem to have completely lost that spirit these days unfortunately. It's not that we can't do the 21st Century equivalent of the power grid, highways, copper phone network or the Snowy scheme, it's that we're too frightened to actually get on and do it.
> 
> .............





Your post makes some valid points, some I agree with others not so sure. For example back in the 80's I was one of the few who could handle some rather high tech gear, so much so the govt would use my specification to scope the works. The govt engineers were simply not up to the task because of the lag between the engineering schools' training and the explosion of new tech. I did not gouge, but I made money, the client made enormous savings over outdated tech and we were all happy pushing new ideas and expanding horizons; responsible contracting and non combative clients goes a long way, especially if egotistical consultants are excluded from the equation.

But as you suggest, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to install light pipes and pits. To this end I don't really understand why multiple layers of organisations, all sucking from the public purse are required. The Chinese crowd who are installing most of the rest of the world's fibre could do our install in a heartbeat  and if security is problem let Cisco do the hardware and software direct.

It's not like Telstra have a recent history of maintaining stuff, proved by the poor state of the copper and the past used by date of the street tophats and their corroded solder connections, so I don't really know what they offer except as a wholesaler/retailer which plenty of people could do with a laptop and a phone.... what is NBNco doing?

Apparently we don't need enterprise any more because we are moving back to the future and devolving into a British Empire mercantile economy, however we sell finished ideas rather than finished goods. For example it seems there is such a high demand overseas for our knowledge in building mining camps and conveyors we can relax about the fall in commodity income.


----------



## drsmith

Syd,

Remember this,



sydboy007 said:


> http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/govern...tbenefit-analysis-report-20140907-10dqu0.html




Simon Hackett's latest piece is in response to it.

http://simonhackett.com/2015/01/14/is-15-megabits-enough/#more-1691


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Syd,
> 
> Remember this,
> 
> 
> 
> Simon Hackett's latest piece is in response to it.
> 
> http://simonhackett.com/2015/01/14/is-15-megabits-enough/#more-1691




I seem to remember Ziggy stated at Senate hearings last year that there was no longer a guarantee minimum speed of 25Mbs, so unless that's changed what Simon is saying doesn't really count for much.

Considering the Liberal believed the Labor satellite rollout was over the top, can you see them doing much in the way of CAPEX to bring the HFC networks up to grade?

Are you willing to comment on the way Telstra has been handed first dibs on all future HFC customers?  They can sit there watching what each premise downloads, gauging the likely ages of members and what their usage habits are like.  Once NBN takes over Telstra will have the best chance of locking in the customers via targeted promotional offers.  Liberal competition policy for you.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I seem to remember Ziggy stated at Senate hearings last year that there was no longer a guarantee minimum speed of 25Mbs, so unless that's changed what Simon is saying doesn't really count for much.



I see.

You've joined Myths in condemning him to the dark side.


----------



## Smurf1976

Tisme said:


> But as you suggest, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to install light pipes and pits. To this end I don't really understand why multiple layers of organisations, all sucking from the public purse are required.



The crux of my point could be summarised this way.

They replaced the pits in my street as a prelude to NBN fibre installation. 

Just one problem. The pits in my street were already suitable for such application and didn't need replacing. Indeed they skipped the hard ones and just did the easy (profitable) work.

As there's nobody left in government who knows about such things, they have no idea that they're paying for work that doesn't need doing in the first place. Sure, the contractors may well be giving them a cheap price per pit "on paper" but in practice we've given them a license to print money simply because there's few if any sitting around the table in a meeting who have ever hauled an actual cable through a conduit. Contractor says it needs to be done, so they pay them to do it. Easy money.

There's a sensible role for both private contractors and in-house staff in building the NBN. But I'll say from experience that the fully outsourced model has a lot of problems where the work is unable to be seen upon completion and there's no employee of the asset owner around when it's being done. Out of sight, can't be checked = almost as bad as signing a blank cheque. Been there, done this and learned the pitfalls.


----------



## SirRumpole

> As there's nobody left in government who knows about such things,




Maybe there is a case for Expanding Infrastructure Australia to include those skills as a permanent repository of knowledge ?


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> I see.
> 
> You've joined Myths in condemning him to the dark side.




No.

Just pointing out that the current rollout is not being designed to meet any minimum performance target - well at least the technologies being used can't be guaranteed to meet any verbal promise provided, and we know how reliable they are from the Abbott Govt.

For someone working in the profession I find that bizarre to say the least.  generally you have an end goal in mind and select the most cost effective technology.  You don't have a goal then select technologies you know may or may not be able to provide the performance required.

I see you have yet again avoided commenting on the Coalition allowing Telstra monopoly access to HFC customers as the rollout occurs.  Roughly 1.5M premises that will get their first taste of upgraded service via Telstra for how many months?

It will be interesting to see if Telstra is allowed to offer current Telstra retail ADSL customers lock in contracts once they have a new lead in cable for the HFC network connected.

Seems the Govt has traded a slight lessening of Telstra's dominance of the ADSL access network and for giving Telstra a massive leg up in areas of the current HFC footprint.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> No.



You quoted Rod Tucker's SMH article and then declared what Simon says doesn't count for much in response to his reply being brought to your attention.

Do you agree with Simon Hackett's response or the original article ?


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> You quoted Rod Tucker's SMH article and then declared what Simon says doesn't count for much in response to his reply being brought to your attention.
> 
> Do you agree with Simon Hackett's response or the original article ?



I do find it interesting how you weren't linking the blogs that Simon Hackett made that were critical of the coalition NBN policy before he was appointed to the board.
Since your well versed on his blogs though you should know that he still thinks that FTTP is the way to go but given the reduced budget they have been given he believes that NBN co are achieving the best possible network under the circumstances. I would hardly say he has changed sides and it is a relief to have someone on the board who doesn't have a vested interest with Telstra like the many of the board do.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> You quoted Rod Tucker's SMH article and then declared what Simon says doesn't count for much in response to his reply being brought to your attention.
> 
> Do you agree with Simon Hackett's response or the original article ?




Currently the majority of people are signing up for plans above 15Mbs, so how can it be argued that the median required speed in 2023 will be 15Mbs???  If over 50% of current NBN customers are on 25Mbs+ plans then the median is already higher.

The actual quote - _As of 2023, the median household requires bandwidth of 15 Mbps_

To go on with what the report said

_Rather, access capacity should be driven by higher end users. Whether this means the top 1% or the top 5% (or some other figure) is a matter of judgement._

Well over 5% of customers on the NBN are on the 100/40 plan, something Ziggy has admitted cannot be offered on a guaranteed basis, so how does the the current NBN board propose to overcome that limitation??  Yes, the silence is deafening.

Now Simon goes on to say 

_Further, the original report projects that that to make at least 95% of households happy, the NBN has to be offering speeds of at least 43 Mbps (and for near 100% satisfaction, the speeds offered have to be much higher than that)_

Once again, how will this be achieved?  As far as I can see only the Govt is telling us there's a minimum 25Mbs speed guarantee but the NBN board itself is not willing to back it.  Considering the Govt has broken all it's promises over the NBN so far, it seems prudent to think this minimum guarantee is likely to turn into a non core promise too.

The distribution of projected user demands is blatantly wrong, or at least seems contradictory that in 2023 50% of users will be happy with speeds of 15Mbs or less, yet the above quote indicates to make 95% of customers happy you need a minimum of 43Mbs.  Care to explain how this contradiction occurs?

So now that I've provided a reasonable response to you, would you care to say what you think about Telstra being given a monopoly right to offer HFC to customers as new lead in cables are installed?  I've only asked you 4 times.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> So now that I've provided a reasonable response to you, would you care to say what you think about Telstra being given a monopoly right to offer HFC to customers as new lead in cables are installed?  I've only asked you 4 times.



I haven't said anything to defend on that detail of the deal between Telstra and NBN Co in relation to Telstra's HFC cable. 

You on the other hand quoted Rod Tucker's SMH article in your criticism of the current government's model. I have returned to this given Simon Hackett's recent critique of that article. You are at least now quoting Simon Hackett instead of dismissing his view as what Simon is saying doesn't really count for much.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> I do find it interesting how you weren't linking the blogs that Simon Hackett made that were critical of the coalition NBN policy before he was appointed to the board.
> Since your well versed on his blogs though you should know that he still thinks that FTTP is the way to go but given the reduced budget they have been given he believes that NBN co are achieving the best possible network under the circumstances. I would hardly say he has changed sides and it is a relief to have someone on the board who doesn't have a vested interest with Telstra like the many of the board do.



He's a pragmatist. Money and time are considerations too as any competent board member would understand. 

He would have learned a lot from being inside the NBN tent. For example, I refer to his September presentation which included commentary on the state of Labor's rollout.


----------



## Smurf1976

sydboy007 said:


> Well over 5% of customers on the NBN are on the 100/40 plan




I do wonder how many of those are actually making use of that speed?

It's like standing at a service station and watching people fill cars with RON 98 fuel when that vehicle would run just as well on 95 or even 91. People do it, presumably through some combination of sheer ignorance, the effects of marketing and/or some inner desire to bump up the consumption of crude oil a bit. It's irrational but pretty common in practice.

I wouldn't be surprised if there are people with higher end NBN plans who are in practice not doing anything online that wouldn't be done equally well with the cheapest plan.


----------



## Trembling Hand

The New Space Race: One Man's Mission to Build a Galactic Internet

Interesting read on the future interweb.


----------



## orr

From 2002, for younger viewers Alston was John Howard's Communications & IT Minister

Senator Alston was responding to a question from ABC Television Journalist Alan Kohler:

_'ALAN KOHLER: In the early days you were actually not just sceptical, you were quite negative, I think you even said that it's just for pornography and gambling?
SENATOR RICHARD ALSTON: Well for example, people will tell you that pornography is one of the major reasons why there's been a high take-up rate in South Korea. I haven't confirmed that at first instance but I've been there, I've looked at what's happening. My scepticism has really been about whether there is any compelling national interest in the Government spending money on subsidising roll-outs to consumers. Because at the moment it's pretty much more of same but a bit faster for most consumers.'_

 With the forward thinking capacity like that  on prospects of the near future Alston was emblematic of the Cabinet to which he belonged. Little wonder so much was squandered by Howard's administration


----------



## sydboy007

orr said:


> From 2002, for younger viewers Alston was John Howard's Communications & IT Minister
> 
> Senator Alston was responding to a question from ABC Television Journalist Alan Kohler:
> 
> _'ALAN KOHLER: In the early days you were actually not just sceptical, you were quite negative, I think you even said that it's just for pornography and gambling?
> SENATOR RICHARD ALSTON: Well for example, people will tell you that pornography is one of the major reasons why there's been a high take-up rate in South Korea. I haven't confirmed that at first instance but I've been there, I've looked at what's happening. My scepticism has really been about whether there is any compelling national interest in the Government spending money on subsidising roll-outs to consumers. Because at the moment it's pretty much more of same but a bit faster for most consumers.'_
> 
> With the forward thinking capacity like that  on prospects of the near future Alston was emblematic of the Cabinet to which he belonged. Little wonder so much was squandered by Howard's administration




Oh Yes, Senator Luddite.  He was a real hoot about the interwebby thing.

I'm waiting for when the truth of Telstra's copper network finally becomes unavoidable.  We had a new install for a client in Miranda (Sydney) at the Shopping centre and when we logged a fault for the line were told a tech would attend by March 5th (this was back on the 17th Feb).  I asked why and was told there's a MSD (Mass Service Disruption) which basically Telstra gets the ACCC to approve and then they can take however long they like to get things fixed.

I wasn't convinced but sure enough this is what Telstra has been able to get away with - 20141204-NSW-S-C-P-SYDNEY-AND-COASTAL-AND-CENTRAL-NSW-EXTENSION-2	Started 04/12/2014 due to end 15/03/2015	Sydney, Greater Sydney, South Coast, Illawarra, Hunter, Mid North Coast, Central Tablelands, Southern Tablelands Districts, parts of the Central West Slopes and Plains and South West Slopes Districts claimed due to Extreme Weather Conditions.  They might as well have put the whole of NSW in the MSD.  

Victoria is not much better off either with 3 MSDs covering Northern Country, Central, South West and Wimmera Districts of Victoria + East Gippsland, West & South Gippsland, North Central and North East Districts of Victoria and Riverina, South Coast and Snowy Mountains Districts of New South Wales + Central and North Central Districts of Victoria that runs from Feb 16 till March 15

Anyone who's interested can have a looksie as to just how many areas Telstra has been able to get out of it's SLA obligations at:

http://www.telstra.com.au/consumer-advice/customer-service/mass-service-disruption/#search

Some may indeed be due to extreme weather events, but exacerbated due to poor network maintenance and lack of staff.  This is what the Abbott Govt has put it's hand into our collective pockets to buy back at a grossly inflated value, a rotting copper network held together with corrosive gels and plastic bags, and somehow this is the way of the future for us.


----------



## drsmith

From an phone/internet data perspective, Labor effectively purchased the copper and HFC networks and chose to shut them down and replace them with fibre. The current government from that framework will effectively purchase them and use them. 

There's obviously differences in the detail which have been long since discussed to death in this thread but it's the previous government that made the decision about ultimate financial responsibility for those networks.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> From an phone/internet data perspective, Labor effectively purchased the copper and HFC networks and chose to shut them down and replace them with fibre. The current government from that framework will effectively purchase them and use them.
> 
> There's obviously differences in the detail which have been long since discussed to death in this thread but it's the previous government that made the decision about ultimate financial responsibility for those networks.




Abbott has moved the expense of maintenance onto the tax payers.  There's also the expense and lots of unknowns regarding the HFC network and just how much will be required to actually get it up to an acceptable level of service.  

There'll be lots of claims though once NBN takes ownership of sections of the HFC network to provide grossly inflated NBN customer figures.

Lets hope Bill Morrow has been honest and NBN can use more fiber if it's determined Telstra copper isn't up to the task, but I wont be surprised if there's a fair amount of pressure to use copper so as to justify the move to FTTN.


----------



## Tisme

sydboy007 said:


> This is what the Abbott Govt has put it's hand into our collective pockets to buy back at a grossly inflated value, a rotting copper network held together with corrosive gels and plastic bags, and somehow this is the way of the future for us.




I don't know about the plastic bags, but I seen plenty of inverted juice bottles used to water proof the K series connectors in the pits.


----------



## Smurf1976

drsmith said:


> it's the previous government that made the decision about ultimate financial responsibility for those networks.




Whoever privatised Telstra in the first place is absolutely to blame for the mess.

Privatisation is little more than inter-generational theft in most cases. Sell a working asset to a private owner, let them run it into the ground, then buy it back sometime later at an inflated price and spend a fortune to fix it.

In due course the same will inevitably happen with power, water, rail, airports and all the rest, indeed we're already quite some way down that track with power and on a limited scale it's already happened with rail and airports. Sell it today, private owner milks it for all its' worth, taxpayer then pays a fortune to buy it back and another fortune to fix it.

Either keep critical infrastructure in public ownership or alternatively, force the private owners to spend the $ on maintenance and refurbishment.

As for not being able to respond in a timely manner to mass disruptions, well that's what happens when you cut staff to the bone and rely heavily on contractors. It always works fine when there's an average workload, falling in a heap the moment there's a crisis. Same happens everywhere that uses that strategy.


----------



## drsmith

Smurf1976 said:


> Whoever privatised Telstra in the first place is absolutely to blame for the mess.



The Howard government can't be blamed for the mess that the subsequent Labor created as the NBN but I do have sympathy for the view that the monopoly side of Telstra's business should have been structurally separated prior to privatisation of the rest.

That though would have still left the government with the copper.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> The Howard government can't be blamed for the mess that the subsequent Labor created as the NBN but I do have sympathy for the view that the monopoly side of Telstra's business should have been structurally separated prior to privatisation of the rest.
> 
> That though would have still left the government with the copper.




There was nothing to top the Howard Govt from selling a Telstra retail and Telecom wholesale network operator with a mandated open access regime.

Telecom wholesale would have had a built in incentive to get as much traffic onto it's network as possible.  There wouldn't have been any benefit to them chumming up with Telstra retail.

The Howard Govt. ran the numbers and found selling a vertically integrated monopoly would raise more $$$ for the Govt, even though it would be to the long term detriment of the industry and customers.

Once can argue that Labor missed an opportunity for not using OTC to start viable competition, instead of rolling it into Telecom at the time, but they at least had the monopolist shackled and could push it towards providing better outcomes.

Do you see the inconsistency between the Howard Govt leaving Telstra with few limits on how it operated in the market, and how Abbott Govt brought in changes to licensing conditions mid Dec 2014 to become operational at Jan 1 2015 to force any company offering high speed internet services like FTTB would have to be structurally separated and provide open access to their network at a fix cost.

It does beg the question of why Telstra has been given over a decade to achieve what other parties have been given 6.5 months.  From complaints in opposition of not allowing enough competition with the NBN, to doing just about everything to stop competition when in office.  Some consistency in their policy would be welcome.

Then we have the potential for TPG to head to the courts claiming compensation.  Whether this happens or not, it does give them a decent bargaining chip against NBN.

It will be interesting to see if Telstra ia able to meet the mid year deadline of the CLC.


----------



## drsmith

Syd,

Re TPG and the NBN, I have little interest in constantly regurgitating old points of conversation over and over.

There comes a point where if we have different points of view, we have different points of view.


----------



## drsmith

An update on the rollout costs for FTTP,



> A six-month review by NBN chief financial officer Stephen Rue found it has cost $4316 per premise to install FTTP broadband in existing premises and $2780 in greenfields areas.




http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...cost-per-premise-doubles-20150224-13nps4.html


----------



## drsmith

AFR,



> The cost of connecting a single existing home or business to the national broadband network has risen to $4316 thanks to higher construction costs and a change in accounting rules, according to NBN Co.
> 
> NBN Co before a Senate estimates committee on Tuesday with new audited figures to show how much it costs the company to connect homes and businesses with fibre-optic cabling. This is the seventh review into the NBN since Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull took over the project.
> 
> In 2013 when Labor was rolling out the network, NBN Co said the cost per premise was $1100 – a figure that did not include the cost of connecting homes to local telephone exchanges and points of interconnect. Once that was included the total cost was around $3300.
> 
> But according to new figures from NBN Co chief executive Bill Morrow, the real cost in June 2013 was $3384 per premise. As of December 2014, the figure has risen to $3579.
> 
> "In the past six months, NBN Co has undertaken a comprehensive review of cost per premises of building the NBN," he said. "The findings will form part of our results materials on Thursday but due to the complexity of the subject and our intent for transparency I'd like to table the information here today for discussion.
> 
> "These are fully allocated costings and represent the cost of building a connection from the transit network to the customer or RSP equipment."




http://www.afr.com/p/technology/connecting_one_premise_to_national_PEpugsmYRESZc9G34M8uTI


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> AFR,
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.afr.com/p/technology/connecting_one_premise_to_national_PEpugsmYRESZc9G34M8uTI




So building FTTP would have been 10% over budget from Labor's original figure of $43 billion which was due to the rising contractor rates and remediation work on the Telstra infrastructure.  One thing is for sure the Liberal propaganda of $97 billion they sprouted before the election is no where near the mark.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> So building FTTP would have been 10% over budget from Labor's original figure of $43 billion which was due to the rising contractor rates and remediation work on the Telstra infrastructure.  One thing is for sure the Liberal propaganda of $97 billion they sprouted before the election is no where near the mark.



There's more to the required funding than just the capital expenditure but who knows what that would have ultimately cost under Labor given the state of the rollout when they left office.


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> There's more to the required funding than just the capital expenditure but who knows what that would have ultimately cost under Labor given the state of the rollout when they left office.




I should have added the link I was referring to


> NBN Co describes the model Morrow and Rue presented yesterday as representing "fully allocated costings" that represents "the true and full cost of building the network" in greenfields, brownfields and fixed wireless areas.



http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/24/nbn_co_fibre_build_was_close_to_budget/



> The cost fell, however, between June 2014 and December 2014, reflecting the impact of new deployment practices (such as using smaller splitters and thinner cables).




I have my doubts that these practices only occurred because of the new NBN co board under the coalition government, like any repetitive practices done it just takes time to get through the initial problematic issues and then more efficient ways will be found as well as technological developments.


----------



## sydboy007

I can't believe the Govt is considering doing FTTN at over 1.5KM

http://www.zdnet.com/article/nbn-co-out-to-tame-troublesome-copper/#ftag=RSSbaffb68

How does one agree to purchase a multi billion dollar network when they don't have a clue on the quality???

_But NBN Co does not yet know the state of the Telstra copper network. Morrow confirmed on Thursday that during renegotiations, NBN Co did not seek, and was not provided with, a history of Telstra's maintenance costs associated with the copper network._

At 1.5KM you start to get back to ADSL speeds.  Sounds like they're really scalling back on the number of nodes they plan to roll out to artificially reduce CAPEX

_He said that for customers who live over 1.5km away from a node, and would get much lower speeds than those next to the node, NBN Co is currently thinking through its options._

Once again people are puting their money where their demand is

_But Morrow said that the AU$3 rise in average revenue per user for the half, to AU$39, indicated that people would want to move to the higher tiers over time._


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> I should have added the link I was referring to
> 
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/24/nbn_co_fibre_build_was_close_to_budget/



I didn't recall reading that in the AFR article I linked but I had a reasonable idea of how the calculation had been arrived at. 



overhang said:


> I have my doubts that these practices only occurred because of the new NBN co board under the coalition government, like any repetitive practices done it just takes time to get through the initial problematic issues and then more efficient ways will be found as well as technological developments.



There are many variables that would feed into the cost per premise (CCP) for a build that would have had the duration of Labor's FTTP model. For this reason alone, it's therefore problematic to apply a CCP at a fixed point in time over a life of a project over such a timescale. One example is the 10% discount rate applied to Telstra for a significant proportion of the value of its deal with NBN Co. Over the long term that becomes very expensive, in particular if there are project delays. 

The Coalition's numbers also refer to peak funding which despite more now being on the capital side of the CCP estimate remains different to peak funding. For example, there's OPEX for the network already built.

While the Coalition's peak funding of $94bn was obviously political bearing in mind it was the worst combination of 4 possible scenarios, it's an interesting question as to how much the NBN might have cost under Labor. For example, who would have thought that we would have had over 50,000 boat arrivals effectively in two terms of Labor government with arrivals peaking at 1,000 per week in the term after the 2010 election ?

With the NBN rollout already well behind sched in 2013 and the rollout itself in further serious strife by the 2013 election, one can only imagine how that 10% discount rate alone would have compounded costs as the delays mounted up had Labor retained office.


----------



## drsmith

While not strictly NBN, the following is part of the communication's portfolio,



> The price of a standard postage stamp could rise from 70 cents to $1 and mail will take longer to arrive, under a plan announced by the Government today.
> 
> Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull said Australia Post would introduce a two-speed mail service, with a regular service operating two days slower than the current delivery speed, and a premium-rate priority service.






> A 60 cent stamp price will remain in place for pensioners and Commonwealth concession card holders, and Christmas cards will still cost 65 cents to send.
> 
> "Australia Post is facing significant structural decline as people choose to communicate over the internet," Mr Turnbull said in a statement.
> 
> "Australians are now sending 1 billion fewer letters a year than they were in 2008, with letters losses rising to more than $300 million a year.
> 
> "While Australia Post has been able to offset these losses by growing its parcels business, losses in letters are now so large that they are overwhelming all profitable areas of the business.
> 
> "Without reform total projected company losses could reach $6.6 billion over the next 10 years, with letters losses of $12.1 billion."
> 
> He said that despite the decrease, the postal service was still required to provide a Monday to Friday delivery service to most homes.




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-03/70c-stamps-could-cost-1-under-plan-for-australia-post/6276704


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> While not strictly NBN, the following is part of the communication's portfolio,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-03/70c-stamps-could-cost-1-under-plan-for-australia-post/6276704




A brilliant idea /sarc

Raise the cost while lowering the standard.  Should see a further exodus from snail mail.

A better option would have been to keep the cost at a similar level and reduced mail deliveries to 2 or 3 days a week.

Those requiring faster delivery can still pay for express post.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> A brilliant idea /sarc
> 
> Raise the cost while lowering the standard.  Should see a further exodus from snail mail.



It's good to see someone standing up for business. 



> About 97 per cent of letters sent in Australia were posted by government or businesses.




The senate though can knock if off through disallowance,



> The new regulations do not require changes to legislation but can be disallowed by the Senate.




http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...post-changes-price-rises-20150303-13tju7.html

Whichever way it's looked at, snail mail is dying with perhaps the exception of Xmas cards.


----------



## Smurf1976

I must say that I'm underwhelmed by the NBN having actually used it (FTTH).

Connection speed was no better than my ADSL to be honest, indeed perhaps slightly slower. Couldn't stream a YouTube video at maximum resolution for example.

I suspect that the limitation was the ISP itself, but that's not the point since it's the speed "as used" which counts rather than some theoretical network connection speed. It's akin to raising the speed limit on a highway to 200 km/h - completely pointless if the traffic is still crawling along at 40 due to some bottleneck. 

I'll give it another go when I get a chance (connection isn't mine, I only have ADSL) but so far at least, I'm underwhelmed.


----------



## moXJO

I know its off topic but does anyone know  a good paid vpn service that allows you to access US content that is geo blocked


----------



## sydboy007

moXJO said:


> I know its off topic but does anyone know  a good paid vpn service that allows you to access US content that is geo blocked




I've been happily using privateinternetaccess for a few years now.

If you do a bit of googling you can usually find a discount coupon.

They're reasonably priced at around $40 USD a year, up to 5 concurrent connections.  They recently launched a AU server as well

I do find sometimes I have to do a bit of hopping between their US based servers to find one not congested, but it's not too often and usually the second one I access is fast enough.

They have easily installed apps for windows and android.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I can't believe the Govt is considering doing FTTN at over 1.5KM
> 
> http://www.zdnet.com/article/nbn-co-out-to-tame-troublesome-copper/#ftag=RSSbaffb68



I meant to comment on this.

A while ago when a Telstra tech was around doing line repairs I asked about FTTN in the local area. He suggested a node would be placed where there is currently a Telstra pillar. He advised that the pillar itself is on a fibre line which runs from an exchange to a local school.

It's possible that Bill Morrow could be talking about initially placing nodes where fibre already exists before broadening the fibre backbone for more nodes.

His comment could also refer to low density semi-rural environments. 

In short, it might be a bit hasty to pass judgment without knowing the context.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> I meant to comment on this.
> 
> A while ago when a Telstra tech was around doing line repairs I asked about FTTN in the local area. He suggested a node would be placed where there is currently a Telstra pillar. He advised that the pillar itself is on a fibre line which runs from an exchange to a local school.
> 
> It's possible that Bill Morrow could be talking about initially placing nodes where fibre already exists before broadening the fibre backbone for more nodes.
> 
> His comment could also refer to low density semi-rural environments.
> 
> In short, it might be a bit hasty to pass judgment without knowing the context.




Either your tech isn't talking about a pillar, or he has no idea what he's talking about.

He might have been talking about a RIM which is more like a mini exchange.

Pillars are pure copper.  They just distribute the copper pairs from a main cable to the premise.

The fun part for NBN will be when they have to acknowledge there's no records to map exchange pair to pillar and pillar pair to premise.  If you've ever watched a tech at a pillar hunting around it's likely because he knows where you come in from the exchange, but he's trying to find your premise pair which usually ends up with a lot of trial and error.  Probably 15-20% of faults I deal with are at the pillar, usually due to another tech stuffing up our customer's line or poor soldering and the connections come lose / corrode.  I certainly wont be sorry to see them go, but do question the feasibility of putting a node at some pillar locations.  Certainly the pillar around the corner from my house doesn't have anywhere near the required space for a node and it's a problem likely repeated all around older suburbs with narrow streets and foot paths.  Any requirement to move the node to a different location would see costs increase exponentially as this would require extensive work on the copper cables.

Due to the lower quality copper used in Australia the speed drop off of VDSL2 would be faster here than the UK.  Notice that by 500M VDSL2 is likely to be slower than ADSL2+ at the same distance.  Whether vectoring will help with this I'm not sure.  The frequencies used in the VDSL standard attenuate very rapidly.  So if the coalition are going to skimp on the CAPEX then we might as well ask why bother if the performance boost is going to be minimal for a reasonably significant minority.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Either your tech isn't talking about a pillar, or he has no idea what he's talking about.
> 
> He might have been talking about a RIM which is more like a mini exchange.
> 
> Pillars are pure copper.  They just distribute the copper pairs from a main cable to the premise.



A pillar was what he said. He mentioned a fibre cable going through there from the exchange to a local school.

Whether or not the fibre cable was in addition to the copper main I didn't ask.


----------



## sptrawler

It sounds as though some of the hysterical screaming was unecassary, suprise, suprise.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/comm...-rod-hopes-for-old-pipes-20150312-142eed.html


----------



## sydboy007

How do you send out tenders worth $500M when you don't have updated design rules to cover the major transition of the NBN to the MTM model?

https://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2015/4/15/technology/nbn-design-rules-go-mia



> Key tenders worth more than $500 million have been sent to select vendors without the media being informed, technical documents including the NBN Design Rules have not been updated to include the multi-technology mix (MTM) NBN technologies, nor released for public scrutiny.






> A successful completion to the NBN rollout is, according to the definition of the “End of the Rollout Date”, when “the number of premises that have been either passed or adequately served is at least 92 per cent of the number of premises in Australia as at that date.”
> 
> Here we go again. Many Australians live in suburbs where premises are “passed” by HFC, yet cannot get HFC connected for one reason or another. The rollout should not end until “at least 92 per cent of the number of premises in Australia as at that date” are connected to the NBN or there is a legislated guarantee that premises will be connected to the NBN when requested by residents. Why should Australians expend $43 billion only to find 15-30 per cent of consumers cannot get connections similar to the areas deemed to have HFC now?






> NBN Co has been asked monthly for the new or draft design rules and other associated technical documents that will provide an engineering perspective on what the MTM NBN will look like but NBN Co has indicated the documents are not yet ready for release. How can this be? How can NBN Co release tenders worth more than $500 million (possibly several billion dollars) without an engineering solution?


----------



## Tisme

See Telstra are ramping up advertising for the reintroduced wifi  hot spot system that will still be a poor cousin to the fibre system. Funny how the rollout and publicity starts before a federal budget from their biggest supporter, after canning it two years ago  It's like rolling out an S class steam loco to deflect attention for budgetary delay of diesel electric.


----------



## DB008

*5G*

Where is NBNMyths?

I mentioned 5G a while ago and got shot down.

Hmm....



> *How 5G will push a supercharged network to your phone, home, car*​
> The next evolution in wireless networking holds promises of self-driving cars and movies that download in the blink of an eye. 5G is big at this year's Mobile World Congress, but don't expect it until 2020.
> Whatever the date, 5G is coming.
> 
> To deliver 5G, carriers will need to boost network capacity between phones and the big antennas, called base stations, they install every few miles.
> 
> They can start by tapping into unoccupied spectrum -- radio-wave territory relatively uncluttered with signals today. Radio waves vibrate with a frequency measured in megahertz or even faster gigahertz. Today's phones communicate at less than 3GHz; 5G will require higher frequency bands.
> 
> But radio waves at higher frequencies are harder to transmit over longer distances or if buildings and walls are in the way. To compensate, carriers will rely on advanced antenna technologies. These include massive MIMO (multiple input multiple output) antennas, which send many radio signals in parallel, and beamforming, which focuses radio energy in a specific direction.
> 
> Carriers will also pack base stations more closely together to improve the odds your phone will be near one. They will also supplement today's long-range "macrocells," which can reach up to about 20 miles, with lots of short-range "small cells," which can cover up to a few hundred feet.
> 
> Installing one macrocell and getting it running costs hundreds of thousands of dollars, while mounting small cells every block on power poles costs tens of thousands of dollars apiece, Fujitsu's Adeyemi says.
> 
> It's too soon to say how much 5G will cost, but carriers' ongoing 4G build-out may total $1.7 trillion through 2020, says Dan Warren, senior technologist for the GSMA mobile industry group. Carriers won't foot the 5G bill without the prospect of lots of new paying customers.
> 
> IoT should deliver those customers. The market will hit $3.04 trillion by 2020, says researcher IDC. Network-equipment maker Cisco Systems, which has a vested interest in IoT's success, predicts the market will be worth $19 trillion over the next decade.
> 
> http://www.cnet.com/au/news/how-5g-will-push-a-supercharged-network-to-your-phone-home-and-car/​


----------



## boofhead

I can see why he shot you down. Read the text you quoted. Have a look at the issues NBN and the mobile carriers are having with approvals with base station installs. 5G to deliver the needed speed with good costumer density will need a lot more towers.


----------



## sydboy007

*Re: 5G*



DB008 said:


> Where is NBNMyths?
> 
> I mentioned 5G a while ago and got shot down.
> 
> Hmm....




The higher the frequency the less distance the signal will travel, and in cities the higher frequencies get blocked by buildings a lot more than the lower ones.

A single fiber has more capacity that the entire radio spectrum.

Are you proposing we wait till at least 2020 before upgrading the Internet infrastructure in Australia?  We'd have to wait a few years past that date for the equipment to drop in price.

How would you propose we affordably double or triple wireless downloads?  It currently accounts for around 3% of downloads and I doubt it will get much higher than that because the cost per GB on wireless is roughly 100 times the cost of adsl / fibre.  My ISP provides 1 TB of downloads for $70.  It's common to pay around $10 per GB on wireless.  An expensive internet plan would give you $5GB for the same cost.

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@...&prodno=8153.0&issue=December 2014&num=&view=


----------



## DB008

boofhead said:


> I can see why he shot you down. Read the text you quoted. Have a look at the issues NBN and the mobile carriers are having with approvals with base station installs. 5G to deliver the needed speed with good costumer density will need a lot more towers.




He said there would never be a 5G...little bit different


----------



## sydboy007

So we were promised faster cheaper and more affordable.

http://blog.jxeeno.com/nbn-fttn-limited-to-121-mbps-during-transition/



> In the most recent draft of the Wholesale Broadband Agreement (WBA 2.2) released Access Seekers for FTTN Business Readiness Testing, nbn has revealed that speeds will be limited to 12/1 Mbps during the so-called “Co-existence Period” on the Fibre to the Node network.
> 
> During this period, all bandwidth profiles will be restricted to reduce interference with existing legacy services that run on the Telstra network.  A similar limitation will apply to Fibre to the Basement, however, the maximum speed will be limited to 25/5 Mbps rather than 12/1 Mbps.






> For customers who live close to the exchange, the speed attainable over the Fibre to the Node network may actually be lower during the “Co-existance period” than what’s possible over their existing ADSL2+ service.






> However, since the duration of the Co-existence period varies depending in the area still using ADSL or special services – customers who experience greater speeds over ADSL greater than the 12/1 Mbps offered would still need to migrate to NBN before NBN Co declares the “Co-existence period” over.
> 
> Once the Co-existence Period is over, nbn™ will provide 12/1 Mbps and 25/5 Mbps speed profiles similar to those on Fibre to the Premises with higher speeds only available as an “up-to” range.  *However, NBN Co also states in the document that it is considered acceptable if the customer only receives speeds set out in the PIR or PIR range “once” in 24 hours.*




Just wow.  Basically you have to wait up to 18 months once the node goes live in your area before you can start thinking about ordering a higher speed service.  If your sync speed is currently higher than 12Mbs you'll have to downgrade for a period of time till the speed limits are removed.  

Hopefully the Senate committee on the NBN will be able to push NBN to provide estimates on how much this will cut from revenue compared to the FTTP rollout.

This issue was also highlighted when the coalition first broached using FTTN instead of FTTP, but the then opposition was still willing to lie that they could do the rollout in just 3 years.  Now they're saying you have to limit speeds for half that time frame.

Hands up those happy to pay for a speed and only getting it once every 24 hours?  I wonder how long once is.  Broadband brought to you by the Abbott Luddites.


----------



## drsmith

Don't get too excited Syd.

Remember that Labor's fanciful FTTP rollout was a smoking train wreck marooned on the side of the tracks when this government came to office.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> Don't get too excited Syd.
> 
> Remember that Labor's fanciful FTTP rollout was a smoking train wreck marooned on the side of the tracks when this government came to office.




Smoking wreck hey? according to who?


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Don't get too excited Syd.
> 
> Remember that Labor's fanciful FTTP rollout was a smoking train wreck marooned on the side of the tracks when this government came to office.




Over the last 18 months it's the only growth of the NBN.

Over the next 18 months, lets see.  Take out the fake jump in NBN connections when the HFC networks are handed over to NBN as they'll be barely fit for service till a few billion in upgrades is spent.

Were you expecting the FTTN rollout to have a go slow limitation for the first 18 months of operations?  I knew there's be issues with running ADSL and VDSL over the same infrastructure, but thought MT would let the service degradation for those on ADSL force their move to FTTN.

FTTB may turn out to be a fast growth area, though TPG has gotten around the anti competition rules of MT.  Funny how MT turned from encouraging competition to doing his best to cruel it eh.

The fun part will be just how the FTTN is handled.  MT can pretend all he likes about how easy it will be, but it's a lot more complicated than the FTTN rollout.  He'd have been better to have done FTTdp and then everyone could have paid for their connection as required, rather than just new home owners.

This slow down also seems to indicate that customers will be moved one by one to the node as NBN orders are actioned.  That's got to be a fairly costly exercise.   Even if you can do a few lines at a time you might have 80-100 tech attendances for each node over the 18 month transition period for customer migration.  Who's paying for that?  It's not something required with the move to FTTP.

Remember the rolls royce satellites that MT said weren't needed.  Well Morrow has pretty much admitted they were the way to go.  So far on time and on budget baring a disaster at launch.  Where would we be if MT had gotten his way and we were trying to find service via commercial operators?


----------



## drsmith

Some memories here are very short.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Some memories here are very short.




You seem to have forgotten the Liberal 25Mbs to all by the end of their first term and the broken promise just 3 months after the election.

It's quite funny that those with a decent ADSL connection now face the prospect of a slow lane FTTN connection until the copper network gets shut down.  I wonder how many people who bought the Liberal spin thought this was the way of the future.

Still no node count estimate.  Still no max copper length.  Reports in some of the trial sites indicate customers from other pillars being moved.  At what cost?  How much longer copper runs and reduction in maximum speed?

What the Liberals are delivering is not what they promised at the election, yet you're far more critical of Labor.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> You seem to have forgotten the Liberal 25Mbs to all by the end of their first term and the broken promise just 3 months after the election.



No Syd I haven't and I haven't indicated that I have.


----------



## Tisme

Should never have been used as a vote catcher, but sold to the public as an offset asset to the sale of utility assets.


----------



## IFocus

drsmith said:


> Some memories here are very short.





And some here seriously blind........mean time I am in line to connect to the NBN in the coming months..............it will seriously reduce my costs and massively improve productivity


----------



## sptrawler

Well in Mandurah, there is fibre to the home at my place and both my neighbours.

None are connecting, wireless only seems to be the choice.:1zhelp:

It's a bit like gas and electric, you have to pay service costs on both, if you can mitigate your usage and only use one it makes sense.

The NBN is going to be a 'white elephant' untill you can force people to use it.

If your internet and phone needs can be serviced on wireless, why would you add the extra cost of NBN.

Most people I know, aren't.

Everyone is talking about all these baby boomers, going into retirement, they were canny with their money when working.
They will be more so, when retired.IMO

I'm sure the take up will be abysmal unless the cost is minimal, then the return on investment will be crap.


----------



## So_Cynical

sptrawler said:


> If your internet and phone needs can be serviced on wireless, why would you add the extra cost of NBN.
> 
> Most people I know, aren't.




Then most people you know don't use the internet much.

----------------------

I get Fibre connected on Friday after a 4 week install wait and 6 months after my building was made fibre ready, im one of the lucky ones as the fibre stops just up the road, those people are stuck with copper for the foreseeable future, connection cost of about the same.

I could save $10 per month on a far inferior wireless service...but i have a clue, i use the internet.


----------



## sptrawler

So_Cynical said:


> Then most people you know don't use the internet much.
> 
> .




Well that is the issue, most people I know don't use the internet enough to justify a bundle.

For example my mother, my mother in law, don't use the internet at all.

My oldest son and his family do.

My second son hardly uses a phone at all.

My two daughters are full wireless, no landline at all.

This might be unusual, but I doubt it.

Unless you have a desire to have high speed internet, why would you spend $60/mth as well as your mobile plan?


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> The NBN is going to be a 'white elephant' untill you can force people to use it.




You are aware that the analogue system is kaput in a couple of years and NBN will be the only hard pipe connect available?

Wireless is hopeless so far in comparison to even analogue for repeatability, consistent speed, consistent connection.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> Well in Mandurah, there is fibre to the home at my place and both my neighbours.
> 
> None are connecting, wireless only seems to be the choice.:1zhelp:
> 
> It's a bit like gas and electric, you have to pay service costs on both, if you can mitigate your usage and only use one it makes sense.
> 
> The NBN is going to be a 'white elephant' untill you can force people to use it.
> 
> If your internet and phone needs can be serviced on wireless, why would you add the extra cost of NBN.
> 
> Most people I know, aren't.
> 
> Everyone is talking about all these baby boomers, going into retirement, they were canny with their money when working.
> They will be more so, when retired.IMO
> 
> I'm sure the take up will be abysmal unless the cost is minimal, then the return on investment will be crap.




If you can get by on an expensive wireless data plan then by all means do it, but I don't really know anyone who could get by with a 1 or 2 GB a month data limit, especially when it includes uploads as all mobile based data plans do.  Better make sure they bill you in 1KB increments as some do it in 10 / 100 and even 1000KB increments which can chew up your allowance very quickly.

I don't consider my household to be an extreme example, but 3 people go through 120-150GB a month, though that has increased by 20-30GB since stan and netflix got introduced.

Ask anyone trying to work from home if they can do it via a 4G dongle?  Might be acceptable when out on the road, but certainly not what you want to put up with all the time.  Latency sucks on those networks, making remoting in to work a pain.  Congestion in peak times also becomes an issue.

I don't see my parents as being outliers, but when they got offered to connect to the NBN they jumped at the chance.  No more line rental.  Faster speeds.  4 times the download limit, all while cutting their costs and getting access to far cheaper phone calls.  Just bought my dad a mini ATOM based PC so he can watch stan more easily.  Am expecting him to upgrade his allowance soon as he's likely going to watch it more than standard TV, especially as he gets entire seasons to watch on demand.  He already watches an hour or 2 of youtube videos most days.  He loves the inventiveness of people and see how they build things.

If netflix UK offers the kind of shows my mum enjoys I'm sure she's going to want a similar set up to my dads in her TV room, and then you'll have for a few hours a day 4Mbs of video traffic.   That's 500KB a second.  That's not affordable on any kind of mobile service.

At work we've seen netflix traffic already jump to over 30Gbs in peak, and it never seems to drop much below 10Gbs, even in the middle of the night.  We're also signing up a few hundred fetch tv subscribers a month.  Traffic for that is on a gentle glide towards 10gbs in peak.  Each channel requires around 2Mbs, so gives you an idea how popular streaming is already, and we're no where near the levels seen in the USA.

ABC iView is extremely popular too.  Any time there's a glitch we get so many complaints from customers.  We lso offered it unmetered, which helps to make it an affordable way to catch up shows you missed.

The world is moving on from fitting into a broadcast schedule to watching what we want when we want it, and to a degree where we want to.  Fixed broadband is the only way this is possible.

Our SME customers are saving a small fortune as we can migrate them to the NBN.  Gone are EFM services or bonded SHDSL that cost a bomb.  Supporting higher bandwidth needs on the NBN is just so much cheaper for us, and far easier to support as well.  I'm sick of telstra techs telling me there's no good pairs left, a CNI has been lodged, that Telstra moves at snail pace fixing these issues.  It's galling we have to raise interference investigations to get a qualified tech to work on a fault, and we pay for the service even when the tech fixes a fault within the Telstra network.  How many companies get away with billing customers to fix issues they're responsible for?  Will be interesting to see how FTTN copes with these issues.

NBN is not the easiest company to deal with, but they are far better than Telstra, and they don't have a vested interest into trying to cruel the opposition.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> No Syd I haven't and I haven't indicated that I have.




So scathing of Labor, but accepting of the Abbott and Turbull bait and switch network.

Come one come all for the faster cheaper more affordable network to be in your neighbourhood no later than December 2016.

Oh, slight change in plans.  Now we'll be in your neighbourhood no later than 2019?  Oh, there's no more speed guarantee either, but you know 15Mbs is plenty.

Oh another slight change in plans.  Now when we get into your neighbourhood you'll be speed limited for up to 18 months, and in fact you might have to take a speed drop depending on where in the node lotto copper rankings that you are.

Oh, something else you should consider.  If you do need / want a higher speed than 25Mbs after the speed limit is removed, it's back to an upto range.  Node lotto will determine what you get.  Ah, another slight caveat is the upto speed only needs to be available once in a 24 hour period.  Ah, how long is that period?  TBA.

Oh, now we're trying to limit the CAPEX costs to fudge the MTM is cheaper, so new housing estates will have to stump up some extra cash.  This is supported by Liberal voters as they tend to be older and already in established housing where they get their connection for free.

So one has to wonder what the next change in plans will be.


----------



## sydboy007

Senator CONROY: What does a high degree of transparency mean to you?

Mr Morrow: One to which we use the basis of a standard model which is a publicly traded company and the obligations associated either legally or from the stock exchange and that is, indeed, what we practice.

Senator CONROY: So, you do not think that it has anything to do with transparency to the public?

Mr Morrow: It is a standard that we believe that we use for transparency to the public.

Senator CONROY: No. Transparency to the stock exchange are manufactured things that you do not have to do. You just manufacture that. I have got no complaint that you have manufactured it, but that does not satisfy transparency to the public and transparency to the parliament when you refuse to answer a single question about a single expense incurred by your company.

Mr Morrow: We believe that we are compliant with the current government's position that NBN should be more transparent and we believe that we are””

Senator CONROY: No, not more; a high degree of transparency.

Mr Morrow: And we believe that we do have a high degree of transparency.

Senator CONROY: Not being prepared to publish, on your own admission with no direction from the government, any information about your forecasts complies with a high degree of transparency?

Mr Morrow: It does, as that is a government decision and not an NBN decision.

Senator CONROY: I said if the government does not direct you. If it directs you I accept that, but you have stated that you would not do it anyway. So, I am asking you, do you think that complies with a high degree of transparency in refusing to publish a single forecast beyond seven months?

Mr Morrow: I believe it complies with a high degree of transparency, prudency and responsibility to protect the investors who are the taxpayers of Australia.

Senator CONROY: Protect the investors. You are protecting the taxpayers from themselves?

Mr Morrow: Indeed.


----------



## Knobby22

Unbelievable. They just don't even bother anymore.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> So scathing of Labor, but accepting of the Abbott and Turbull bait and switch network.



As appealing as Labor's FTTP dream seemed, the history of how it progressed under that government cannot be forgotten or changed.

Further to that I'll also add that continuing to spend time at the alter of the discredited Mr Red Underpants is time wasted.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> As appealing as Labor's FTTP dream seemed, the history of how it progressed under that government cannot be forgotten or changed.
> 
> Further to that I'll also add that continuing to spend time at the alter of the discredited Mr Red Underpants is time wasted.




So what is your perceptions of the current rate of rollout for the MTM?  Recently there were roughly 70 non FTTP customers.  Not a bad run rate I suppose.

Do you think tax payers have gotten a good deal from the renegotiations with Telstra and Optus?  My understanding is NBN has now taken on the asbestos liabilities from Telstra.  Not sure what that would be worth, but is a decent risk now borne by tax payers.

Morrow has already admitted that by moving towards Docsis 3.1, bleeding edge technology, will allow them to cut back on CAPEX as they will take the increased bandwidth it offers to reduce the splitting of amount of new nodes to be introduced into the network.  So when MT talks about 1Gbs/100Mbs connections being available, is he talking theoretical, or are they actually going to have the bandwidth available to support those speeds?  Is it hype over reality?  I suppose we'll have to wait till 2017 to find out as they're only going to start trials sometime in 2016.


----------



## drsmith

I didn't think Syd that you'd stand at the alter of Senator Conroy for very long. It is after all now a very lonely place.

As for that long term reluctance to accept that Simon Hackett isn't on the dark side, 



sydboy007 said:


> Morrow has already admitted that by moving towards Docsis 3.1, bleeding edge technology, will allow them to cut back on CAPEX as they will take the increased bandwidth it offers to reduce the splitting of amount of new nodes to be introduced into the network.  *So when MT talks about 1Gbs/100Mbs connections being available, is he talking theoretical, or are they actually going to have the bandwidth available to support those speeds?*  Is it hype over reality?  I suppose we'll have to wait till 2017 to find out as they're only going to start trials sometime in 2016.




Simon Hackett December 14 2013,



> Upgrade paths beyond 100 megabits for HFC are noted in the strategic review document on page 100. However, the review is also being conservative (in my view) in framing DOCSIS 3.1 as only supporting up to 250 megabit services on HFC.
> 
> *I have participated in vendor briefings already in which I’ve been shown the rollout path via DOCSIS 3.1 all the way to delivering 1000 megabit data rates. These upgrade paths start to become possible once DOCSIS 3.1 equipment hits the market in the next 3-5 years.*
> 
> It is also important to note that coaxial cable doesn’t have the very short distance limitations that copper does, at gigabit speeds.
> 
> These are much ‘fatter’ cables – in physical and in spectral terms. They are of a far higher quality than copper phone lines, and are capable of sustaining dramatically higher bandwidths.




The link from which the above has been sourced has been long since been posted on this thread however I have posted it again below for reference.

http://simonhackett.com/2013/12/14/hfc-in-the-nbn/#more-1090

My bolds.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> I didn't think Syd that you'd stand at the alter of Senator Conroy for very long. It is after all now a very lonely place.
> 
> As for that long term reluctance to accept that Simon Hackett isn't on the dark side,
> 
> 
> 
> Simon Hackett December 14 2013,
> 
> 
> 
> The link from which the above has been sourced has been long since been posted on this thread however I have posted it again below for reference.
> 
> http://simonhackett.com/2013/12/14/hfc-in-the-nbn/#more-1090
> 
> My bolds.




I'm not deny that DOCIS 3.1 can handle 1Gbs speeds.  I'm asking is the HFC network going to be provisioned for these speeds, or is NBN being forced to take the increase in spectral efficiency and cut CAPEX so that the available bandwidth is such that only up to 100Mbs will be possible?

Morrow has already come out in the Senate Committee and admitted that DOCIS 3.1 will allow them to reduce CAPEX by reducing the node splits ie higher level of contention within the NBN.

Is MT and NBN management being honest when they talk about the potential of 1Gbs via DOCIS 3.1, or is it yet another bait and switch where the eventual product rolled out is far lower than what was promised?


----------



## orr

drsmith said:


> Remember that Labor's fanciful FTTP rollout was a smoking train wreck marooned on the side of the tracks when this government came to office.




Ah no it wasn't, unless you had your head buried in the 'Merde och' press.
and some of us have memories that do go back, Like to the smoking ruin the economy was left in by treasurer John Howard ... And Smokin Joe is 'working' his way toward digging the economy into a similar hole, unable to unpick Howard's middle class profligacy  over milk sop costello.

Ah and to remember Richard Allston.... 

Great re-run from 'Working dogs' 'Utopia' last night. The deep truth buried in the episode is the worth of the In Land freight link Melb -Bris . 
Don't expect anything from Captain Infrastructure ClownShoes.

And don't take my word for it google 'Roads to Nowhere' the Monthly and get Linsay Fox's take


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I'm not deny that DOCIS 3.1 can handle 1Gbs speeds.  I'm asking is the HFC network going to be provisioned for these speeds, or is NBN being forced to take the increase in spectral efficiency and cut CAPEX so that the available bandwidth is such that only up to 100Mbs will be possible?
> 
> Morrow has already come out in the Senate Committee and admitted that DOCIS 3.1 will allow them to reduce CAPEX by reducing the node splits ie higher level of contention within the NBN.
> 
> Is MT and *NBN management* being honest when they talk about the potential of 1Gbs via DOCIS 3.1, or is it yet another bait and switch where the eventual product rolled out is far lower than what was promised?



Here you go Syd,

http://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-i...unleash-fibre-speeds-for-cable-customers.html

Beyond that, you can always send an email across the great void to the dark side.

My bolds.



orr said:


> Ah no it wasn't, unless you had your head buried in the 'Merde och' press.



The reference is in this thread if you care to look.

I'm not doing your homework for you.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Here you go Syd,
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-i...unleash-fibre-speeds-for-cable-customers.html
> 
> Beyond that, you can always send an email across the great void to the dark side.






> “Effectively, this technology *has the potential* to offer speeds equivalent to what’s on offer by full fibre to the premises and up to 100 times faster (up to 10Gbps) than what is currently provided by today’s HFC network."




Time will tell if it's media hype or they're actually building the network to deliver what the glossy PR brochures talk about.  NBN will be a guinea pig for the new DOCIS 3.1 standard.  H/W will be relatively untested in the wild.  Hopefully NBN are up to the challenge of dealing with vendors over promising and under delivering.  The FTTP network was based on relatively old standards and cheaply mass produced H/W.  DOCIS 3.1 H/W is going to be pretty much first gen new release, and a similar price to buying an iphone on launch rather than getting and older product.  There's always lots of blood letting when you're at the bleeding edge of technology.  Expect repeated s/w and firmware updates to sort out problems and weird network glitches.

Suppose those on FTTN can look on in envy as they suck up their 12/1 18 month speed limit then face the prospect of paying for an up to speed that's provided once in a 24 hour period.


----------



## drsmith

Read down a little further Syd,



> “With this announcement, NBN Co joins an elite group of multi-system operator (MSOs) like Comcast and Liberty Global who have committed to significant DOCSIS 3.1 upgrades of their HFC networks. The upgrade puts NBN Co on a path to offer Gigabit broadband services within a short period of time.


----------



## So_Cynical

So_Cynical said:


> I get Fibre connected on Friday




Thanks Labor, thank you Greens, Thanks Rob and Tony . 
~


----------



## IFocus

So_Cynical said:


> Thanks Labor, thank you Greens, Thanks Rob and Tony .
> ~




Excellent SC hope to join you some time this year


----------



## So_Cynical

IFocus said:


> Excellent SC hope to join you some time this year




Its amazing, i still can't believe i downloaded a 800 meg movie in only 5 and a half minutes.


----------



## DB008

So_Cynical said:


> Thanks Labor, thank you Greens, Thanks Rob and Tony .
> ~




Well done.

I recently moved and have a crap internet connection. I'm also on the limit of ADSL (I think a touch over 4km from the cabinet).

Been checking the NBN Co website for updates, but nothing as yet on the suburb l've moved to.


----------



## So_Cynical

DB008 said:


> Been checking the NBN Co website for updates, but nothing as yet on the suburb l've moved to.




It is painfully slow - the rollout, probably can't genuinely even call it a rollout, more like an ease out...from the first time i saw the shiny blue cable in my street to actual availability was about 7 months then another 5 weeks wait for the install.

And my area is Fibre, so the original NBN not the half assed Noalition NBN...the half assed NBN seems to be taking even longer.


----------



## sydboy007

So_Cynical said:


> It is painfully slow - the rollout, probably can't genuinely even call it a rollout, more like an ease out...from the first time i saw the shiny blue cable in my street to actual availability was about 7 months then another 5 weeks wait for the install.
> 
> And my area is Fibre, so the original NBN not the half assed Noalition NBN...the half assed NBN seems to be taking even longer.




Bite your tongue.  At a recent Senate Estimates Committee the MTM had added around 70 users.  Not sure if any of those 70 is actually a commercial customer.  Strangely MT hasn't been terribly forthcoming with the progress of his faster cheaper more affordable network.


----------



## sydboy007

Sometimes MTs chutzpah is breathtaking

Back in Feb 201 while in opposition he was saying



> “There is enough capacity on private satellites already in orbit or scheduled for launch for the NBN to deliver broadband to the 200,000 or so premises in remote Australia without building its own,” Turnbull said in his statement at the time. That statement appears to have been removed from the Minister’s personal website since that time.




Now he's playing the typical Liberal policy of blaming Labor and in a way rewrite history

http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/media/LTSS



> “One of the mistakes that Labor made in Government is that it sold its interim satellite service as offering ADSL-equivalent services in the city,” the Member for Wentworth wrote.
> 
> “This may have been true of headline speeds that could be achieved, but capacity is different. Whereas you can always make an incremental investment in the core of your network for fixed line – or even fixed wireless – networks to increase capacity, once a satellite is launched, its capacity is fixed until you decide to launch another one.”
> 
> “But Labor badly misjudged how much capacity would be needed on the Interim Satellite Service, and crucially underestimated how much demand there would be for the Long Term Satellite Service. A review of the fixed wireless and satellite services found that they had underestimated demand by around 200,000 end-user services. This has meant we have had to do substantial work and invest billions of dollars extra to ensure that we are able to cater for the extra demand <sorry Malcolm but you originally opposed this investment>.”
> 
> “They also had no tools to enforce ‘fair-use’ policies meaning that Retail Service Providers (RSPs) and heavy users could use data allowances of up to 60GB a month and clog services at peak times, without having to pay for that.”
> 
> “The NBN’s Long Term Satellite Service will be able to identify both RSPs and individual end users and take action to ensure they are not unduly disrupting capacity across the network <something that wouldn't be possible if Labor had followed your but from the private sector policy>.”




Now some reality on Turnbull's claims that the private sector could have met the capacity requirements of rural Australia.  Info provided by Matt Dawson who was the NBN satellite coordinator.



> *Dawson said that NBN Co could probably kluge together something like 6 to 10GHz of capacity through commercially available agreements. The total capacity available to Australia was something like 40GHz, he said. In comparison, nbn’s own satellites would be able to deliver something like 90GHz*



.

Once again the Nationals are silent on an issue very important to their constituents.  If Labor had followed Turnbull's suggestion there would be no improvement within site for much of rural Australia, and with demand exceeding supply you can be sure that the private sector would have been milking excess profits from the public purse.  It's galling he's trying to take credit for what was a policy choice by Labor that he regularly opposed.

One has to wonder if Malcolm still stands by his opposition to the NBN satellite build now that he has removed it from his own web site.  Like Abbott has learned with his tweets, once it's on the internet it's out there forever.


----------



## Tisme

sydboy007 said:


> Sometimes MTs chutzpah is breathtaking
> 
> 
> Now he's playing the typical Liberal policy of blaming Labor and in a way rewrite history




He's got a reputation amongst his colleagues for being a deflector and Pontius Pilate.

I was watching the ABC the other day when they showed the families out bush who can't get bandwidth to educate their kids. They would have been better staying with school of the air. Anyone who has an iota of knowledge of satellite comms knows ADSL speeds are a whim.

Malcolm is that smug SOB in the room who just has to ask the logical fallacy to cement his own superiority. 

What beats me is why Bill Shorten doesn't jump on history rewrites and capitalise on them. Same would apply to any political party being smeared undeservedly (rare indeed ).


----------



## drsmith

We can see the difference between Labor and Liberal with the NBN rollout by some of the commentary on this forum.

Criticism of MT on commentary made years earlier vs more ongoing problems under Labor.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> We can see the difference between Labor and Liberal with the NBN rollout by some of the commentary on this forum.
> 
> Criticism of MT on commentary made years earlier vs more ongoing problems under Labor.




Ah, Labor's satellite solution was to resolve problems.  MT spent plenty of time claiming it wasn't necessary.

Now he's trying to claim the Govt is cleaning up Labor's satellite mess when they had already signed the contracts to give the bush a decent service.  Labor's solution will provide an excellent service for as long as the satellites have fuel to maintain orbit.  MT's solution would have left the bush under serviced for how long?

Can you imagine the stink MT would be going on with now if Labor had followed his advise and teamed up with NewSat.

MT should at least have the decency to admit when he was wrong and accept Labor got this part of the NBN well and truly right.

As for the NBN rollout, so far no commercial services I aware of under the MTM model.  Quite likely it will take them 2 years to actually start selling a single MTM service.  How long will it take to ramp up to the same speed as the current FTTP?  Why is NBN spending tax payers funds to train workers for private companies to do the FTTN work?  Seems the contracting companies are bilking the tax payer on this.


----------



## Tisme

sydboy007 said:


> Ah, Labor's satellite solution was to resolve problems.  MT spent plenty of time claiming it wasn't necessary.
> 
> .




He's always been the Chauncey Gardiner of technology and the internet. He just plods along and everyone hears what they want to hear: even with so many people knowing about marketing these days, it's amazing how branding continues to over shadow product quality.


----------



## sydboy007

Tisme said:


> He's always been the Chauncey Gardiner of technology and the internet. He just plods along and everyone hears what they want to hear: even with so many people knowing about marketing these days, it's amazing how branding continues to over shadow product quality.




His double standards knows no bounds

In 2010, Malcolm Turnbull introduced a private members bill demanding that the Government release NBN Co’s business case.  In 2013, after the previous Government had released NBN Co’s 2011 and 2012 Corporate Plans, the demands kept coming. In 2013, Malcolm Turnbull even criticised the process of submitting draft Corporate Plans to Government.

What has the transparent MT done since becoming Communications minister?

Released a NSA esq redacted Strategic Review and a Corporate Plan that could be characterised as plagiarism based on the SR.  Surely having the corporate plan since April is enough time to peruse it and release it?  Seems MT is a don't do what I do, do what I say type.

Estimates are the MTM is costing nearly $1B in IT upgrades for NBNs Operational Support Systems.  Quite a bit of money for no actual benefit to end consumers.  Scale roll out of the FTTN network was supposed to have started by mid 2014.  Getting past mid 2015 and there's not a single commercial FTTN service, let alone anything that could be considered a large scale roll out.

I suppose by the election MT will claim all the HFC customers are now happy MTM campers, though it's unlikely much in the way of HFC upgrades will have occurred, so the numerous complaints of poor speeds on whirlpool will likely continue.


----------



## Smurf1976

A significant scale of problem is emerging with the NBN equipment it seems, the batteries are failing!

I was in a battery shop today and was told that 7Ah 12V batteries are now generically known as "NBN batteries" and that shop alone had sold 4 today. They're going as far as providing in-home installation for those who can't figure it out themselves, the same sort of service historically reserved for stranded motorists with failed car batteries.

These batteries were a niche product previously, they had a use but not many were sold, but apparently now are the second biggest seller in that shop behind automotive batteries. So they're already outselling batteries used for solar systems, golf carts, power tools and so on at least at that supplier (a major chain retailer).

So, 4 today and that's just one shop in Hobart which isn't exactly the largest market for anything. I see that electrical wholesalers, that's the places where electricians buy their supplies, are also now stocking these batteries. Previously, they didn't generally sell batteries at all. They wouldn't be stocking them if they weren't selling.

I'm told that the crux of the problem is that the batteries supplied are of poor quality and were purchased in bulk 2 years ago, sitting around not being kept charged since that time and that these are still being installed. A poor quality battery, life shortened by sitting around, and they fail after about 6 months.

I went around to a presently empty house just to check on everything for a family member last weekend and noticed that the NBN box is beeping every few minutes and that a red light has come on. I haven't looked into it yet, but based on my conversation with staff in the battery shop today I suspect I'll be back there next week to buy an "NBN battery".

How long should the battery last? That depends on a lot of things but the answer is "several years" not six months.


----------



## Tisme

Smurf1976 said:


> A significant scale of problem is emerging with the NBN equipment it seems, the batteries are failing!
> 
> I was in a battery shop today and was told that 7Ah 12V batteries are now generically known as "NBN batteries" and that shop alone had sold 4 today. They're going as far as providing in-home installation for those who can't figure it out themselves, the same sort of service historically reserved for stranded motorists with failed car batteries.
> 
> These batteries were a niche product previously, they had a use but not many were sold, but apparently now are the second biggest seller in that shop behind automotive batteries. So they're already outselling batteries used for solar systems, golf carts, power tools and so on at least at that supplier (a major chain retailer).
> 
> So, 4 today and that's just one shop in Hobart which isn't exactly the largest market for anything. I see that electrical wholesalers, that's the places where electricians buy their supplies, are also now stocking these batteries. Previously, they didn't generally sell batteries at all. They wouldn't be stocking them if they weren't selling.
> 
> I'm told that the crux of the problem is that the batteries supplied are of poor quality and were purchased in bulk 2 years ago, sitting around not being kept charged since that time and that these are still being installed. A poor quality battery, life shortened by sitting around, and they fail after about 6 months.
> 
> I went around to a presently empty house just to check on everything for a family member last weekend and noticed that the NBN box is beeping every few minutes and that a red light has come on. I haven't looked into it yet, but based on my conversation with staff in the battery shop today I suspect I'll be back there next week to buy an "NBN battery".
> 
> How long should the battery last? That depends on a lot of things but the answer is "several years" not six months.




Those batteries are extensively used in the Security/Access panels and have been for decades. The Yuasa brand is the one that is common, but generally they are swapped out every year or so because of the need for a secure facility.


----------



## Smurf1976

Tisme said:


> Those batteries are extensively used in the Security/Access panels and have been for decades.




True, but the NBN replacement market vastly exceeds the security panel battery market.

My main point though is that I doubt very much that the average person expected NBN to supply them with a dud battery that fails after 6 months.


----------



## IFocus

Just had the fibre run to my joint and have the box on the outside wall, the excitement builds, going live some time in the next 6 months.


----------



## sydboy007

IFocus said:


> Just had the fibre run to my joint and have the box on the outside wall, the excitement builds, going live some time in the next 6 months.




Dun get too excited.  The install at the FTTN trial sites ain't going too well

2WOYY is now February 2016 having in the last month slipped form November to December and now to February.

Doesn't bode well for the national rollout.


----------



## ghotib

sydboy007 said:


> Dun get too excited.  The install at the FTTN trial sites ain't going too well
> 
> 2WOYY is now February 2016 having in the last month slipped form November to December and now to February.
> 
> Doesn't bode well for the national rollout.




2WOYY? WOT???


----------



## IFocus

sydboy007 said:


> Dun get too excited.  The install at the FTTN trial sites ain't going too well
> 
> 2WOYY is now February 2016 having in the last month slipped form November to December and now to February.
> 
> Doesn't bode well for the national rollout.




Yeah actually there is a real bun fight going on in my area with IInet not delivering the speed as advertized 100 Mbps verse getting 2 Mbps. IInet are scrambling to up grade the exchange hard ware to handle the traffic.

I am reasonably confident I'll get NBN before years end  as the progress has been as advertised so far the local contractors seem to have their act together.


----------



## sydboy007

ghotib said:


> 2WOYY? WOT???





2WOYY - an FTTN node in Wyong.  One of the "trial" stealth rollout sites.  The 1000 node rollout that was announced with much fan fare well over a year ago but has yet to sell a single service.

I'm not sure how much faster I can cope with, they way the FTTN rollout is running at.


----------



## sydboy007

IFocus said:


> Yeah actually there is a real bun fight going on in my area with IInet not delivering the speed as advertized 100 Mbps verse getting 2 Mbps. IInet are scrambling to up grade the exchange hard ware to handle the traffic.
> 
> I am reasonably confident I'll get NBN before years end  as the progress has been as advertised so far the local contractors seem to have their act together.




The sad fact is the CVC cost from NBN makes providing adequate bandwidth to users difficult.

With the advent of Netflix taking off, customers need a minimum 2Mbs to stream.  To provide that in the ~1800-2300 peak period currently costs $35 a month.  You then need to add in the AVC cost per subscriber which is a minimum of $24 a month, then the backhaul from the POI to the RSP's network, transit links, peering links, staff costs, hardware, rent and the rest.

It's analogous to the electricity network in terms of provisioning for peak usage, though in this case there's no regulated return on investment so we need to either stump up the cash to cope with the peak demand, or accept the congestion.


----------



## ghotib

sydboy007 said:


> 2WOYY - an FTTN node in Wyong.  One of the "trial" stealth rollout sites.  The 1000 node rollout that was announced with much fan fare well over a year ago but has yet to sell a single service.
> 
> I'm not sure how much faster I can cope with, they way the FTTN rollout is running at.



I did wonder if 2WOYY was some kind of 4-character code for Woy Woy.  Pretty close, eh?

Thank you

(and Spike Milligan)


----------



## Smurf1976

sydboy007 said:


> It's analogous to the electricity network in terms of provisioning for peak usage, though in this case there's no regulated return on investment so we need to either stump up the cash to cope with the peak demand, or accept the congestion.




Or we could just do what is actually done with electricity and encourage bulk downloading to occur at off-peak times.

Off-peak electric hot water = basically a bulk download of energy from the grid.

Watching a movie = no real reason why the same can't be done other than the likes of Netflix intentionally making it difficult.

By all means stream in real time at 7pm if you like, but that ought to cost more than downloading the same movie at midnight.


----------



## sydboy007

Smurf1976 said:


> Or we could just do what is actually done with electricity and encourage bulk downloading to occur at off-peak times.
> 
> Off-peak electric hot water = basically a bulk download of energy from the grid.
> 
> Watching a movie = no real reason why the same can't be done other than the likes of Netflix intentionally making it difficult.
> 
> By all means stream in real time at 7pm if you like, but that ought to cost more than downloading the same movie at midnight.




Yes, I think the Netflix model is in some ways wrong.  It does need to allow some for off off peak caching to limit the peak demands.  I think it's more of an issue getting the content owners to allow this than something Netflix is forcing.  Possibly they could start allowing their original content to be downloaded on a scheduled basis.  Might force other content owners to follow, though with a few ISPs offering unmetered access to netflix they're actually sending the wrong pricing signal.

Most ISPs already have peak / off peak download limits to try and encourage bulk downloads to occur in off peak.


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> Yes, I think the Netflix model is in some ways wrong.  It does need to allow some for off off peak caching to limit the peak demands.  I think it's more of an issue getting the content owners to allow this than something Netflix is forcing.  Possibly they could start allowing their original content to be downloaded on a scheduled basis.  Might force other content owners to follow, though with a few ISPs offering unmetered access to netflix they're actually sending the wrong pricing signal.
> 
> Most ISPs already have peak / off peak download limits to try and encourage bulk downloads to occur in off peak.




My daughter is getting netflix and having Telstra air installed, does anyone know if this Telstra air is reasonable speed? Don't mean to hijack the thread, just a quick question.


----------



## sydboy007

sptrawler said:


> My daughter is getting netflix and having Telstra air installed, does anyone know if this Telstra air is reasonable speed? Don't mean to hijack the thread, just a quick question.




Telstra Air is a platform they're rolling out where they have wifi hot spots on pay phones and other locations.  It allows you to use some of your exisiting download limit while out of home.  Could save you on mobile data.

The system can also share your home wifi with others.  When overseas you can use wifi via FON.

Telstra Air will have little bearing on Netflix.  That will depend on what kind of internet access your daughter has at home.


----------



## sptrawler

sydboy007 said:


> Telstra Air is a platform they're rolling out where they have wifi hot spots on pay phones and other locations.  It allows you to use some of your exisiting download limit while out of home.  Could save you on mobile data.
> 
> The system can also share your home wifi with others.  When overseas you can use wifi via FON.
> 
> Telstra Air will have little bearing on Netflix.  That will depend on what kind of internet access your daughter has at home.




She has moved home with us and wants to install her own internet, to reduce the chance of conflict, with us.

Therefore she is having Telstra install a modem and says it is on Telstra air, as she is deaf, this sometimes leads to her being taken for a ride. 

I thought I would ask my learned friends on the forum, prior to Telstra arriving at the door, if there is something we should be aware of.


----------



## drsmith

sptrawler said:


> I thought I would ask my learned friends on the forum, prior to Telstra arriving at the door, if there is something we should be aware of.



Telstra have an interactive map of where the sites are.

http://crowdsupport.telstra.com.au/...uery=Honour Avenue, Bicton WA 6157, Australia

More info,

http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/06/telstras-nationwide-wi-fi-network-is-now-called-air/


----------



## trainspotter

NBN cable rolled out in my area recently and they upgraded the pit out the front of my place. Speed went from 1560Kbs down to 57Kbs (slower then dialup) so I contacted my ISP and they put in a fault claim. Telstra man turned up and opened the pit. It appears they joined BOTH my incoming lines together (one for ADSL and alarm system) and the other for home phone 

Yeahhh can't wait for the NBN ... Telstra man also said my speed is as good as what NBN will be offering in the area


----------



## IFocus

sydboy007 said:


> The sad fact is the CVC cost from NBN makes providing adequate bandwidth to users difficult.
> 
> With the advent of Netflix taking off, customers need a minimum 2Mbs to stream.  To provide that in the ~1800-2300 peak period currently costs $35 a month.  You then need to add in the AVC cost per subscriber which is a minimum of $24 a month, then the backhaul from the POI to the RSP's network, transit links, peering links, staff costs, hardware, rent and the rest.
> 
> It's analogous to the electricity network in terms of provisioning for peak usage, though in this case there's no regulated return on investment so we need to either stump up the cash to cope with the peak demand, or accept the congestion.




You nailed it Syd


----------



## sptrawler

drsmith said:


> Telstra have an interactive map of where the sites are.
> 
> http://crowdsupport.telstra.com.au/...uery=Honour Avenue, Bicton WA 6157, Australia
> 
> More info,
> 
> http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/06/telstras-nationwide-wi-fi-network-is-now-called-air/




Thanks doc, I will show her the links, to help her understand more about it.

By the way you were spot on about the Roe Hwy/ Freeway interchange, looks like a winner. Two more lanes added to the Bibra Lake overpass. yippeee.


----------



## drsmith

sptrawler said:


> Thanks doc, I will show her the links, to help her understand more about it.
> 
> By the way you were spot on about the Roe Hwy/ Freeway interchange, looks like a winner. Two more lanes added to the Bibra Lake overpass. yippeee.



All 4 southbound lanes should be open to traffic later this month if there's not too much crappy weather.


----------



## sptrawler

drsmith said:


> All 4 southbound lanes should be open to traffic later this month if there's not too much crappy weather.




Aleluya, there is someone with foresight.


----------



## sydboy007

Just before the 2013 election MT was doing a grand launch with OpenNetworks at Sydney Park Village(10 min walk from my house).  he was lauding them building a FTTN network in the Apartment complex (it was really FTTB but hey in the rough and tumble of an election what's a bit of misdirection).

So what did MT say during his launching of the network?

http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/c...script-launch-of-openetworks-3-september-2013

At the event, Shadow Minister Turnbull was explicitly asked whether a Coalition Government would allow companies such as OPENetworks to continue deploying their own infrastructure in competiion with the NBN.

“Yes,” the Member for Wentworth said in response. He added that where a housing developer paid a company like OPENetworks to deploy telecommunications infrastructure, and as long as that new network complied with the NBN specifications, then the NBN company itself would be likely to acquire that network and run it as its own or leave the company to operate the infrastructure on an open access basis.

“… what that really means is that a developer then knows that he or she can get the fibre deployment company they know and trust and work with to get the work done so that it can either be operated as a network run by the developer or by a company like OPENetworks or it could just be sold over to the NBN Co,” Shadow Minister Turnbull said at the time.

So lets fast forward to August 2015, around 9 months after MT tried to kill off TPG's FTTB rollout by making retrospective changes to regulations, and see what NBN is up to.  OpenNetworks is alleging that NBN is now overbuilding in areas already service by them.  "The full list of targeted sites is available, and it includes several sites where OPENetworks has the only FttP or FttN/B/R and provides 'super-fast broadband' services of at least 100/40Mbps," OPENetworks managing director Michael Sparksman said in a statement on Monday.

So once again we have the Abbott Govt saying one thing prior to the election and then doing near the total opposite.  pro competition prior to the election, anti competition after.  My ADSL gets slower every time it rains, so why are would NBN be spending money to provide services to those who already get access to 100/40 services when the surrounding area is in dire need of an upgrade?


----------



## Tisme

sydboy007 said:


> Just before the 2013 election MT was doing a grand launch with OpenNetworks at Sydney Park Village(10 min walk from my house).  he was lauding them building a FTTN network in the Apartment complex (it was really FTTB but hey in the rough and tumble of an election what's a bit of misdirection).
> 
> So what did MT say during his launching of the network?
> 
> http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/c...script-launch-of-openetworks-3-september-2013
> 
> At the event, Shadow Minister Turnbull was explicitly asked whether a Coalition Government would allow companies such as OPENetworks to continue deploying their own infrastructure in competiion with the NBN.
> 
> “Yes,” the Member for Wentworth said in response. He added that where a housing developer paid a company like OPENetworks to deploy telecommunications infrastructure, and as long as that new network complied with the NBN specifications, then the NBN company itself would be likely to acquire that network and run it as its own or leave the company to operate the infrastructure on an open access basis.
> 
> “… what that really means is that a developer then knows that he or she can get the fibre deployment company they know and trust and work with to get the work done so that it can either be operated as a network run by the developer or by a company like OPENetworks or it could just be sold over to the NBN Co,” Shadow Minister Turnbull said at the time.
> 
> So lets fast forward to August 2015, around 9 months after MT tried to kill off TPG's FTTB rollout by making retrospective changes to regulations, and see what NBN is up to.  OpenNetworks is alleging that NBN is now overbuilding in areas already service by them.  "The full list of targeted sites is available, and it includes several sites where OPENetworks has the only FttP or FttN/B/R and provides 'super-fast broadband' services of at least 100/40Mbps," OPENetworks managing director Michael Sparksman said in a statement on Monday.
> 
> So once again we have the Abbott Govt saying one thing prior to the election and then doing near the total opposite.  pro competition prior to the election, anti competition after.  My ADSL gets slower every time it rains, so why are would NBN be spending money to provide services to those who already get access to 100/40 services when the surrounding area is in dire need of an upgrade?




Telstra is to the Libs what the union movement is to Labor, except the unions are a nursery of the Labor pollies, whereas Telstra is one of the retirement homes for Liberal politicians and its hacks. Gotta look after one's retirement and the future fund


----------



## sydboy007

Wow.  MT is really backtracking on his welcoming the private sector to invest in providing high speed internet access.

Why would you encourage the NBN to replicate infrastructure when the FTTN trial rollout is at least 4 months behind schedule.

http://delimiter.com.au/2015/08/19/nbn-overbuild-based-on-fairer-competition-says-turnbull/



> “While the Government wants to foster private sector investment and competition and avoid unnecessary expenditure, it also needs to ensure that all people have access to better broadband and NBN Co, as a commercial entity, also need to invest where it makes sense.”





http://blog.jxeeno.com/analysis-164k-nbn-fibre-to-the-node-premises-delayed/



> According to rollout information produced by the company rolling out the National Broadband Network, the ready for service dates for around 164 thousand premises in the NBN Fibre to the Node trial area have been delayed since the company’s estimates in May.
> 
> In May, the company estimated that 37,200 FTTN premises will be declared “Ready for Service” in September 2015 with another 35,200 premises added in October.  However, the latest monthly ready for service plan released by the company last week shows a mere 2,100 premises will be declared “Ready for Service” in September.  Delays continue into October, with only 9,600 premises expected to be activated in that month.
> 
> In total around 164 thousand premises have been pushed back by up to 4 months.




Nigh on 2 years in and FTTP is still the primary reason that broadband speeds are increasing.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Why would you encourage the NBN to replicate infrastructure when the FTTN trial rollout is at least 4 months behind schedule.



You haven't looked very closely at the data.

Individual suburb delays are up to 4 months as noted by the article author but the overall  delay is 1 month.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> You haven't looked very closely at the data.
> 
> Individual suburb delays are up to 4 months as noted by the article author but the overall  delay is 1 month.




How do you get to an overall 1 month delay when half of the trial rollout is 2+ months late?

Jobs for the HFC rollout were still being advertised Leeds than 2 weeks ago which doesn't bode well for a sexy upgrade either.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> How do you get to an overall 1 month delay when half of the trial rollout is 2+ months late?



You're an intelligent boy Syd. 

Take another look at the data and you'll figure it out.


----------



## sydboy007

sums things up pretty well





This morning the NBN company released its latest corporate plan. The document reveals up to 550,000 less Australian premises would receive the full Fibre to the Premises rollout than had been previously been planned under the Coalition’s Multi-Technology Mix, with the project’s funding requirement also blowing out by between $5 billion and $15 billion.

I love these little gems:



> ...quality of this network is not fully known as there has been limited opportunity to evaluate the physical infrastructure at significant scale.






> However, it is known that there is significant work required to remove broadband blockers from the copper network,




Hands up anyone who'd buy a used car without fully understanding the condition it's in, but accepting all future liabilities with say asbestos clean up and any repairs required.  Thoedy's userd car lot is doing a booming business.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> This morning the NBN company released its latest corporate plan. The document reveals up to 550,000 less Australian premises would receive the full Fibre to the Premises rollout than had been previously been planned under the Coalition’s Multi-Technology Mix, with the project’s funding requirement also blowing out by between $5 billion and $15 billion.



Did you see the cost per premise for FTTP ?


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Did you see the cost per premise for FTTP ?




The redacted info or the stuff being released for public viewing?


----------



## Tisme

Even the dowager leader, Malcolm couldn't help but blame Labor for the ridiculous bungling, under his watch, of the NBN in the outback, until Leigh rebuked him for wandering off subject.

Where's that broken record pic?


----------



## H C

Coalition clowns MTM patchwork in disarray just as we predicted. Blowout just was we predicted. Unable to deliver 25mbps in 2016 just as we predicted. NBN management made up of incompetents. Corporate plan of little substance full of filler stock photos, 3 pages out of 94 used for management clown team alone. Only a few Turnbull apologists still in denial about the disaster we predicted. Most quite rightly hiding under rocks sucking their thumbs.

http://delimiter.com.au/2015/08/24/we-must-determine-how-the-15bn-nbn-cost-blow-out-occurred/


> If the plan is to be believed — and the Minister strongly emphasised today that it is — then the NBN Strategic Review underestimated the peak funding required to complete the NBN project by at least $5 billion and perhaps as much as $15 billion over the life of the project.




http://delimiter.com.au/2015/08/24/...se-to-blame-labor-says-on-nbn-cost-blow-outs/


> “The cost of the Coalition’s second rate NBN started out at $29.5 billion in April 2013, it blew out to $41 billion in December 2013, increased again to $42 billion in August 2014 and today it was announced that it will now cost up to $56 billion.”




http://delimiter.com.au/2015/08/24/nbn-co-delays-fttn-rollout-for-further-testing/


> the company estimated that about 37,200 premises would be declared ready for service in September this year, with a further 35,200 to be added in October. However, the site reported last week that the latest monthly ready for service plan released by the NBN company showed a mere 2,100 premises would be declared ready for service in September — and only 9,600 expected premises expected to be activated in October.




Pathetic.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> The redacted info or the stuff being released for public viewing?



If it was redacted, I wouldn't have seen it.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> If it was redacted, I wouldn't have seen it.




So how does one come up with a figure of $1600 for FTTN when NBN management admits that "...quality of this network is not fully known as there has been limited opportunity to evaluate the physical infrastructure at significant scale." 

They also go on to say "However, it is known that there is significant work required to remove broadband blockers from the copper network,"

The assumptions they used to come up with their FTTN costs have been redacted so there's no way for anyone to actually see if the costs are based on reasonable assumptions or not.

I seem to remember that the Melton rollout trial also had the cost per premises down below $1600.

Even Paul Fletcher admits the Abbott Govt has been tricky with the truth surrounding FTTP

http://www.itwire.com/government-te...erestimate-labor’s-nbn-cost-admits-government



> Then Fletcher, in February 2014 said in a public forum, in a direct response to my question, and in front of dozens of witnesses, *that NBN Co’s internal review of Labor’s NBN had costed it at $56 billion, much closer to Labor’s figure than the inflated estimate the Coalition took to the election.*
> 
> When I quizzed him on the disparity between the Coalition’s $90 billion estimate of a FTTP network and the much lower NBN Co estimate (made by the management team the Coalition had put into place) of $56 billion, the best Fletcher could say was that the Coalition estimate “may have been a little high”.




A lot of the forecasting by NBN also has a falling ARPU or at best increasing at roughly the rate of inflation.  

Strategic Review Trajectory A (high case) ARPU was ~2.5% nominal
Strategic Review Trajectory B (low case) ARPU was ~0% nominal

Currently NBN is seeing over 8% YoY ARPU growth, all provided by the Labor NBN as there's no commercial services on any of the MTM components.  We were constantly told that all the high speed plans were the early adopters, but for ARPU to continue to grow there must be a reasonable increase in customers willing to pay for the higher tiered plans, especially since CVC costs were dropped.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> So how does one come up with a figure of $1600 for FTTN.......



Well done Syd.

You found the page and would have noted the FTTP per premise capex in the same table on that page.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Well done Syd.
> 
> You found the page and would have noted the FTTP per premise capex in the same table on that page.




And if you have a look at the strategic report you'd notice that most of the information that would allow an understanding of how the various forecasts were made have been redacted.

Fletcher has already admitted the Govt has not been particularly honest with the figures they've used in the past, and with the lack of openness around the assumptions underlining the current corporate report, forgive me for being sceptical that they've not been massaged in a similar way to Chinese GDP figures.


----------



## H C

Another scathing assessment of the Turnbull mess from Paul Budde being less diplomatic than usual, even he has had a gut full of the imbeciles and lies.

http://www.buddeblog.com.au/frompaulsdesk/the-nbn-more-lies-leading-us-from-bad-to-worse/


> My real problem is not the delay and the higher costs, but the fact that for all of that we get a network that will not deliver us the capacity and quality needed to build a modern economy and society.




Nailed it.


----------



## drsmith

Syd,

Look at LTD performance on the next page.

You'll note that's not a forecast.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Syd,
> 
> Look at LTD performance on the next page.
> 
> You'll note that's not a forecast.




Send a bit unfair when the FTTN COP had this caveat

(e)  The CPP excludes the impact of initial trial arrangements, where costs are not in line with long term expectations (due to low volume, and bespoke commercial and delivery arrangements), and excludes contingency.

There's no transparency into how those CPP figures were calculated.


----------



## H C

http://www.zdnet.com/article/nbn-october-map-update-extending-to-three-year-outlook/


> "We now put out a forecast for the next 18 months, and probably in a month and a half, you're going to see a three-year view," he said. "You'll be able to go onto the website, at that point, look up your suburb, and see exactly when that's going to occur, or in the rough time frame as to when construction will start."




Clown car pilot Bill Morrow explaining exactly when you'll get nothing, after the next election when it's politically convenient, you can see the election time adverts now "VOTE FOR US NOW OR YOU WONT GET THEM CRAP SPEEDS WE PROMISED. ALSO STOP THE BOATS!!!"


----------



## So_Cynical

H C said:


> Another scathing assessment of the Turnbull mess from Paul Budde being less diplomatic than usual, even he has had a gut full of the imbeciles and lies.
> 
> http://www.buddeblog.com.au/frompaulsdesk/the-nbn-more-lies-leading-us-from-bad-to-worse/
> 
> 
> Nailed it.




Another quote from Paul



			
				Paul Budde said:
			
		

> It becomes clear that this government didn’t have a clue about its proposed ‘cheaper and faster option’. It was nothing more than political rhetoric.
> 
> Aside from the delay, the government has now also been forced to admit that its second-rate version of the NBN could cost as much as $56 billion. If it was not so sad it would be funny.




And this guy was a supporter.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Send a bit unfair when the FTTN COP had this caveat
> 
> (e)  The CPP excludes the impact of initial trial arrangements, where costs are not in line with long term expectations (due to low volume, and bespoke commercial and delivery arrangements), and excludes contingency.
> 
> There's no transparency into how those CPP figures were calculated.



What FTTN may ultimately cost doesn't change what FTTP is costing.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> What FTTN may ultimately cost doesn't change what FTTP is costing.




I questions those costs, because they're way out of whack to what project fox was delivering.

If NBN were releasing the cost of each FSAM it would give us some clarity on how the costs are going.

I don't think it's unreasonable to question that the current nbn management would be doing their bst to show FTTP as being as expensive as they can, while doing their best to present the FTTN and HFC costs as low as possible.

With the lack of transparency from the Govt there's no real way to know the truth.  I can't see that there would be any commercial reason why they can't release relatively fine grained costs for the various technologies.


----------



## drsmith

You need to remember Syd that on matters transparency, Stephen Conroy's own words spoke for themselves.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> You need to remember Syd that on matters transparency, Stephen Conroy's own words spoke for themselves.




MT said he would be accountable and transparent.  He's done neither while communications minister.  The level of redacted information in the SRs is proof of this.  Holding on to information for months before release in a glossy picture book that contains a less than ideal level of information.

It's rank hypocrisy to complain of a lack of transparency when in opposition, and then to provide even less transparency when in office.

When did you ever accept as an argument from your kids that they did it so it's OK for me to do it?

The faster more affordable network.  That's going in the pool room, just to remind him he's dreaming.


----------



## Smurf1976

sydboy007 said:


> I don't think it's unreasonable to question that the current nbn management would be doing their bst to show FTTP as being as expensive as they can




1. NBN manages the project.

2. Contractor A takes on a big section of work.

3. Contractor A outsources that work to contractor B.

4. Contractor B engages sub-contractors C, D, E, F and G to do the actual work as such. Contractor B being just a project manager (as is NBN and contractor A).

5. Contractors C, D, E, F and G then sub-contract a lot more small contractors to actually build things. So contractors C, D, E, F and G are really just another layer of project managers.

6. That last lot of contractors then engages workers, some direct and others via labour hire, to actually build the NBN.

There's a lot of steps there and each is taking their 15% or so cut. Not much of the money ends up in the pockets of those actually delivering the project, indeed I'm reliably informed that many have ended up losing money, since there's not enough left to actually do the work, and walked away.

So the cost is that of actually building it + multiple layers of project managers + the overheads of each of those layers + profit for each of those layers. It's hard to imagine a more expensive way of doing it really.

If it were back in ye olde days then we'd just have NBN employing workers and building the NBN, cutting out the multiple layers of middle men. That's not the current ideology but it gets things done a lot more cheaply even if a few of those directly employed workers do end up leaning on those proverbial shovels.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> MT said he would be accountable and transparent.  He's done neither while communications minister.  The level of redacted information in the SRs is proof of this.  Holding on to information for months before release in a glossy picture book that contains a less than ideal level of information.
> 
> It's rank hypocrisy to complain of a lack of transparency when in opposition, and then to provide even less transparency when in office.
> 
> When did you ever accept as an argument from your kids that they did it so it's OK for me to do it?
> 
> The faster more affordable network.  That's going in the pool room, just to remind him he's dreaming.



If you wish to make comparisons between the relative performances of the two communication ministers, I refer you not only to Stephen Conroy's infamous red underpants comment but also (and again) to Simon Hackett's presentation from a year ago and in particular, his comments as to the state the rollout under Labor and what led it to that state.

http://simonhackett.com/2014/09/06/rebooting-the-nbn/


----------



## drsmith

Smurf1976 said:


> 1. NBN manages the project.
> 
> 2. Contractor A takes on a big section of work.
> 
> 3. Contractor A outsources that work to contractor B.
> 
> 4. Contractor B engages sub-contractors C, D, E, F and G to do the actual work as such. Contractor B being just a project manager (as is NBN and contractor A).
> 
> 5. Contractors C, D, E, F and G then sub-contract a lot more small contractors to actually build things. So contractors C, D, E, F and G are really just another layer of project managers.
> 
> 6. That last lot of contractors then engages workers, some direct and others via labour hire, to actually build the NBN.
> 
> There's a lot of steps there and each is taking their 15% or so cut. Not much of the money ends up in the pockets of those actually delivering the project, indeed I'm reliably informed that many have ended up losing money, since there's not enough left to actually do the work, and walked away.
> 
> So the cost is that of actually building it + multiple layers of project managers + the overheads of each of those layers + profit for each of those layers. It's hard to imagine a more expensive way of doing it really.
> 
> If it were back in ye olde days then we'd just have NBN employing workers and building the NBN, cutting out the multiple layers of middle men. That's not the current ideology but it gets things done a lot more cheaply even if a few of those directly employed workers do end up leaning on those proverbial shovels.



In some of the broader infrastructure construction market, costs have come down significantly. The particular example I'm thinking of is road construction in the now post mining boom construction environment.

That would be due to a number of factors and perhaps part of that is a cut at each step due to their being less overall work available. That doesn't change fundamentally though what you say about the model.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> You need to remember Syd that on matters transparency, Stephen Conroy's own words spoke for themselves.
> 
> View attachment 64096




Right on que with political rhetoric.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> If you wish to make comparisons between the relative performances of the two communication ministers, I refer you not only to Stephen Conroy's infamous red underpants comment but also (and again) to Simon Hackett's presentation from a year ago and in particular, his comments as to the state the rollout under Labor and what led it to that state.
> 
> http://simonhackett.com/2014/09/06/rebooting-the-nbn/




Close to 2 years and not a single paid for service on the MTM.  I think that sums up where we're at.

I'm not saying how Labor was handling things was perfect.  Certainly making all fibre in apartments was silly.

But at least be consistent in criticising the current Govt for doing things you criticised labor for doing.

Am I wrong in expecting if a politician says they will be provide more transparency on one of the largest infrastructure projects in Australian history that they will actually do it?

Am I wrong to be concerned when a Govt business buys a copper network then says they've not actually done any large scale testing to determine the quality of the network, and come out saying Telstra were right to withhold any quality information during negotiations?  How do you come up with a figure for the cost of FTTN installs when the quality of the copper is unknown?  No information from the "trial" rollout as to how much remediation work has been done.  Will more have been done to provide early positive results like the ones trumpeted last year with the few test users?

OSS upgrades cost 5 to 6 times what we were told they would. Coalition members touring the country talking up the benefits the launching of nbn satellites will have for rural areas, but still back handing Labor for spending the money on such a rolls royce option.

So in your view exactly how is the current Govt managing the nbn rollout better than Labor?  FTTN is slower than even the revised lower targets from a not long ago.  HFC rollout way slower and a lot more expensive than we were told.  Cost blow outs at every level of the mixed part of the network.  Satellite and wireless are progressing broadly in line with the costs labor forecast.


----------



## H C

sydboy007 said:


> Close to 2 years and not a single paid for service on the MTM.  I think that sums up where we're at.
> 
> But at least be consistent in criticising the current Govt for doing things you criticised labor for doing.
> 
> So in your view exactly how is the current Govt managing the nbn rollout better than Labor? FTTN is slower than even the revised lower targets from a not long ago. HFC rollout way slower and a lot more expensive than we were told. Cost blow outs at every level of the mixed part of the network. Satellite and wireless are progressing broadly in line with the costs labor forecast.




Indeed. But you cant expect consistency form those that criticised the proper NBN plan. 

Thing is before the election Turnbull fooled them real good with the fantastical magical claims of FttN. All the things you mention Sydboy are things that were discussed at length on many websites. But instead of trusting the tech community they instead chose to trust a politicians word. Now that the MTM has been exposed as a farce just as we predicted they dont dare criticise it. If they did that would be admitting they were fooled. When your taxpayer dollars are being pissed away pride is very important you see.


----------



## drsmith

Syd,

Regardless of how you wish to construct argument around the cost of FTTN and HFC, a large difference in cost per premise remains between the cost of those and FTTP. Screaming conspiracy over the cost of FTTP doesn't change that.

I also refer to the following which you've recently posted,



sydboy007 said:


> Send a bit unfair when the *FTTN* COP had this caveat
> 
> (e)  The CPP excludes the impact of initial trial arrangements, where costs are not in line with long term expectations (due to low volume, and bespoke commercial and delivery arrangements), and excludes contingency.
> 
> There's no transparency into how those CPP figures were calculated.




You might want to go back to the table to which that comment refers and check as to the technologies to which that statement applies.

My bolds.


----------



## sptrawler

It is all a bit like the Melbourne east/ west tunnel, the preveous government said it was the way to go, the new government has canned it. Time will tell if it was the right choice.

If Labor get back in, it will be interesting to see if they go back to their original plan.

That is the problem, everyone has the answers in hindsight, maybe when they sealed the Nullabor they should have made it 4 lanes? In 2,200 they may have to widen it?


----------



## drsmith

sptrawler said:


> If Labor get back in, it will be interesting to see if they go back to their original plan.



Their draft national policy platform from May this year is at best a crab walk. From page 46,



> Labor understands that fibre is optimal. A National Broadband Network for the 21st century will be rolled out across Australia, but because of the Coalition’s limited vision, it will now need to be built in two stages rather than one.




https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.n...ultation_Draft_Labor_National_Platform_1_.pdf


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Syd,
> 
> Regardless of how you wish to construct argument around the cost of FTTN and HFC, a large difference in cost per premise remains between the cost of those and FTTP. Screaming conspiracy over the cost of FTTP doesn't change that.
> 
> I also refer to the following which you've recently posted,
> 
> 
> 
> You might want to go back to the table to which that comment refers and check as to the technologies to which that statement applies.
> 
> My bolds.




I have read it.  I am questioning how politicised those figures are.

Why can't NBN release costs down tot he FSAM level?  Why can't NBN release costs involved with the FTTN trial?  Technically all the money currently spent is from the tax payers, along with a bit from revenue, so why don't we have the right on the kind of transparent information that was promised before the election.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I have read it.



And to what technologies does that caveat from that table apply ?

Is it FTTN specifically as you claim or more broadly ?


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> And to what technologies does that caveat from that table apply ?
> 
> Is it FTTN specifically as you claim or more broadly ?




FTTP / FTTN / HFC

Various reports are advising that the wireless and satellite rollout is within budget.  The Govt is certainly not saying much, neither is the opposition, so I take that to mean there is no political gain for either side on that part of the nbn.

I'd be interest to know for FTTP / FTTN / HFC what the lowest median highest CPP figures.  At least that would give us some idea on how much remediation they're planning for the mixed part of the network.  How do you forecast remediation costs when have no network quality stats to make an informed estimate?

What would an increase of 5% to the number of premises requiring remediation do to the figures?

I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that nbn is presenting a favourable light on the costs of FTTN and HFC.  Hopefully it's not been unrealistic, but so far everything the Govt has said about the MTM has been unrealistic, so just going by their past efforts I'm sceptical.

A greater level of transparency is required, but I wont hold my breath on MT living up to his word.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> FTTP / FTTN / HFC



Thank you Syd.

The statement as read is non technology specific but I'll take the above as acknowledgement of error in your original statement on this specific point.



> I'd be interest to know for FTTP / FTTN / HFC what the lowest median highest CPP figures.  At least that would give us some idea on how much remediation they're planning for the mixed part of the network.  How do you forecast remediation costs when have no network quality stats to make an informed estimate?
> 
> What would an increase of 5% to the number of premises requiring remediation do to the figures?



What is done in specific instances where remediation costs are prohibitive is described in the document.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Thank you Syd.
> 
> The statement as read is non technology specific but I'll take the above as acknowledgement of error in your original statement on this specific point.
> 
> 
> What is done in specific instances where remediation costs are prohibitive is described in the document.




I'm not talking about prohibitive.  NBN has acknowledge that they will go to FTTP if the cost is comparable to remediation.  The issues surrounding just how crappy the copper needs to be before NBN will bother to remediated is a whole other issue.  With the cost blowouts there will be increasing pressure to leave marginal copper in place.

But at what point does the cost difference between say FTTN and FTTP have to be where the higher upfront CAPEX is worthwhile for the long run lower OPEX and the fact there is not future upgrade cost?  If Remediation is a few hundred $$$ cheaper, does it still make sense to go with copper?  If it's $1,000 cheaper does it make sense over say a 10 year period?

The NBN is being forced to reduce CAPEX to justfy moving to the MTM, even though this can add substantially to OPEX.  Upgrading to DOCIS 3.1 will be partially passed onto customers / RSPs as they will have to pay the millions in CAPEX for new cable modems.

You seem to be accepting as gospel what the Govt is saying, when even their own ministers have acknowledged they've not been particularly honest about the costs of FTTP in the past, and have had no real idea of the cost for FTTN and HFC as well.

Either MT provides the transparency he promised, or we'll have to wait for a few years just to see how if we've been provided accurate information or not.


----------



## drsmith

Write them a letter Syd asking about things you want to know but don't write it as if you've got an axe to grind.

Also, don't in it suggest that Labor's costing's and timeframe were in any way honest.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Write them a letter Syd asking about things you want to know but don't write it as if you've got an axe to grind.
> 
> Also, don't in it suggest that Labor's costing's and timeframe were in any way honest.




Well, according to the liberals Labors costs have come down from $90B to something in the 70s, while MTM has continued the march from $29B up to $56B but without knowing the single biggest cost variable they have ie the state of the copper and HFC networks and how much remediation costs they will bare.

As for writing for further information, I've been fobbed off by MT a number of times.  Now I focus my efforts on Labor and the Greens to ask some cut through questions during the senates estimate hearings as that is maybe the only way we'll get some answers.  That's if the NBN board members can be bothered to attend.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Well, according to the liberals Labors costs have come down from $90B to something in the 70s, while MTM has continued the march from $29B up to $56B but without knowing the single biggest cost variable they have ie the state of the copper and HFC networks and how much remediation costs they will bare.
> 
> As for writing for further information, I've been fobbed off by MT a number of times.  Now I focus my efforts on Labor and the Greens to ask some cut through questions during the senates estimate hearings as that is maybe the only way we'll get some answers.  That's if the NBN board members can be bothered to attend.



$90bn was the worst case scenario and a figure in the 70's isn't too far off of that and that's bearing in mind that the FTTP component of the rollout is proceeding somewhat more smoothly than it was under Labor.

Write to the company or even to Simon Hackett. Don't start though with chastisement about conversion to the dark side.

Ask Jason Clare for clarification on Labor's present policy position.

While your at it, publish on this forum the questions you asked of MT and the answers you've got.


----------



## sydboy007

I definitely have a mistrust of what the electricity networks say when they're tryign to get more money, but if the the electricity networks aren't just about getting some free money then I wonder how that impacts the cost effectiveness of HFC.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/09/03/electricity_networks_push_back_against_nbn_network_rules/



> To make sure the network could support future upgrades like DOCSIS 3.1, the Department of Communications also decided HFC networks would need thicker overhead cables, and that's what the electricity networks don't like.
> 
> The Department put forward changes to the definition of “low impact” telecommunications facilities so that nbnTM would be able to install cables for the fibre part of the HFC network that are 48 mm instead of what's allowed at the moment – 30 mm.






> The 60 per cent increase has electricity networks up in arms for several reasons, among them various safety issues, and the number of poles they'd have to replace if the new cables are too heavy.
> 
> As Endeavour Energy notes in its submission to the Department, the heavier HFC cable has a much higher breaking strain (risking a pole breaking if the cable is snagged by a truck), and the extra thickness also increases the wind load on the poles.





> The likelihood that poles will have to be replaced to cope is noted by West Australia's Office of Energy Safety: *“We understand the cost of a like-for-like pole replacement is in the order of $10,000 per pole, depending upon pole size, location and conductor/equipment configurations.”*
> 
> And that excludes considerations like engineering design, disruption to service and the like.
> 
> Queensland's Ergon Energy notes that the charges it levied on Telstra and Optus were based on the 30 mm cables, and reckons its fees would have to rise for the thicker cables.






> *Another concern is that at 48 mm, the cables can be mistaken for electrical conductors, with Endeavour Energy attributing a fatality in 2013.*




So will NBN wear the costs, or will electricity customers be foreced to stump up some extra daily access charges instead to keep the NBN on budget???


----------



## Tisme

sydboy007 said:


> As for writing for further information, I've been fobbed off by MT a number of times.  .




They're all like that. One day you are having a friendly chat at Tattersals or the QLD Club and the next day your emails are responded to with the party's newsletter.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> I definitely have a mistrust of what the electricity networks say when they're tryign to get more money, but if the the electricity networks aren't just about getting some free money then I wonder how that impacts the cost effectiveness of HFC.
> 
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/09/03/electricity_networks_push_back_against_nbn_network_rules/
> 
> So will NBN wear the costs, or will electricity customers be foreced to stump up some extra daily access charges instead to keep the NBN on budget???




60 per cent increase ??

The author of the above linked article should have done a little more homework before publishing.

Below is an extract from the June 12 consultation paper under proposed amendments,



> Under Clause 3 of Schedule 3 to the Act, overhead cables in excess of 13mm in diameter cannot be specified as a low-impact facility unless a larger diameter is specified in the Regulations.
> 
> In 2011, the Regulations were amended, in effect, to allow overhead cables of up to 30mm and the LIFD was amended to allow optical fibre cabling of up to that diameter. In the move to a MTM approach, in some limited circumstances overhead cabling of up to 48mm will be required, specifically in the HFC network. The Government therefore proposes to amend the Regulations to allow this.
> 
> Specifically, the Government proposes to recommend to the Commonwealth Governor-General that Regulation 11.2 be amended to increase the diameter of ‘designated overhead line’ from 30 mm to 48mm. This change would then allow the Minister for Communications to specify overhead cabling of up to 48mm in diameter as low-impact in the LIFD. Such cabling is specified at Item 1 of Part 4A of the Schedule to the LIFD.
> 
> NBN Co and comparable carriers are expected to use the smallest cable and cable bundle diameter feasible for above ground line links in an area. NBN Co has advised that in some areas, particularly in HFC areas, it will be necessary to add a cable to an existing overhead cable or a bundle of overhead cables to improve the network. This includes piggy-backing new cables on to existing cables and cable bundles in order to transit through existing coverage areas to reach areas that were missed during previous HFC network rollouts.
> 
> *In limited circumstances, such as when NBN Co adds an extra cable to an existing 42mm bundle, the diameter of the HFC cable bundle will be 48mm. Typically, HFC cable bundles will be much smaller than this. In addition, NBN Co has advised that in very limited circumstances, individual copper cables of up to 40mm in diameter will need to be used to augment the copper network for FTTN. Further guidance on the limited use of such cabling will be provided in the Explanatory Statement to the amending Determination and other documents as required.*
> 
> In the past there have been community concerns about the use of overhead cabling for telecommunications. The Government appreciates these concerns but believes that there are important countervailing factors that also need to be considered. Telecommunications cabling is placed on above ground infrastructure for electricity that already exists and to which people are generally accustomed. In large part the additional cabling that is proposed by NBN Co will augment existing cabling (i.e. a cable will be added to an existing bundle); the overall amount of new cabling will be limited; and cabling in new locations (i.e. where there are overhead power cables but no overhead telecommunications cables) will be small in diameter. As a result, any impact is expected to be limited. On the other hand, the cabling will be used to provide significantly better broadband services, services for which there is strong community demand.




https://www.communications.gov.au/h...latory-changes-help-roll-out-faster-broadband

My bolds.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> If you wish to make comparisons between the relative performances of the two communication ministers, I refer you not only to Stephen Conroy's infamous red underpants comment but also (and again) to Simon Hackett's presentation from a year ago and in particular, his comments as to the state the rollout under Labor and what led it to that state.
> 
> http://simonhackett.com/2014/09/06/rebooting-the-nbn/




http://www.smh.com.au/business/nbns...ibretothenode-technology-20150325-1m77el.html



> NBN Co director Simon Hackett has slammed the federal government's use of fibre-to-the-node technology as part of the national broadband network, saying he wishes it would disappear.
> 
> The Coalition's version of the NBN is heavily reliant on the technology, which provides slower broadband speeds at lower costs compared with Labor's preferred method of connecting homes and businesses directly to fibre optic cabling.
> 
> *"Fibre to the node is the least-exciting part of the current policy – no argument," he said. "If I could wave a wand, it's the bit I'd be erasing."*
> 
> Speaking at the Rewind/Fast Forward event in Sydney on Wednesday, Internode founder Mr Hackett said he was a strong supporter of connecting premises directly to fibre and was on the board of NBN Co to make it "as least worse as possible".


----------



## sydboy007

http://www.businessspectator.com.au.../how-much-do-fttp-nbn-connections-really-cost

so if they can learn to do it faster and cheaper in NZ, why does the Govt say we haven't / can't do the same here?







> When Chorus commenced a FTTP rollout in 2012, the cost per premises passed (CPPP) was about $NZ3,500 and this cost has decreased to an average of $NZ2,134 over the past year. The projection for financial year 2016 is in the range of $NZ1,700 to $NZ1,770.






> *Chorus reports that over the past year about 75 per cent of the net additions and changes to ultra-fast broadband (UFB) fibre connections have been to adopt 100 Mbps+ download speeds.* A key reason for the move to 100 Mbps download plans has been the decision by Chorus to reduce the cost for wholesale 100/20 Mbps fibre connections to $NZ40 per month.






> in an effort to justify the MTM broadband plan and explain away the recently announced $15 billion cost blow-out, NBN Co has released a financial report for the financial year ending June 31 2015 and a corporate plan for 2016 to 2018 that quite remarkably indicates that brownfield FTTP rollout costs are increasing.




One has to wonder why FTTP rollouts is the only part of the economy that doesn't benefit from the learning effect ie as you rollout FTTP you learn ways of doing things better and incorporate this into making it faster and cheaper



> ...*the true Capex cost of a FTTP connection falls to an average of $3,659, which if you disregard the use of different currencies, is about $200 per premises more expensive than what Chorus reports*.






> A key reason why FTTP connection costs should decrease is the use of new technologies including the move from multi-port to mini-port devices that are used to connect fibre running past premises to the drop lines that go into premises. Another step that should be taken is the adoption of aerial fibre distribution, micro trenching and sheathed fibre and other approaches that have been shown to reduce the cost of distribution and drop fibre rollout in locations where existing infrastructure is old and degraded. The option of self-installation of drop lines should be explored too.






> *Questions must be asked of NBN Co about why there is a major discrepancy between the figures it has reported and figures reported by Chorus and why alternate construction techniques are not being adopted to further reduce FTTP rollout costs as is happening in New Zealand. *


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> http://www.businessspectator.com.au.../how-much-do-fttp-nbn-connections-really-cost



I didn't have to read very far to see that article's a comedy piece,



> In New Zealand, the conservative government led by Prime Minister John Key has forged ahead with a fibre-to-the-premises (FTTP) rollout abandoning the use of the obsolete *Fibre-to-the-Node (FTTN) which is to be rolled out to over 50 per cent of Australian premises* under the Coalition’s multi-technology mix (MTM) broadband plan.




My bolds.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> http://www.smh.com.au/business/nbns...ibretothenode-technology-20150325-1m77el.html



To be understood fully, those comments from March this year need to be seen in the broader context and not in isolation.

That broader context is the presentation he gave last year to which I've previously referred.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> I didn't have to read very far to see that article's a comedy piece,
> 
> 
> 
> My bolds.




So Doc, you don't find it strange that nbn is forecasting rising or at best static costs for the FTTP portion of the network?  Sure we should have moved along similar learning learning curve as in NZ and should now start to see reasonable efficiency gains in the rollout?

I suppose we should just trust the Govt that they wouldn't in any way try to fudge the figures to justify the path they have taken.

So the author engaged in a bit of FTTN hyperbole.  You seemed fine with the Liberal $90B claims for FTTP prior to the election, so I wonder why you're so offended now.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> To be understood fully, those comments from March this year need to be seen in the broader context and not in isolation.
> 
> That broader context is the presentation he gave last year to which I've previously referred.




Right.  So we must view what Mr Hacket said in isolation, rather than seeing how he fully feels about the MTM based nbn, how his views have changed over time.

Depending on the cost for the HFC upgrades, and it seems like nbn have about as much of an idea on the true state of that network as they do with the copper, it will be interesting to see if the senate is able to force the Govt to handover the assumptions underpinning the latest corporate plan.

I don't usually gamble, but I'd be willing to take bets that the Govt is going to fight tooth and nail to keep that information out of the public domain.  I'm starting to feel that MT and myself have very different concept on what transparency is.  I think MT may have been thinking of being opaque.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> So the author engaged in a bit of FTTN hyperbole.  You seemed fine with the Liberal $90B claims for FTTP prior to the election, so I wonder why you're so offended now.




FTTN being rolled out to over 50 per cent of Australian premises isn't a bit of hyperbole. It's an outright lie and the author (whom I assume is paid to write this stuff) should know better than to publish such rubbish.

I'll be kinder to you though Syd and let "Liberal $90B *claims* for FTTP prior to the election" through as hyperbole. As you would remember, it was the worst case of a number of scenarios.

My bolds.


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Right.  So we must view what Mr Hacket said in isolation, rather than seeing how he fully feels about the MTM based nbn, how his views have changed over time.



In the 12-months or so since that presentation, have you actually listened to it because the ignorance indicated in the above statement indicates you either haven't or at the very least, your memory of the contents has faded somewhat.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> FTTN being rolled out to over 50 per cent of Australian premises isn't a bit of hyperbole. It's an outright lie and the author (whom I assume is paid to write this stuff) should know better than to publish such rubbish.
> 
> I'll be kinder to you though Syd and let "Liberal $90B *claims* for FTTP prior to the election" through as hyperbole. As you would remember, it was the worst case of a number of scenarios.
> 
> My bolds.




Shame you din't callout those against FTTP to the same degree you do with this author.  Do you in any way find it strange that there are not benefits from learning how to rollout FTTP in our nbn compared to the NZ version?  Don't you wonder why over time we're not working out how to do it faster and cheaper?

As for the $90B cost for FTTP, it was the only number used by the Liberals.  They never even bothered to put an * on it so people would know it was based on basically no learning how to do the rollout better and everything that could go wrong did go wrong.   I could have accepted the Liberals giving a range of X to $90B, but that didn't suit their agenda.



drsmith said:


> In the 12-months or so since that presentation, have you actually listened to it because the ignorance indicated in the above statement indicates you either haven't or at the very least, your memory of the contents has faded somewhat.





I’ll say this again, building it with all fiber is the right thing to do
The issues that Simon talks about are pretty much applicable to the last 2 years as well.
Morrow – turn around of Vodafone required billions of investment.
Construction partners - $40M bribe to repair relationships?
Agree SC0 was a silly metric
Improving transparency???  Lots of talk, I don’t see it happening.  Might as well tell us it’s on water matters.
Disconnection Process Ramp-up – Do we actually have any information on how this will occur?  I’ve only been able to find very vague process documents but nothing that actually examines many of the issues that are likely to occur, including how difficult it is going to be to marry up the exchange to pillar pair and pillar to house pair.  The next few months in the trial 1000 node rollout will be very interesting in answering this.
ISS – unfair to blame Labor for trying to provide it to everyone.  If they had limited access then the Abbott coalition would have ran around rural areas telling everyone how bad Labor was.
Fixed Wireless – labor got it mostly right.  Govt owns the spectrum so filling in the gaps isn’t really an issue
Telstra deal took way longer than Simon thought it would, what MT said it would.
FTTB – Labor got it wrong forcing FTTP.  Much smarter to have put the nodes in and let the body corps decide on copper or fiber.  Rollout would have certainly added a couple of hundred thousand extra premises.  Didn't suit their narrative though.
Why is the nbn competing against TPG in FTTP when the Govt argues the nbn should have been built by the private sector?
Have any of the challenges been resolved with FTTN?  Still seems they are having issues with site access and organising power to nodes.
No real analysis of how the state of the copper network is going to impact the rollout.  Currently nbn admits they have no idea and will likely take a considerable amount of time to really quantify the network quality
No discussion on what the maximum loop lengths are.  I’ve yet to find any detailed info on loop lengths for the trial rollout.  If customers are due to be signed up surely a transparent minded Govt would have this information released to the public.
VDSL+ with Vectoring has trouble hitting 100Mbs after 400M.  By 650M you’ll have trouble even selling a 50Mbs+ service.  No real analysis of the loss of revenue this will cause.  That type of customer is around 1/3 of the customer base I support.  Loss of AVC revenue and lower CVC as well due to the lower speeds.  Will be interesting to see if they follow Chorus and make higher tier speeds more affordable.  $14 separates the AVC between 12/1 and 100/40.  Would higher CVC demand offset removing this artificial restriction?  maybe just having 2 tiers of 50/20 and up to 100/40 would be a better way forward?
HFC – will the contention ratios really be able to provide fiber equivalent services?  Simon says yes, but we wont know for 4+ years.
Is it rational to assume that as fiber gets cheaper its share will rise?  Possibly now that MT is PM, but under Abbott that was never going to be a possibility


----------



## drsmith

Sydney!

Those questions/points above don't address your understanding of his presentation from last year in light of what you said,



sydboy007 said:


> Right.  *So we must view what Mr Hacket said in isolation, rather than seeing how he fully feels about the MTM based nbn*, how his views have changed over time.




No. That is not what I said.



drsmith said:


> To be understood fully, those comments from March this year need to be seen *in the broader context and not in isolation.*
> 
> That broader context is the presentation he gave last year to which I've previously referred.




How he feels about the MTM based NBN and FTTN as a separate element is more broadly outlined in that presentation than it is in that more recent Fairfax piece. Had you listen to it carefully, you will understood that. 

That his least preferred technology if FTTN is no great new revelation from the Fairfax article nor is wishing it away if he had a wand. If you understood that earlier presentation, you would have realised that the wand needed is financial.

My bolds.


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Sydney!
> 
> Those questions/points above don't address your understanding of his presentation from last year in light of what you said,
> 
> 
> 
> No. That is not what I said.
> 
> 
> 
> How he feels about the MTM based NBN and FTTN as a separate element is more broadly outlined in that presentation than it is in that more recent Fairfax piece. Had you listen to it carefully, you will understood that.
> 
> That his least preferred technology if FTTN is no great new revelation from the Fairfax article nor is wishing it away if he had a wand. If you understood that earlier presentation, you would have realised that the wand needed is financial.
> 
> My bolds.




Based on the Govt figures.

The question still unanswered is why the Australian nbn has no learning efficiencies in the FTTP rollout when NZ has seen significant cost reductions, and projecting further cost reductions.  What are we doing wrong compared to NZ?

Solve that problem, and FTTN may not be required nearly as much.

I'd be interested no see if you have any complaints about the Liberal nbn, or is it a stunning job as far as you're concerned?


----------



## drsmith

sydboy007 said:


> Based on the Govt figures.
> 
> The question still unanswered is why the Australian nbn has no learning efficiencies in the FTTP rollout when NZ has seen significant cost reductions, and projecting further cost reductions.  What are we doing wrong compared to NZ?
> 
> Solve that problem, and FTTN may not be required nearly as much.
> 
> I'd be interested no see if you have any complaints about the Liberal nbn, or is it a stunning job as far as you're concerned?



Your comments above don't seem to relate to the post you've quoted. 

As for second rate public commentary, you might want to waste time on it but I'm not when the author fails the test on basic detail with the rollout on this side of the Tasman. Your hoop Syd. No one else has to jump through it.

On matters actually happening, 

NBN today launches FTTN technology.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-i...bn-launches-fibre-to-the-node-technology.html

National Press Club Bill Morrow keynote address from Wednesday Sept 16.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam...al-press-club-bill-morrow-keynote-address.pdf


----------



## Tisme

So the real question is whether Malcolm can take his Abbott glasses off now and allow a real internet network  to be built and give Telstra and Ziggy the bullet?


----------



## drsmith

More background on the FTTN launch,



> The rollout of the fibre to the node (FTTN) component of the National Broadband Network is going to see fibre deployed as deeply as possibly, according to NBN Co’s chief architect Tony Cross.
> 
> “All of the copper between the exchange and the pillar is not part of the FTTN, it is completely bypassed by the NBN fibre,” Mr Cross told The Australian.
> 
> He added that with only the last part of the copper in use, NBN Co is confident that the copper is in “reasonably good” condition.
> 
> “We have made allowances within our corporate plan for a reasonable amount of remediation to that infrastructure and we are confident that we have got allocations where we need in the budget to cover any issues we discover with the infrastructure,” Mr Cross said.
> 
> “Then we also have choices as to what we do, we can stay with a predominantly FTTN solution and replace whatever copper parts we need to replace or we can look at other options.”
> 
> Mr Cross’ comments came as NBN Co officially launched the commercial Fibre to the Node (FTTN) product. With the initial FTTN rollout launched in Belmont, New South Wales, FTTN is aiming to have 500,000 FTTN premises ready for service (RFS) by mid-2016 and 3.7 million by mid-2018.
> 
> The state of the copper network has been a significant bone of contention in the overall NBN debate, with NBN Co’s critics highlighting that the degraded state of the copper lines will lead to onerous cost blowouts. However, Mr Cross said that so far the FTTN pilots have not uncovered any nasty surprises.
> 
> “We are pretty happy with what we have discovered in the trials so far but to be honest they haven’t been running long enough for us to get any long term insight into any maintenance,” he said.
> 
> The FTTN trials have so far delivering download speeds of 100Mbps and upload speeds of 40Mbps for residents who live within 400m of a node and an average speed of 50/20 for premises that are 700m from the node.
> 
> According to internal NBN data, about 90 per cent of the nation’s premises lie within 700m of a node, as for the 10 per cent of premises that are beyond the 700m range, Mr Cross said they will receive a 25/5 service.
> 
> One noticeable feature unearthed during the Belmont trials is that premises with faulty or subpar internal wiring end up receiving slower than expected broadband speeds. It’s unclear just how damaging the issue in-home wiring might be for the overall FTTN NBN build, but Mr Cross said that it’s an issue that will ultimately be dealt by the retail service providers (RSPs).
> 
> “In majority of cases the internal wiring is not an issue but if the end user wants to have that looked at then that’s completely up to them and it’s up to the RSPs to see how they can turn it into a product construct that’s part of a service offering or is a chargeable amount,” he said.
> 
> “It’s entirely up to them.”




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-deep-on-rollout/story-e6frg90f-1227537978529


----------



## sydboy007

drsmith said:


> Your comments above don't seem to relate to the post you've quoted.
> 
> As for second rate public commentary, you might want to waste time on it but I'm not when the author fails the test on basic detail with the rollout on this side of the Tasman. Your hoop Syd. No one else has to jump through it.
> 
> On matters actually happening,
> 
> NBN today launches FTTN technology.
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-i...bn-launches-fibre-to-the-node-technology.html
> 
> National Press Club Bill Morrow keynote address from Wednesday Sept 16.
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam...al-press-club-bill-morrow-keynote-address.pdf




Yes, the very slow launch of FTTN.

$1B in OSS upgrades but nbn is so unsure of if they will actually work under load they're artifically limiting the number of services being activated for the first 2 to 3 months.

I suppose that's somehow Labor's fault too


----------



## drsmith

Labor ??

No mention of Labor in above quoted post.


----------



## overhang

The wheels are really falling of the MTM NBN now.  The government tried to palm off the the cost blowouts as problems with the FTTP roll out however former CEO Quigley has been quick to defend his former board by releasing this document (
https://delimiter.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/MQ-PDF.pdf) which indicates that the cost of FTTP should have actually decreased using the latest 2015 corporate plan against the 2013 strategic review.  It makes no sense for the cost of the build to blowout by 15 billion unless of course the costs associated with the MTM were underestimated which now has been confirmed by NBN CEO Bill Morrow who yesterday said 



> “We talked about the $8 billion cost that caused that … it mostly related to the two new technologies that we’re using,” he said, referring to the HFC cable and Fibre to the Node rollouts highlighted by Quigley.
> 
> Morrow said from the NBN company’s point of view, the cost increase was “perfectly understandable”.
> 
> When the NBN company conducted its Strategic Review in late 2013, he said, the company had not conducted “in-fill trials” for the two new technologies ”” meaning that it did not have a full picture of their cost. The company has since refined its model, Morrow said.


----------



## trainspotter

Speaking of new technologies .... 



> Li-Fi, a super-fast alternative to Wi-Fi, has been proven capable of sending data at up to 1GBps in real-world tests.
> At that speed, 100-times faster than current Wi-Fi technologies, a high-definition film could be downloaded in a matter of seconds.




http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook

Tell me why we need the NBN again?


----------



## trainspotter

I wrote this on the 7th June 2011 post #583



> It will only take one geeky kid or technoboffin to write a code that can decompress data into bite size chunks to change this story. There was an Australian guy who invented an engine that was 50% lighter and 30% more fuel efficient. A fuel company bought it so bye bye technology. Sarich was his name.
> 
> Whatever happened to this startling breakthrough?
> 
> _“The scratched glass we’ve developed is actually a Photonic Integrated Circuit,” he explained in a University of Sydney statement. “This circuit uses the ‘scratch’ as a guide or a switching path for information -- kind of like when trains are switched from one track to another -- except this switch takes only one picosecond to change tracks.
> 
> “This means that in one second the switch is turning on and off about one million times,” he added. “We are talking about photonic technology that has terabit per second capacity.”
> 
> An initial demonstration of the photonic technology has revealed it as capable of providing speeds around 60 times faster than today’s networks, which rely on electric switching, but the team is confident that further development will glean even quicker performance._
> http://www.thetechherald.com/article...rough-the-roof




So as technology catches up and the shiny blue cable is being eaten by rats who ya gonna call?



> COLONIES of rats are sinking their teeth into the $36 billion National Broadband Network on the Darling Downs.
> 
> A source close to the telecommunications industry claims the company in charge of the network's roll-out failed to lay rodent-proof cables in a bid to cut costs.
> 
> He said contractors were being brought in to replace long stretches of cables that had been mauled by rodents between Toowoomba and Dalby.




http://www.thechronicle.com.au/news/rats-put-bite-on-nbn-roll-out/1410950/

Check out how many people have actually taken up the NBN and how many houses have been passed ...

http://www.mynbn.info/stats


----------



## Smurf1976

trainspotter said:


> So as technology catches up and the shiny blue cable is being eaten by rats who ya gonna call?






> the company in charge of the network's roll-out failed to lay rodent-proof cables in a bid to cut costs




There might be an exception somewhere, but in general terms government funding + private contractor delivering the work = shoddy workmanship.

Very rarely do governments properly hold contractors to account on either cost or quality and that leads to an "easy money" situation especially with underground works that are out of sight and impractical to properly inspect. 

Been there, played this game.


----------



## So_Cynical

trainspotter said:


> I wrote this on the 7th June 2011 post #583
> 
> So as technology catches up and the shiny blue cable is being eaten by rats who ya gonna call?
> 
> http://www.thechronicle.com.au/news/rats-put-bite-on-nbn-roll-out/1410950/






			
				www.thechronicle said:
			
		

> *A source *close to the telecommunications industry claims the company in charge of the network's roll-out failed to lay rodent-proof cables in a bid to cut costs.




A source = some guy at the pub wearing hi vis.

The story is a beat up.


----------



## trainspotter

Possibly not the first time this has happened ...



> "It turned out a rat chewed the cable that runs through the conduit ”” it's a pipe concreted into the bridge walls on the Minnamurra Bridge. The cable length from one site to the next is 1.9 kilometres. The cable feeds a mobile tower on the western side of the highway, which services thousands of customers," a *Telstra *spokesperson said.
> 
> "The rat unfortunately chewed through the working fibres and all the dark spare fibres. Given the number of customers affected, we made the call to run a temporary cable to restore service to the mobile tower."




http://www.zdnet.com/article/nbn-cable-replaces-rat-chewed-telstra-fibre/


----------



## boofhead

trainspotter said:


> Speaking of new technologies ....
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook
> 
> Tell me why we need the NBN again?




Seems it is better designed for indoors after reading that story. Seems many wireless based technologies have issues once they go outside, have weather and distance.


----------



## trainspotter

boofhead said:


> Seems it is better designed for indoors after reading that story. Seems many wireless based technologies have issues once they go outside, have weather and distance.




Absolutely bh ... I completely concur. That particular piece of technology was light based and not wireless. My portent was to evidence that in 4 years since I posted that technology will surpass the NBN (as in infrastructure cabling) they now have a light based technology that does not require total internal reflection. (as in NOT inside a cable) This is just the start.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> A source = some guy at the pub wearing hi vis.
> 
> The story is a beat up.



I looked at the date and noted 2012.

More recent but also with a connection to 2012 is the following,

http://www.afr.com/business/telecom...st-hit-on-aging-optus-network-20151125-gl7eii



trainspotter said:


> Check out how many people have actually taken up the NBN and how many houses have been passed ...
> 
> http://www.mynbn.info/stats



More up to date but lacking the pretty graph is NBN's weekly updates.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-i...co/corporate-plan/weekly-progress-report.html


----------



## sptrawler

drsmith said:


> I
> 
> More up to date but lacking the pretty graph is NBN's weekly updates.
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-i...co/corporate-plan/weekly-progress-report.html




So it still looks around a 50%  take up, which is pretty average IMO.


----------



## Knobby22

I've got the NBN.
No more expensive than my old DSL.
New inner city estate so it is fibre. Watched the guy come out and install it, about half an hours work.
I reckon it could be done nation wide if it was done like Foxtel. Run it along the street but pay a fee if you want it connected.


----------



## Tisme

trainspotter said:


> Speaking of new technologies ....
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook
> 
> Tell me why we need the NBN again?




Because we need the NBN to stay with the pack. It could be a decade (already been 5 years) before the technology hits the shelves.

I do like the idea of transmitting via LED bulbs that light up the rooms in the house. It will still probably need a light pipe at the door though and thus the need for FTTP instead of bandaid FTTN.


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> So it still looks around a 50%  take up, which is pretty average IMO.




Had my premises made ready, just have to wait for brownfield works to commence.


----------



## DB008

Got something in the mail the other week that l'll be getting the NBN next year. Fingers crossed. The internet is so slow here.....


----------



## trainspotter

Got NBN in street. Got NBN on outside wall. Have phoned 3 ISP providers who really don't seem to give a rats @rse that I am with Telstra for 2 land lines and want to "bundle" them with my internet. "Oh we will send a technician around to your place to connect you to the NBN" they say ... "Yeah that's great" ... I say "But what about the telephone lines?" to which they reply "Oh we will send a technician around to your place to connect you to the NBN" ... "Ermmm and can you tell me about the telephone lines I want transferred onto this one account .. you know ... bundled and all that?" I plead and the response is "Oh we will send a technician around to your place to connect you to the NBN" ... "No you don't seem to understand, do you actually contact Telstra or do I have to contact them as I want only ONE bill for the lot." to which they reply "Oh we will send a technician around to your place to connect you to the NBN" by now I am hitting Defcon 4 and I say in my sweetest voice "Can you please advise me if there is an additional cost to change my land lines from Telstra to (insert ISP providers name here) and do I contact Telstra or do you do it for me yourselves as part of the service?" ... "Oh we will send a technician around to your place to connect you to the NBN" ....  CLICK !


----------



## Tisme

trainspotter said:


> Got NBN in street. Got NBN on outside wall. Have phoned 3 ISP providers who really don't seem to give a rats @rse that I am with Telstra for 2 land lines and want to "bundle" them with my internet. "Oh we will send a technician around to your place to connect you to the NBN" they say ... "Yeah that's great" ... I say "But what about the telephone lines?" to which they reply "Oh we will send a technician around to your place to connect you to the NBN" ... "Ermmm and can you tell me about the telephone lines I want transferred onto this one account .. you know ... bundled and all that?" I plead and the response is "Oh we will send a technician around to your place to connect you to the NBN" ... "No you don't seem to understand, do you actually contact Telstra or do I have to contact them as I want only ONE bill for the lot." to which they reply "Oh we will send a technician around to your place to connect you to the NBN" by now I am hitting Defcon 4 and I say in my sweetest voice "Can you please advise me if there is an additional cost to change my land lines from Telstra to (insert ISP providers name here) and do I contact Telstra or do you do it for me yourselves as part of the service?" ... "Oh we will send a technician around to your place to connect you to the NBN" ....  CLICK !




The phones would be swapped onto the internet with Cisco digital babies; same numbers, pstn gone.


----------



## Tisme

You Liberal voters should be ashamed of yourselves:

http://mobile.pcauthority.com.au/Feature/412733,analysis-the-destruction-of-the-nbn.aspx

could have at least connected me up to the NBN before it heads south.


----------



## NBNMyths

I must admit to having lost interest in the NBN somewhat since the Coalition set about wrecking it.

But, given the extent of the unfolding disaster, I thought I'd drop in to summarise all the _I told you so_'s. I think it might be time to revamp the nbnmyths website too.

*Completion:*
Remember when Mal promised that everyone would have access to 25Mbps by 2016? Pretty sure I said that would never happen. And, what a surprise. Here we are just a year out from deadline, and the only parts of the NBN with any volume of connections are the FTTP, Wireless and Sat parts that all commenced under Labor. There's almost no-one connected to FTTN. 

What are we at? 1.3M premises passed out of ~10M required. Top job, Mal.

*Cost:*
$29bn, Mal promised. It's currently up to ~$49bn peak funding, although Mal assures us the Govt is only stumping up $29.5. My bet is they'll guarantee the rest of the debt though, which given the NBN is a GBE is essentially the same thing. "1/3 the cost of FTTP", Mal said. The projected cost per premises for FTTN is now almost the same as the actual cost of FTTP.

*FTTN:*
_Of course the copper network is fine for FTTN, said Mal. No problems at all. The network is in great shape...._
Meanwhile, back in the real world, the original $60M budget to fix up the copper has now blown out 10fold to $650M. And this is with less than 2% of premises passed so far. Wow, who could have seen that coming?

Then there is the 1,800km of new (obsolete) copper that NBN has bought so far in order to get FTTN working. What a great investment that is.

NBN have now quietly delayed FTTN connections, so they can "undertake further testing". Although they assure us there are no problems. It's not really a delay....

*HFC:*
_HFC is used right around the World for broadband. The NBN would be mad to overbuild it, when they could use it for the NBN, Mal said._
What could possibly go wrong spending $800m to take over a 15yo network that's seen no routine maintenance for a decade? After all, the grown-ups are in charge now and they perform due-diligence on such things.

Whoops. Seems the Optus HFC is in such bad condition, they'll have to overbuild it.

*Remind me again why we were changing to an MTM? To save time and money? How's that working out?*


*Satellites:*
Back in 2012, Mal said there was no need for new NBN satellites. There will be massive spare capacity, he said....
Now in 2015, they can't come fast enough. The interim satellite service, which uses all the available capacity on existing satellites (which Turnbull said would be adequate for the foreseeable future), is already operating beyond capacity.

*Wireless:*
There was no shortage of conservative tech luddites who said we'd all be using some imaginary superfast wireless technology by now, and the NBN would be obsolete. Yet cellular data is as expensive as ever, and 4G speeds are plummeting, just as the tech-heads said they would. The ABS data shows that fixed line downloads continue to grow at a rate that dwarfs mobile:


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> I must admit to having lost interest in the NBN somewhat since the Coalition set about wrecking it.



Welcome back Myths. I was quietly hoping the photography business was so busy that you simply didn't have time.

Have you after all this time listened fully to that presentation from Simon Hackett ?


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Welcome back Myths. I was quietly hoping the photography business was so busy that you simply didn't have time.
> 
> Have you after all this time listened fully to that presentation from Simon Hackett ?




Yes, that has been the case. I have been ridiculously busy of late, modifying a LandCruiser and working on a camper-trailer website...... But I think given the situation, that I should dedicate some time to the NBN again.

I think Simon's old presentation has been superseded by his more recent lament.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> I think Simon's old presentation has been superseded by his more recent lament.



Strictly speaking, that doesn't answer the question.

I refer specifically to his commentary about the state of the rollout under the former Labor government. I again post the link,

http://simonhackett.com/2014/09/06/rebooting-the-nbn/


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> Strictly speaking, that doesn't answer the question.
> 
> I refer specifically to his commentary about the state of the rollout under the former Labor government. I again post the link,
> 
> http://simonhackett.com/2014/09/06/rebooting-the-nbn/




Ok so the execution may not have been perfect under Labor, but the Noalition deliberately set out to wreck it, told lies and massively underestimated the job at hand...a near complete balls up.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Strictly speaking, that doesn't answer the question.
> 
> I refer specifically to his commentary about the state of the rollout under the former Labor government. I again post the link,
> 
> http://simonhackett.com/2014/09/06/rebooting-the-nbn/




Right, yes I have listened to it in full now. Here are some comments:

There wasn't really anything unexpected in there. I admire Simon's theory and desire to improve the "less-than-ideal" MTM. In practise, it's probably not going as well as he thought it would.

Being a very political process, NBN Co was always going to suffer issues due to the influence of its political masters. This is still the case, and it always will be.

Unfortunately, the nature of politics, a tech-illiterate public and the heavy (and generally false) campaign being run by News Ltd in particular, meant the NBN Co was under massive pressure to show progress. Nice to say they should have been more transparent with results in the early years, but doing so would have added more fuel to News's fire. Would have been nice if it were bi-partisan from the beginning, based on expert advice instead of politics.


Clearly, the $29.5bn MTM budget was a fantasy, as we all said it would be. Given the recent large budget blowouts and subsequent discoveries about the copper and HFC condition/remediation, I question whether FTTN/HFC is still being undertaken because it is the most prudent option (even if capability is removed from the equation). I sense a strong political reason for continuing with FTTN at least partially to save some political face. Can you imagine the howls if Mal admitted that FTTP had been the best solution for most of the network all along?

Given the Optus HFC debacle and pending the knowledge about the status of Telstra's HFC, Simon's conclusion that HFC will be a great part of the NBN is currently rather shaky. 

"Service class zero", which Simon was critical of under the previous NBN management, was at 55,000 premises at June 2013. This then rose to a peak of 99,000 premises under the new management team, before dropping back to 49000 currently. Not exactly a stellar improvement.

NBN Co had already changed to a process of installing lead-ins during the rollout prior to the change in management/government. IIRC, this was impeded originally because legislation didn't give NBN Co the right to enter property without express authorisation (while Telstra, for example, did have that right). The Victorian coalition Govt, for example, blocked the NBN from having this access.

The build maps weren't just removed, the order of the build was changed. For example, the maps originally showed the lower Blue Mountains commencing June2015, with no timetable for the upper Mountains. This was changed to the upper Mountains being first, and the lower Mountains commencing in 2017. This is not a 'reality check' that Simon described, it is an (unexplained) change in priority.

Yes, the interim satellite service is oversubscribed, and cannot cope. That's the same service that Mal told us would be good for the foreseeable future, with ample spare capacity available. He would have cancelled the new satellites if the contracts hadn't been signed pre-election. Lucky Mr Red Undies got them signed, huh?

Ive said before I have no problem with fibre to the basement.

He says FTTN should be switched on mid-2015. Didn't happen. FTTN is late, and all the budget-blowouts since the new Govt relate to FTTN/HFC. FTTP is the only part of the terrestrial rollout that is on-budget. So is the new team actually doing any better than the old one?


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Right, yes I have listened to it in full now. Here are some comments:
> 
> There wasn't really anything unexpected in there. I admire Simon's theory and desire to improve the "less-than-ideal" MTM. In practise, it's probably not going as well as he thought it would.
> 
> Being a very political process, NBN Co was always going to suffer issues due to the influence of its political masters. This is still the case, and it always will be.
> 
> Unfortunately, the nature of politics, a tech-illiterate public and the heavy (and generally false) campaign being run by News Ltd in particular, meant the NBN Co was under massive pressure to show progress. Nice to say they should have been more transparent with results in the early years, but doing so would have added more fuel to News's fire. Would have been nice if it were bi-partisan from the beginning, based on expert advice instead of politics.



It's interesting that having taken 15 months to come to terms with that presentation to listen to it in full, you want to blame a section of the media for the outcome under Labor rather than the government that was in charge.

What's clear is that even after your long sabbatical from this discussion, your political perspective hasn't changed.



NBNMyths said:


> *HFC:*
> _HFC is used right around the World for broadband. The NBN would be mad to overbuild it, when they could use it for the NBN, Mal said._
> What could possibly go wrong spending $800m to take over a 15yo network that's seen no routine maintenance for a decade? After all, the grown-ups are in charge now and they perform due-diligence on such things.
> 
> Whoops. Seems the Optus HFC is in such bad condition, they'll have to overbuild it.
> 
> *Remind me again why we were changing to an MTM? To save time and money? How's that working out?*



What's also clear from the above and at least one other point from that particular post is that you haven't reviewed the ongoing discussion that's taken place on this forum before contributing to the discussion again. 

There's a link within a post on the previous page of this thread that highlights the timing of that decision to spend $800m to take over a 15yo network that was in such disrepair.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> Ok so the execution may not have been perfect under Labor, but the Noalition deliberately set out to wreck it, told lies and massively underestimated the job at hand...a near complete balls up.



For one side of politics, the above is a somewhat kind characterisation of an outcome analogous to trains crashing through the end of stations both in absolute terms and relative to the other.

Both sides have underestimated the job at hand with their respective plans but the political starting point for the Libs was Labor's optimistic projections. Ultimately, this element has been a pox on both their houses and the overall political process.

In terms of the current rollout, the additional cost of upgrading the copper and the Optus component of the HFC network as recently reported is relatively small compared to the overall project cost and more importantly, the cost difference between FTTP and MTM. The cost rollout relativities between the varying technologies on a per premise basis has been outlined in NBN's latest corporate plan and previously discussed on this forum.


----------



## boofhead

The HFC and copper replacements do seem to be a waste in consideration that MTM is a shorter term fix where fibre to the premises is a longer term plan.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> It's interesting that having taken 15 months to come to terms with that presentation to listen to it in full, you want to blame a section of the media for the outcome under Labor rather than the government that was in charge.
> 
> What's clear is that even after your long sabbatical from this discussion, your political perspective hasn't changed.
> 
> 
> What's also clear from the above and at least one other point from that particular post is that you haven't reviewed the ongoing discussion that's taken place on this forum before contributing to the discussion again.
> 
> There's a link within a post on the previous page of this thread that highlights the timing of that decision to spend $800m to take over a 15yo network that was in such disrepair.




The 'section of the media' released an endless stream of factually inaccurate anti-NBN stories, which was in part responsible for the political pressure brought to bear on NBN Co. Funny how they seem far less interested in the failures of the NBN since the Coalition came to power. I wonder why? If Labor were presiding over the stream of debacles that have beset the MTM NBN over the last 18 months, it would have been on the front page of the Australian/Telegraph a dozen times!

Yes, the former Government paid Optus the $800m to close down the HFC and transfer the customers to the NBN when it was overbuilt. A prudent move considering the state of the network. The details of the change to the agreement is a bit sketchy. I wonder when NBN Co take possession? Will they have to pay to maintain the network until they can overbuild or repair it? In a masterful display of due-dilligence, the new Govt apparently didn't actually investigate the network before deciding to take it over. So the bold promises surrounding the deal of faster rollout and lower cost are now inaccurate.

Dated November 2015, the leaked report containing the HFC revelation came after the August update of the corporate plan (which increased the peak funding to ~49bn). The subsequent leaked report on the blowout in copper remediation is also post-corp plan. So we can expect that both the timetable and cost will have blown out since that corporate plan was released. The minister apparently didn't even know about the HFC issue before the report was leaked, continuing to claim that it would be used in the NBN to speed the rollout and save money. Oops.

Fifield won't even answer questions about it now. Funny how demands of transparency and honesty in opposition are quickly forgotten once you're running the show....

The fact that NBN Co is leaking secret documents like a sieve doesn't instil much confidence of staff moral levels, following the technology and management changes made by the Coalition. Simon Hackett said it was a bit of an unhappy workplace when he started there. I wonder what he'd say about it today.

The cost of the MTM has almost doubled since Turnbull announced it. It's gone from "1/3 - 1/2" the cost of FTTP to being very, very close. Perhaps still slightly cheaper, but clearly very poor value for money once capability is taken into account. As I've stated many times before, we will blow $50bn on obsolete technology, which future generations will be lumbered with upgrading in the future.

_Do it once, do it right, do it with fibre. _Words that will come back to haunt us.


----------



## drsmith

I can recall a factually inaccurate story from the ABC about the hands of asylum seekers being deliberately burnt during a boat turn back and more broadly, their asylum seeker biased commentary.

Did that stop the government from successfully implementing its border protection policies in this regard ?

Governments are responsible for the policies they put forward, not the media that comment on them.

Perhaps $800m was too much to pay for the Optus HFC network regardless of its future use given the state it was in. It doesn't magically become worth more if you want to close it down relative to other uses. Too much was paid for the asset under Labor in the first place.

As for your interpretation of Simon Hackett's commentary on the overall situation under Labor,



NBNMyths said:


> Simon Hackett said it was a bit of an unhappy workplace when he started there.




I suggest you listen to it again, this time with your ears and eyes open. 

As for cost relativities, that's in this year's corporate plan and I have also noted, has been in your absence, discussed on this forum. You can go back, review that discussion and do the math for yourself if you like. You'll find that the latest reports regarding copper and Optus HFC are relatively small when compared to the overall cost difference between MTM and FTTP.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> As for cost relativities, that's in this year's corporate plan and I have also noted, has been in your absence, discussed on this forum. You can go back, review that discussion and do the math for yourself if you like. You'll find that the latest reports regarding copper and Optus HFC are relatively small when compared to the overall cost difference between MTM and FTTP.




According to Turnbull's 2013 Strategic Review, 'radically redesigned' 93% FTTP could have been done for $64bn peak funding. The latest corp plan puts the peak funding of the MTM at $46-56bn. That's 10-20 times the capability for ~$10bn more cost, which would also generate more revenue. And in the 3 months since the Corp plan and with almost no FTTN actually built, the MTM has already added $0.6bn in copper remediation costs and an unknown amount for overbuilding the Optus HFC which was supposed to be used. And if you think 0.6bn will be the final blowout for remediation, I think you'll be sadly mistaken.

Citing only my own anecdotal evidence, I think there will be much, much more to do. My street was developed in 1970. So the original copper is ~45 years old. Quite young, and in a well-drained rocky area well away from the ocean. So it's 'new' and with little corrosive exposure relative to much of the Telstra network. Yet despite being just 1km from the exchange, I was only getting 7Mbps sync speed. Theoretically, I should have been getting ~17. 3 years ago a tree fell on the power lines, bringing them down onto a Telstra pole, melting all the phone lines in the street. Telstra replaced them all the way back to the exchange, and my sync speed immediately went up to 16.5Mbps. Now it's already dropped back to 12. After just 3 years. And we are to believe that this (undersize), poorly maintained copper network will deliver the ~100Mbps+ that thick, new copper does in a lab?

Our data consumption continues to double every 12 months. There is no sign of the growth slowdown predicted by Mal et al. Remember Turnbull told us just 5 years ago that we didn't need more than 12Mbps. He said 3 years ago that the new NBN satellites were a 'Rolls-Royce' solution, when a Camry will do. Now it's looking like even the Rolls Royces won't be able to cope for more than a few years, and they'll need to look at launching a third new sat. People (and conservatives in particular) consistently underestimate the rate of growth and change in technology. MTM is a perfect example of this. A _2010 Camry_ solution to problem that requires a _2050 Tesla_.

Sorry, but the MTM will go down in history as one of the most backward-looking infrastructure projects ever undertaken by Government in Australia. I suspect it will be obsolete and overwhelmed before it's even finished.


----------



## drsmith

> Michael Malone, founder of Perth-based internet service provider iiNet, says the NBN's problems were cemented when Labor failed to get bipartisan support for the project in the first place, and let it become a "political plaything".
> 
> *He still believes fibre-to-the-node will be cheaper and faster, and that controversy around the state of Telstra's copper has been "definitely over-hyped".*




http://www.smh.com.au/technology/te...litions-nbn-came-unstuck-20151203-glermm.html

My bolds.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> http://www.smh.com.au/technology/te...litions-nbn-came-unstuck-20151203-glermm.html
> 
> My bolds.




Time will tell. But, yes it probably will be (slightly) cheaper and (slightly) faster to deploy. The issue is what is better value for money. How much cheaper and how much faster? Is it worth saving $5-10bn and 1 or 2 years to build a network that has 1/10th to 1/20th of the capability, and will generate lower long-term revenue, given what we know about historical bandwidth demand growth and current trends?

I also notice you've quoted rather selectively from that article. In fact you found the only comment that wasn't lambasting the state of the MTM, and the operation of the new NBN Co. Here, let me balance it out for you:

From Rod Tucker, who was awarded John Howard's Prime Ministers Prize for his services to communications:
The University of Melbourne's Rod Tucker, who advised Labor on implementing its NBN, argued in The Conversation that if NBN had in 2013 hired the extra 1000 construction staff it finally did in 2015, *a full-fibre NBN could have been completed as soon as 2021, but with the benefits of a faster network with lower operational costs and higher revenue.*

Telecommunications analyst Paul Budde believes *Turnbull ignored good advice on the state of the networks for political reasons, and "only surrounded himself with friends who all had the same sort of view on the NBN"*.
Budde is concerned that the NBN's mix of "second-rate" technologies, which lag significantly in speeds compared to fibre-to-the-premise, will leave the NBN vulnerable to competition from private players like Telstra, which is investing heavily in its fixed-wireless network.
"If the NBN is no longer super duper, the next thing obviously is others [telco providers] are going to step in [and offer quality of service that the NBN is not delivering]," Budde says. "That will massively undermine the core business model [of the NBN], no doubt about it."

RMIT University's Dr Mark Gregory, a prominent commentator on the topic, says current NBN management is "stonewalling everyone" and creating an "adversarial" relationship with media because it is "*trying to hide all the bad news". "There are no facts coming out of NBN Co, no transparency,*" he says.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> *Wireless:*
> There was no shortage of conservative tech luddites who said we'd all be using some imaginary superfast wireless technology by now, and the NBN would be obsolete. Yet cellular data is as expensive as ever, and 4G speeds are plummeting, just as the tech-heads said they would. The ABS data shows that fixed line downloads continue to grow at a rate that dwarfs mobile:




I'm amazed as to how much the prospects for wireless have advanced in the past three days,



NBNMyths said:


> Budde is concerned that the NBN's mix of "second-rate" technologies, which lag significantly in speeds compared to fibre-to-the-premise, will leave the NBN vulnerable to competition from private players like Telstra, which is investing heavily in its fixed-wireless network.
> "If the NBN is no longer super duper, the next thing obviously is others [telco providers] are going to step in [and offer quality of service that the NBN is not delivering]," Budde says. "That will massively undermine the core business model [of the NBN], no doubt about it."


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> I'm amazed as to how much the prospects for wireless have advanced in the past three days,




Budde didn't use Telstra's fixed wireless (Payphone WiFi) network as an example that could undermine the NBN, the journo did. The payphone WiFi isn't really competing with the NBN, it is (or will be) connected to it and only exists in a ~50m radius around Telstra payphones.

What will compete with the NBN and wreck its business case are things like TPG's FTTB program.

As Budde says, if the NBN is only offering 25Mbps, then there's a whole raft of tech that could do as well or better. That isn't the case if the NBN is offering 100 or 1000Mbps.


----------



## Tisme

NBNMyths said:


> Budde is concerned that the NBN's mix of "second-rate" technologies, which lag significantly in speeds compared to fibre-to-the-premise, will leave the* NBN vulnerable to competition from private players like Telstra*, which is investing heavily in its fixed-wireless network.
> .




Isn't Telstra already the NBN and that's why it (the NBN) is a hotch potch of bandaids and spin? Telstra is one of those Moo Moo land resorts that Liberal politicians and their families retire at to milk the public purse until the Lord beckons isn't it?


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Budde didn't use Telstra's fixed wireless (Payphone WiFi) network as an example that could undermine the NBN, the journo did. The payphone WiFi isn't really competing with the NBN, it is (or will be) connected to it and only exists in a ~50m radius around Telstra payphones.
> 
> What will compete with the NBN and wreck its business case are things like TPG's FTTB program.
> 
> As Budde says, if the NBN is only offering 25Mbps, then there's a whole raft of tech that could do as well or better. That isn't the case if the NBN is offering 100 or 1000Mbps.



The journo ??

You can't resolve the inconsistency in what you said that easily. You presented it as your own argument. 

With regard to your reference to FTTB above, here's another,



NBNMyths said:


> Ive said before I have no problem with fibre to the basement.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> The journo ??
> 
> You can't resolve the inconsistency in what you said that easily. You presented it as your own argument.
> 
> With regard to your reference to FTTB above, here's another,




Yes, the journo. Budde's quote makes no mention of Telstra's "fixed wireless". He wouldn't be silly enough to call it that, because it isn't fixed wireless. It's WiFi at payphones, connected to the fixed line network. Telstra doesn't have a fixed wireless network, NBN Co do. The journo is confused.

I just copied and pasted the sections of the article. If I'd taken Budde's quote in isolation, it wouldn't have made sense. I do not believe (and have never believed) that wireless is a viable alternative to fixed lines for the vast majority of the market. Which I have said all along.

Yes, I have no problem with FTTB. It's good, because the copper loops are short so you can get good speeds. Which is why TPG's will erode NBN Co's income where it's available.


----------



## NBNMyths

Tisme said:


> Isn't Telstra already the NBN and that's why it (the NBN) is a hotch potch of bandaids and spin? Telstra is one of those Moo Moo land resorts that Liberal politicians and their families retire at to milk the public purse until the Lord beckons isn't it?




Telstra's dilapidated copper network is being transferred to the NBN, so they can spend a few billion fixing it so it works in the rain.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Yes, the journo. Budde's quote makes no mention of Telstra's "fixed wireless". He wouldn't be silly enough to call it that, because it isn't fixed wireless. It's WiFi at payphones, connected to the fixed line network. Telstra doesn't have a fixed wireless network, NBN Co do. The journo is confused.
> 
> I just copied and pasted the sections of the article. If I'd taken Budde's quote in isolation, it wouldn't have made sense. I do not believe (and have never believed) that wireless is a viable alternative to fixed lines for the vast majority of the market. Which I have said all along.




Perhaps you can clarify what that statement (quoted below) was meant to say,



NBNMyths said:


> Budde is concerned that the NBN's mix of "second-rate" technologies, which lag significantly in speeds compared to fibre-to-the-premise, will leave the NBN vulnerable to competition from private players like Telstra, which is investing heavily in its fixed-wireless network.




bearing in mind,



NBNMyths said:


> Budde didn't use Telstra's fixed wireless (Payphone WiFi) network as an example that could undermine the NBN, the journo did. The payphone WiFi isn't really competing with the NBN, it is (or will be) connected to it and only exists in a ~50m radius around Telstra payphones.


----------



## NBNMyths

Perhaps you're unaware of what these things are: *"* *"*

They are called quotation marks. I learned about them around 3rd class I think. You put them on either side of text, when that text is a direct quote. You'll notice that they are missing from the bit of the article that mentions Telstra's fixed-wirelsss network. Like I wrote, this would be because Telstra doesn't have a fixed-wireless network, so Budde wouldn't have said that. This explains (to most people at least) why the fixed wireless is not in quotation marks.

The *quote* from Budde is:
_"If the NBN is no longer super duper, the next thing obviously is others ... are going to step in ... That will massively undermine the core business model ..., no doubt about it." _

The journo is the one talking about fixed wireless. Budde's quote does not identify any particular technology.


----------



## NBNMyths

First dog on the moon nails it again:
http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...om-helpful-and-important-to-ferret-underpants

_*"The Malcolm Government bought 1800km of the finest, fastest copper tubings money can buy from *_*Crapstick & Sons Ye Olde Copper Tubings Pty Ltd"*


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> The *quote* from Budde is:
> _"If the NBN is no longer super duper, the next thing obviously is others ... are going to step in ... That will massively undermine the core business model ..., no doubt about it." _
> 
> The journo is the one talking about fixed wireless. Budde's quote does not identify any particular technology.



That's not the bit to which I refer but frankly, you're not going to be taken seriously in any forum where you present commentary as your own and then attempt to blame someone else when it turns out to be wrong.


----------



## trainspotter

And that Sir is how you play snooker.


----------



## orr

derty said:


> Cheers NBNmyths.......
> 
> The NBN will end up making FOXTEL cable network infrastructure obsolete and will open up the market to many competitors which is why you see the Murdoch rags conducting such a concerted campaign against the rollout.



  thanks derty circa 2011

And here we are now with Netflix and Stan... Hulu that gets you content from all over the world...


From drsmith circa 2012...._for insight_... and you want to be taken seriously???


_Today's Bolt Report was outstanding.

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/a...eport_today10/_    ........ A  truely outstanding forward analysis of the Clean Energy Finance Fund from Bolt in this one.

And still on the NBN the retro grade rear guard actions continue from the Murdoch toadies . Lets not forget that the one hundred and sixty odd editors of murdochs world wide publication network were 100%, bar one, behind the Iraq invasion form the get go, the hold out from memory in Hobart caved in and got in lock step after about ten days.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> That's not the bit to which I refer but frankly, you're not going to be taken seriously in any forum where you present commentary as your own and then attempt to blame someone else when it turns out to be wrong.




What on earth are you talking about? I pasted entire sections from an article. You're the one who can't distinguish a quote from a Journo's introduction to it. Do we presume that you agree with every part of every piece of text you have ever linked to or pasted in this thread, simply because you pasted it?

I have never said wireless is an alternative. Ever. And the evidence I posted earlier backs that up. Your attempts at strawmanning and diversion are impressive, young one, but the facts remain that the vast majority of qualified people consider the MTM to be a dogs breakfast. One which is rapidly going off in the sun.

Since the election, the cost has almost doubled, even though the FTTP has shrunk. The rollout time has increased by 200%. The FTTN trial is delayed, with no reason given. There are secret reports which are damning of the HFC and copper condition. The minister is oblivious. The only parts of the NBN that are still on time and budget since 2013 are the bits Labor started - The FTTP, Wireless and Satellite.


----------



## So_Cynical

NBNMyths said:


> Our data consumption continues to double every 12 months. There is no sign of the growth slowdown predicted by Mal et al. Remember Turnbull told us just 5 years ago that we didn't need more than 12Mbps.




I have shared a 2 bedroom unit with the same person for the last 6 years, in that time we have gone from a 30 gig 1.5 Mbps DSL1 plan to 25 Mbps 250 gig NBN fibre, we generally don't watch TV anymore, everything is online...i remember watching Malcolm give that "we didn't need more than 12 Mbps" presentation and thinking to myself that he was foolish to be saying such things.

He should've been smarter than that, Abbott made him look like a fool...he should've known better than to take the Communications minister job.


----------



## drsmith

orr said:


> From drsmith circa 2012...._for insight_... and you want to be taken seriously???



If in going back that far you're suggesting that everything I've said since that time has come to pass, you're possibly being a little generous but I thank you for the compliment in any case.


----------



## Tisme

So_Cynical said:


> I have shared a 2 bedroom unit with the same person for the last 6 years, in that time we have gone from a 30 gig 1.5 Mbps DSL1 plan to 25 Mbps 250 gig NBN fibre, we generally don't watch TV anymore, everything is online...i remember watching Malcolm give that "we didn't need more than 12 Mbps" presentation and thinking to myself that he was foolish to be saying such things.
> 
> He should've been smarter than that, Abbott made him look like a fool...he should've known better than to take the Communications minister job.




Yes, although I lost my 30 Mbps connection when I moved earlier this year, I hate to think what I'd have to watch without the 19 Mbps, non rimmed ADSL (which is like a dog in comparison to the previous cable btw, but just enough to stream). 

Think of Rumpole and his metered connection!!!!!


----------



## NBNMyths

Woohoo!

The MTM now has 1,000 customers connected to FTTN. 

In October last year, the plan was to have 244,500 by October 2015. So they're only 243,500 (or 99.6%) behind target. Top effort Bill, Mal et al. It doesn't come much closer than that.


----------



## NBNMyths

Using NBN Co's own costings, an analysis of FTTP Vs FTTN has found it would only take ~6 years before its initial rollout savings are overtaken by FTTN's $220/year higher running costs and $10/month lower revenue.

So not only are we getting a greatly inferior network, but we're getting one that will cost more as well. Gee, I wonder who could have seen that one coming.

https://delimiter.com.au/2016/01/04...l&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer


----------



## Tisme

NBNMyths said:


> . Gee, I wonder who could have seen that one coming.




I think those in the industry could see the sham from the onset. The incredulous thing for me is trying to quantify how supposedly intelligent people did and still do defend the Claytons system. In twenty years time when the next gen comms comes along I predict those same people who slavishly defend the Abbott/Turnbull mess will crow about how it was a good thing we didn't waste money on NBN MKI.

I feel the anxiety for those who don't really understand the technology they denigrate or espouse. At least in the old days you could tell the magazine PC experts because they used big words (fluffy dice horsepower) to mask their inability to grasp the inner workings, these days you don't know who they are cutting and pasting, there's just so much plagiarism around.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> https://delimiter.com.au/2016/01/04...l&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer



I have reviewed the author's actual article and the calculations therein and the data from which it was sourced.

Author's article,

http://valman.blogspot.com.au/2015/12/fttp-vs-fttn-when-is-spending-4400.html

Data source,

https://delimiter.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Optus-HFC.pdf

His calculations are based on the assumption that revenue and opex from the table in the data source above represent recurrent annual projections. It looks bad for FTTN relative to FTTP due to the large relative difference in margin (revenue - opex) projected over time. The purpose of the table however seems to be to determine peak funding relativities between the options so it's not necessarily the case that the revenue and opex numbers are recurrent annual as he assumes.

He may have been influenced by the 1yr $275m caption under the FTTP revenue. Strangely though, he has extrapolated that period to FTTN revenue and opex even though the revenue caption there is 1.3yr. Opex figures contain no caption so it's difficult to know specifically what period they cover. They are also complicated by Telstra lease payments (noted at bottom of table). Another consideration for revenue is also take up lag between service availability and take up rate. This is unlikely to be steady state from the outset.

One cannot therefore assume with any confidence that revenue and opex are recurrent annual figures from the information provided as he has done. Other issues with his analysis include the number of premises for the per-premise calculations (350k or 470k) and time value of money but these may be secondary relative to the above.



NBNMyths said:


> Woohoo!
> 
> The MTM now has 1,000 customers connected to FTTN.
> 
> In October last year, the plan was to have 244,500 by October 2015. So they're only 243,500 (or 99.6%) behind target. Top effort Bill, Mal et al. It doesn't come much closer than that.




You may wish to review the two linked articles from the above more carefully than when you posted the above. If you do, you'll note the numbers represent two different things.


----------



## NBNMyths

Surprise, surprise. FTTN is already falling over. Insufficient capacity at the node is dropping "100Mbps" connections down to <4Mps at peak times. https://delimiter.com.au/2016/02/09/nbn-gridlock-fttn-taken-down/

Now while this is certainly a fixable problem (increasing capacity from each node back to the POI), that upgrade comes at a cost. And if the capability is already showing such massive degradation, with only a few of the maximum 135 subscribers active on the node, then it would appear that the nodes are enormously under-resourced, and will need an upgrade.

How much will this increase the FTTN cost, and what bearing will it have on the already tenuous claim that FTTN is cheaper than FTTP?

Once again, I'm reminded of all those people who assured us that the 'grown ups are now in charge' and they'll run the project properly. Even as their FTTN stumbles from one problem to the next, and Labor's FTTP sections continue to experience smooth sailing.


----------



## Tisme

NBNMyths said:


> Once again, I'm reminded of all those people who assured us that the 'grown ups are now in charge' and they'll run the project properly. Even as their FTTN stumbles from one problem to the next, and Labor's FTTP sections continue to experience smooth sailing.




Yeah but it's Bill Shorten and ABC bias that is causing the problem. You need to get with the program and pick a political side if we are ever going to get the NBN active.


----------



## drsmith

Senate Estimates on the above as reported on Computerworld,

http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/593701/nbn-quizzed-over-fttn-complaints/

In short,



> In some cases it could be related to an end user’s in-home network, the backhaul provisioning of a retail service provider or the capacity (CVC) being purchased at an NBN Point of Interconnect by an RSP, the CEO said.






> “We evaluated and inspected every complaint on this to see because this is so important for us to understand if in fact the technology cannot deliver the speeds that we need to, and we did not find one case where fibre to the node technology was a factor in those speed complaints that were coming forward.”






> However the CEO said that in some cases assessed by NBN the speed issue was linked to an under-provisioning of capacity at a Point of Interconnect.


----------



## DB008

I think that for very large infrastructure projects of any kind that will take more than say, 5 years to complete, all 3 parties (ALP/Libs/Greens) should be involved and come to some sort of agreement be made before starting the project.

If Labor get back in, plans will change again and it will inevitability cost more money and take more time to complete this project.


----------



## Tisme

DB008 said:


> I think that for very large infrastructure projects of any kind that will take more than say, 5 years to complete, all 3 parties (ALP/Libs/Greens) should be involved and come to some sort of agreement be made before starting the project.
> 
> If Labor get back in, plans will change again and it will inevitability cost more money and take more time to complete this project.





Yep every incoming govt has to put its smell on anything worthwhile and act like its their idea = juvenile behaviour.


----------



## DB008

l did a search on 5G on ASF, but way too much came up.

Anyways, NBNMyths said that 5G was a pipe-dream...

*Telstra to launch 5G network tests​*


> AUSTRALIA’S Commonwealth Games will not just be a speed test for athletes but for smartphones, as Telstra today revealed it would use the Gold Coast 2018 Games to test its next-generation 5G network.
> 
> The new network could offer speeds as high as 20 gigabits per second, theoretically able to deliver three series of Games of Thrones in less than one second.
> 
> The country’s biggest telecommunications carrier revealed its 5G plans before Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, also revealing plans to launch a high-speed mobile modem this year.
> 
> Telstra networks group managing director Mike Wright said the telco aimed to deliver its 5G network by 2020, and the 2018 Gold Coast Commonwealth Games had been chosen as “a great way to focus energy” on delivering a significantly faster mobile network with partner Ericsson.
> 
> The trials may not necessarily involve finished smartphones, however, as manufacturers might not yet be ready for the technology.




http://www.news.com.au/technology/online/telstra-to-launch-5g-network-tests/news-story/094565a784c895c6d3dcb4fb4a893e6d​


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> l did a search on 5G on ASF, but way too much came up.
> 
> Anyways, NBNMyths said that 5G was a pipe-dream...
> 
> *Telstra to launch 5G network tests​*
> 
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/technology/online/telstra-to-launch-5g-network-tests/news-story/094565a784c895c6d3dcb4fb4a893e6d​




Ahh.... no. I never said 5G was a pipe dream. Of course there will be 5G. And 6G, 7G, 8G, 9G...until we run out of Gs.

What I said was that 5G will not be a viable replacement for a fixed network. And it won't. Too slow (once many people are connected), and too expensive. 

Telstra's real-world 4G speeds dropped by 50% between 2014-2015, as more users connected. The price is 20x higher than fixed line (GB for GB), and hasn't fallen to any great extent. By the time 5G hits the street it will be required just to keep the networks from collapsing under the data strain being imposed on 4G.

Looking at the latest data from the ABS, it's clear that there is still no sign of a move away from fixed data, despite what all the fanbois said when 4G was launched. In fact, fixed line volume growth is massively in front of mobile:


----------



## SirRumpole

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-01/manning-what-went-wrong-with-the-nbn/7210408


----------



## Monkey C Doo

NBNMyths said:


> Ahh.... no. I never said 5G was a pipe dream. Of course there will be 5G. And 6G, 7G, 8G, 9G...until we run out of Gs.
> 
> What I said was that 5G will not be a viable replacement for a fixed network. And it won't. Too slow (once many people are connected), and too expensive.
> 
> Telstra's real-world 4G speeds dropped by 50% between 2014-2015, as more users connected. The price is 20x higher than fixed line (GB for GB), and hasn't fallen to any great extent. By the time 5G hits the street it will be required just to keep the networks from collapsing under the data strain being imposed on 4G.
> 
> Looking at the latest data from the ABS, it's clear that there is still no sign of a move away from fixed data, despite what all the fanbois said when 4G was launched. In fact, fixed line volume growth is massively in front of mobile:
> 
> View attachment 65958




Yeah but...
I'm a heavy user of both mobile and fixed line data

Mobile data when i'm working on the road doing important stuff
Fixed line when I'm chilling at home and want to download the entire Game of thrones series.

Fixed line is awesome but it's all just wank - Download just one pissy single Gig of documents, data whatever and see how long it take to analyse said info.......    I'll see you next year. 
Fixed lines main claim to fame is just for watching movies and stuff.

If the government / corporations can come up with a way to block dodgy movie downloads then the whole NBN reasons for existence is moot. ( they won't though as there is heaps more money selling bandwidth than selling actual product )

I just got a new work phone, samsung something with LTE data ( ??? ) I hooked it up to download Bush tucker man and Billions. 5 min's later it was all done over the wireless and my boss is now on my **** over the $1200 excess Data bill FFS. ( forgot about the torrent 'till next day ) He can get stuffed though.

If mobile ever catches up to or comes even comes remotely close to fixed line pricing - Who would bother with copper? It's not needed in the real word (excluding valid dodgy entertainment reasons) With LTE speed isn't an issue. It's like microwaving Baked beans - who cares if they take 2.4 seconds as opposed to 1.2 sec's, It's the same.


----------



## NBNMyths

Monkey C Doo said:


> Yeah but...
> I'm a heavy user of both mobile and fixed line data
> 
> Mobile data when i'm working on the road doing important stuff
> Fixed line when I'm chilling at home and want to download the entire Game of thrones series.
> 
> Fixed line is awesome but it's all just wank - Download just one pissy single Gig of documents, data whatever and see how long it take to analyse said info.......    I'll see you next year.
> Fixed lines main claim to fame is just for watching movies and stuff.
> 
> If the government / corporations can come up with a way to block dodgy movie downloads then the whole NBN reasons for existence is moot. ( they won't though as there is heaps more money selling bandwidth than selling actual product )
> 
> I just got a new work phone, samsung something with LTE data ( ??? ) I hooked it up to download Bush tucker man and Billions. 5 min's later it was all done over the wireless and my boss is now on my **** over the $1200 excess Data bill FFS. ( forgot about the torrent 'till next day ) He can get stuffed though.
> 
> If mobile ever catches up to or comes even comes remotely close to fixed line pricing - Who would bother with copper? It's not needed in the real word (excluding valid dodgy entertainment reasons) With LTE speed isn't an issue. It's like microwaving Baked beans - who cares if they take 2.4 seconds as opposed to 1.2 sec's, It's the same.




LTE is another name for 4G.

I've always said that the two techs are complementary, not competitive. We need both.

Wireless is expensive for two reasons: 
- It's costly to build, operate and upgrade.
- Usage charges are deliberately high to restrict the usage.

In order to keep the speed reasonable they have to restrict usage, because wireless is a shared medium. The restrict it by making it expensive. All else being equal, every time you double the amount of data being carried on a cell, you halve the speed that data can be sent/received by each user. Real world 4G speeds have already halved since it was introduced, because more users have connected to the network.

You say that LTE speed is fine. And it is. But would you be happy with 1/30th (3%) of your current speed? Because that's roughly what you'd get if 50% of current fixed line data was moved across to mobile networks. And fixed line data volume is doubling every 2 years. So 24 months later, your mobile speed would be 1.5% of current.


The biggest single user of bandwidth in the US is Netflix. So legal entertainment, not illegal. Blocking torrent sites would have no effect on volume, it would just move it from illegal to legal traffic. 

Traditional broadcast and pay TV will gradually disappear, and people with watch what they want, when they want. And the more they do that, the more viable fixed line networks become. The more income they generate. You can already see it happening.


----------



## drsmith

SirRumpole said:


> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-01/manning-what-went-wrong-with-the-nbn/7210408



It would help if journalists such as the above reconciled that leaked Scale-the-Deployment-Program document with other information publically available to understand it in context.

Firstly, the leaked report doesn't cover the full FTTN rollout and secondly, the targets in that report do not match publically made rollout forecasts. They are more aggressive suggesting a contingency between the two for issues that may (and obviously do) arise.

As for how things are actually going with the brownfields fixed line rollout relative to the corporate plan from last year, the weekly rollout updates will be the figures to watch.

In that, 1,580k brownfields are forecast to be ready for service (RFS) by June 30 this year. That consists of 1080k FTTP and 500k FTTN. As at March 3, that sits at 1,263k and thus needs to progress at an average rate of ~19k per week over the remaining 17 weeks to June 30 to meet the target. The average over the past 5 weeks has been ~33k.

Note in the above that NBN now include FTTB as a subset of FTTN.


----------



## NBNMyths

Clearly, there are some very unhappy campers working down at NBN Co. The endless stream of leaked documents is pretty clear evidence that the staff at the company absolutely hate FTTN.

The latest leak shows that 5 dropouts per day of FTTN is considered acceptable!

Also, they won't even come out and check a fault if you don't have an 'approved' modem, but they also won't release a list of 'approved' modems! So how are you supposed to know when you buy one?

Lucky we're in the middle of an ideas boom. Maybe someone will have the idea to scrap the obsolete crap and get back to the real NBN.


http://blog.jxeeno.com/dropouts-acceptable-on-nbn-new-fttn-network/


----------



## Tisme

NBNMyths said:


> Also, they won't even come out and check a fault if you don't have an 'approved' modem,




That would be a Telstra modem like a rebadged Cisco or something ... that's called innovation these days.


----------



## drsmith

Some info today on FttDp, 



> The difference between the cost of using FttDP and fibre to the node (FttN) now sits at around the AU$400 mark, Morrow told the Senate Select Committee on the National Broadband Network on Tuesday.
> 
> "That has opened so many more opportunities; we see a couple of hundred thousand homes that would otherwise be getting FttN or fixed wireless that this now has passed over and broken over into the faster, cheaper driver that we have," he told the committee.
> 
> "That cost, because of that cost difference, still has yet to be cheaper than FttN ... is yet to reach that point to be quicker and cheaper.
> 
> "Therefore, we are steady-state on the technology mix, this is one that is increasing in terms of the volume."
> 
> Morrow said he could see the NBN board, Coalition government, and Labor opposition all backing FttDP as the costs continue to fall in the future.
> 
> "We want it," he said. "If those prices can continue to come down, and [we] can continue to find ways to shave off more weeks, more months of that construction build, then we will move into and use this technology over that of FttN.".




http://www.zdnet.com/article/fttdp-...han-fttn-but-premature-for-entire-nbn-morrow/


----------



## drsmith

The above also notes speed relativities between FttN and FttB,



> Morrow touted that the average speed on FttN connections sits at 83Mbps down and 36Mbps up. However, in the morning, NBN said that those numbers also included fibre-to-the-basement (FttB) users.
> 
> In the afternoon, NBN revealed the average speed on its FttN connections is 76Mbps down and 34Mbps up, and for FttB customers the average speeds are 102Mbps down and 43Mbps up.


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> It would help if journalists such as the above reconciled that leaked Scale-the-Deployment-Program document with other information publically available to understand it in context.
> 
> *Firstly, the leaked report doesn't cover the full FTTN rollout and secondly, the targets in that report do not match publically made rollout forecasts. They are more aggressive suggesting a contingency between the two for issues that may (and obviously do) arise.*
> 
> As for how things are actually going with the brownfields fixed line rollout relative to the corporate plan from last year, the weekly rollout updates will be the figures to watch.
> 
> In that, 1,580k brownfields are forecast to be ready for service (RFS) by June 30 this year. That consists of 1080k FTTP and 500k FTTN. As at March 3, that sits at 1,263k and thus needs to progress at an average rate of ~19k per week over the remaining 17 weeks to June 30 to meet the target. The average over the past 5 weeks has been ~33k.
> 
> Note in the above that NBN now include FTTB as a subset of FTTN.




In a senate select committee hearing yesterday, the above (in bold) has been confirmed.



> I know you will ask us about this alleged nbn document that talks about FTTN designs being behind so let me clarify the facts on this too. It is a fact that the volume flowing through our FTTN design process was partly held up due to sub-optimal processes in our work with the many different power companies - each with their own different and unique process. We have since resolved the major bottleneck but it was never an issue of the nbn roll out being off track and let me explain why.
> 
> *First, the document in question only refers to one program that does not represent the entire FTTN build.
> 
> Second, depending on the technology, there are up to 14 steps in a process before an area is declared ‘Ready for Service’. Each step is closely monitored and has its own targets. The metrics under each have thresholds higher than what is needed to meet the corporate plan. We do this to allow for any unexpected challenges, as is prudent in a newly established process. This contingency management is something that any large project management organisation will do and is exactly what was happening here.*




https://11217-presscdn-0-50-pagely....6/03/130315_Bill-Morrow_opening_statement.pdf

My bolds.


----------



## drsmith

More on FttDP from Lateline last night,



> PAUL BROOKS: Because the copper length is much shorter, it can be run at much higher speeds. So we should expect to see speeds somewhere in the order of 600, maybe 800, maybe approaching 1,000 megabits per second.
> 
> DAVID LIPSON: Taking into account other associated costs, the price of skinny fibre to the front gate is around $2,000 per premises, still much cheaper than fibre all the way to the home at $3,700, but just $400 more than the Government's fibre-to-the-node technology.
> 
> DAVID LIPSON: NBN chief Bill Morrow says that difference in cost does add up.
> 
> BILL MORROW: So even with the $400 or $500 difference, you have to multiply that times millions. And worse yet is: it's going to take us a lot longer.
> 
> DAVID LIPSON: According to Bill Morrow, the new technology still doesn't reach the Government's benchmark of delivering fast broadband cheaper and sooner. He raised the new technology with the NBN board a year ago, but it's still not being rolled out.
> 
> BILL MORROW: As it relates to our remit that comes from the Government: it is to do it in the fastest way possible at the least possible cost. And with that as our overarching direction, our recommendation is to do fibre-to-the-node.
> 
> DAVID LIPSON (to Bill Morrow): That remit, though, is a political remit. Is that getting in the way of the best business model for the NBN?
> 
> BILL MORROW: Well, that's a question you really have to ask the politicians.
> 
> EMMA ALBERICI: And the Minister for Communications, Mitch Fifield, responded tonight, saying the Government had given NBN a clear mandate to find the fastest and most cost-effective way to complete the network.
> 
> He said NBN is continuing to innovate and look for ways to lower costs, but there is no better approach available right now.




http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2015/s4425688.htm

The above, looking forward, creates an interesting dilemma for both the government and the opposition with respect to street FttN and FttP.

Presently, FttDP. looks like it will be implemented at specific locations where a commercial decision is made within the current government's rollout expectations. That would be the 200,000 premises indicated in the article linked from yesterday.

Looking forward, the government is not, strictly speaking, wedded to one form of technology for the land line rollout but would have to compromise on initial rollout cost and timeframe for greater FttDP adoption. This would be the most appropriate course if the economics (business case) stack up which becomes increasingly likely as the cost of FttDP comes down to relatively to the cost of street FttN. Ideally, the economics would be considered on a location by location basis rather than across the board.

For Labor, the above developments with FttDP further illustrate the fallacy of their initial FTTP only landline rollout as it did in relation to MDU's. It will be interesting to see at what point they back away further from FTTP. 

A link to the leaked NBN internal document mentioned in the above Lateline report is available from the following link,

https://delimiter.com.au/2016/03/16/delimiter-publishes-nbns-leaked-secret-fttdp-plan/

Judging by the date, someone may have had it for some time.


----------



## NBNMyths

I'm skeptical that it could cost an average of $1700 to take fibre from the front gate into the building.

That aside, FttDP is clearly a better alternative than FTTN, but is being blocked by a Govt that blindly cares only about _initial_ cost and time, with absolutely zero thought being given to capability,  _future_ upgrade costs/time, operational expenses etc.

We already saw a while back the analysis that even FTTN costs overtook full FTTP after just 10 years. Here we have a intermediate technology, which offers almost FTTP capability for (allegedly) less than 1/3 the premium of an FTTP build. But they won't do it because no weight is given to the future. Welcome to the ideas boom, where great ideas go *BOOM*.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> We already saw a while back the analysis that even FTTN costs overtook full FTTP after just 10 years.



That analysis was flawed as noted at the time.

I'm curious though.

What do you think Labor should now do given the above with FttDP and what do you think is now the role for FttP in the overall rollout ?


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> That analysis was flawed as noted at the time.
> 
> I'm curious though.
> 
> What do you think Labor should now do given the above with FttDP and what do you think is now the role for FttP in the overall rollout ?




You said it was flawed, that doesn't mean it was.

I'd like to see more info on FttDP before committing.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> You said it was flawed, that doesn't mean it was.



At the time, I offered reasons as to why that analysis was flawed which you've failed to rebut despite your repeated references to that analysis since.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> At the time, I offered reasons as to why that analysis was flawed which you've failed to rebut despite your repeated references to that analysis since.




Other than that one post above, I actually haven't referred to it _at all_ since. But hey, don't go letting the truth get in the way of a good story.

I didn't think it was really worth rebutting. You gave your opinion on his analysis. You didn't refute anything, you just questioned some of his assumptions.

It's acknowledged fact that FTTN opex is higher than FTTP opex. You might disagree with his calculations on the difference, but that's your assumptions against his assumptions. The fact remains that it's higher. Faults are higher, maintenance is higher, electricity costs are higher.

It's also widely accepted that FTTN revenue is lower than FTTP revenue, because it's often impossible to achieve the same speeds. There's less chance of a customer choosing a 100Mbps plan on FTTN, because it's often incapable of achieving that speed. Also, one could assume that faster speeds will lead to more data volume, causing ISPs to provision more CVC, thus earning NBN Co more revenue. As we move into the future, the gap will increase as more people want more speed. There will be zero FTTN customers on 250/400/1000Mbps plans, but there would be at least some FTTP customers who choose those speeds.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> I didn't think it was really worth rebutting. You gave your opinion on his analysis. You didn't refute anything, you just questioned some of his assumptions.




It hasn't been demonstrated that his assumptions in that analysis are valid. His conclusions cannot therefore be regarded as valid and that's before we get to the errors and inadequate financial analysis which I also noted.



NBNMyths said:


> Other than that one post above, I actually haven't referred to it _at all_ since. But hey, don't go letting the truth get in the way of a good story..




Feb 10 2016,



NBNMyths said:


> How much will this increase the FTTN cost, and what bearing will it have on the already tenuous claim that FTTN is cheaper than FTTP?




If you review some of your other posts in recent times and the responses that have followed, you'll note inaccuracy in those claims of yours as well.


----------



## NBNMyths

That's not referring to that particular analysis, I've been saying it (ie FTTN being cheaper than FTTP) all along.

Again, there is more to the cost than the initial build. There is the additional opex/maintenance, the cost to the economy of having a less capable, less reliable network and the cost of future upgrades. Like I said, it is tenuous to claim flatly that FTTN is cheaper than FTTP.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> That's not referring to that particular analysis, I've been saying it (ie FTTN being cheaper than FTTP) all along.



If that statement is a reference to some other analysis, I'm curious to see it.


----------



## drsmith

More on FttDP,



> nbn will trial FTTPD in 30 premises and feels it will be applicable to about 300,000 premises that are too expensive to serve with other technologies. In the future, it hopes that the combination of FTTPD and “skinny fibre” - a new method that makes it easier to bring fibre to the kerb, will offer an upgrade path for the twisted-pair based sections of the NBN..




http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/17/nbn_says_telstras_copper_in_better_shape_than_expected/

http://www.itnews.com.au/news/nbn-could-flip-300000-premises-from-fttn-to-fttdp-417081

http://www.zdnet.com/article/nbn-announces-fttdp-trials-across-sydney-melbourne/


----------



## drsmith

A couple more articles on FttDP which together include an interesting aside on the cost of connecting a handful of semi-rural properties under the USO,



> •Connection costs aren't blowing out - One of the sites the press tour covered was a semi-rural locale where just three dwellings occupy a few hectares. Morrow said stretching FTTN into that locale would mean bringing in power, which means a whole extra level of planning and expense and hassle. So the company is doing FTTP for those three premises instead, at a cost of several tens of thousands of dollars per premises because it has a mandate to deliver universal broadband. Sometimes nbn will find itself with many tricky builds for FTTP or FTTN, which will drag up quarterly average connection costs to levels that look scary but aren't indicative of long-term trends;




http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/17/nbn_shifts_the_conversation_to_copper_upgrades/



> The example given was a handful of scattered rural properties outside Brisbane, which will be served by FTTP.
> 
> Morrow said FTTN, the preferred option, would have been too costly because it would have cost $200,000 to get power to the node. Satellite was ruled out because there are properties in the beam covering that area that need the capacity and that are too remote for FTTN or FTTP.
> 
> Fixed wireless was also deemed unsuitable because of the terrain, and too costly for the few premises to be served.




http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/596198/nbn-trial-fibre-pit-technology/


----------



## NBNMyths

Yeah, I wrote long ago that FTTN for semi-rural areas would be problematic, because the large distance between houses would mean poor performance and/or high costs.

So FttDP will work nicely for them. I'd be happy with it too, but I'm skeptical it would be much cheaper than proper FTTP for a number of reasons.... There are a lot of places (like mine) where copper is aerial, and there are no pits. Can they go on poles?

Here's an idea, let's swallow 'our' pride and just go back to FTTP.


----------



## NBNMyths

HFC, or as NBN staff like to call it, _Operation Cluster#^&_

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/in...ation-cluster--something-20160315-gnjbsp.html

http://bit.ly/1pxTstV

Edit: Seems the ASF forum didn't like the F word being in the link, so I've created a bit link.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Edit: Seems the ASF forum didn't like the F word being in the link, so I've created a bit link.



With your above two posts it's possible to compare the relative greenness of the grass.

You still have the shrine to Stephen Conroy crowned with his red underpants and I have a Telstra pit out the front.


----------



## drsmith

Another media piece on the potential future role of FttDP,

http://www.news.com.au/technology/o...h/news-story/7c79af02ff00030b53100dbb3684c54d


----------



## drsmith

A video from the above mentioned NBN road trip.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KdrFMM6edE


----------



## Tisme

drsmith said:


> A video from the above mentioned NBN road trip.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KdrFMM6edE





That's kinda awkward


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> It would help if journalists such as the above reconciled that leaked Scale-the-Deployment-Program document with other information publically available to understand it in context.
> 
> Firstly, the leaked report doesn't cover the full FTTN rollout and secondly, the targets in that report do not match publically made rollout forecasts. They are more aggressive suggesting a contingency between the two for issues that may (and obviously do) arise.
> 
> As for how things are actually going with the brownfields fixed line rollout relative to the corporate plan from last year, the weekly rollout updates will be the figures to watch.
> 
> In that, 1,580k brownfields are forecast to be ready for service (RFS) by June 30 this year. That consists of 1080k FTTP and 500k FTTN. As at March 3, that sits at 1,263k and thus needs to progress at an average rate of ~19k per week over the remaining 17 weeks to June 30 to meet the target. The average over the past 5 weeks has been ~33k.
> 
> Note in the above that NBN now include FTTB as a subset of FTTN.



The last two weeks brownfields RFS rollout figures may be starting to reflect some bite from the above Scale-the-Deployment-Program document.

The week to Mar 10 saw an additional 21,200 brownfields RFS and the week to Mar 17, 12,362. 

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam...ollout-metrics/nbn-rollout-metrics-170316.pdf

The next few weeks in particular will now be interesting to watch to see if the above establishes a trend. The brownfields FTTP/FTTN rollout needs to average 18,878 premises per week RFS over the remaining 15 weeks to June 30 to reach the above target.


----------



## drsmith

The weekly rollout update to March 24 shows an uptick in brownfield premises passed and declared RFS.



> A total of 27,878 additional lots/premises were passed/covered by the network during the week, of which 26,033 were in Brownfield and 1,561 were in Greenfield areas. Fixed wireless coverage increased by 284 premises During the week an additional 15,325 premises had services activated on the network, including 14,057 on fixed line services and 1,268 using satellite and fixed wireless technologies.




http://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-i...co/corporate-plan/weekly-progress-report.html

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam...ollout-metrics/nbn-rollout-metrics-240316.pdf

This takes total brownfield to 1,322,861 compared to the 1,580,000 June 30 target.

257,139 brownfield now need to be passed over the remaining 14 weeks to June 30 at an average rate of 18,367 per week.


----------



## Logique

We're about to get the NBN rollout in my area. To those who've migrated to NBN, could I ask some dumb questions please?

-Does the chosen NBN plan include fixed line telephone rental?

-What happens with existing ADSL contracts, are they allowed as a $ credit on new NBN plans?

-Is the switch over to NBN instantaneous, i.e any internet connection down time?

-The cost of a base level 100GB NBN plan seems to be ~$75/mth..? 

Grateful for any guidance on this.


----------



## drsmith

https://delimiter.com.au/2016/04/04/new-leaked-docs-show-fttn-delays/



> The second document is the NBN company’s regular ‘Ready for Service’ update, which the NBN company sends to retail ISPs so they know where their customers can buy NBN services, and when.




The above is part of an article about another leak and FTTN rollout delays.

The Excel table in the above RFS service update from the end of Feb is interesting in that it allows more detailed information on internal targets relative to publically published rollout targets. It confirms two things. 

Firstly, the buffer between internally published and publically published targets in last year's corporate as noted in this thread and missed in media commentary.

Secondly, the magnitude of that buffer to June 30 as at the end of Feb. Despite the FTTN delays relative to internal targets, an addition of the columns reveals approximately 480k brownfield FTTP/FTTN premises are scheduled to be RFS over the 4 months from March to June. This compares to a requirement of approximately 320k over the same period to satisfy the June 30 2016 1580k FTTP/FTTN brownfields target as outlined in last year's corporate plan.

That equates to a buffer of approximately 160k.


----------



## Craton

NBN was meant to give those of us in regional/remote areas an equal playing field with our city cousins.

What an absolute joke!

At an NBN road show back in 2007/08 (?) in Broken Hill, NSW it was divulged that the NBN wouldn't be rolled out here until 2016/17 but a Back Haul fibre optic cable needed to be layed ASAP. This cable connected B/Hill to Wentworth, NSW and Mildura, VIC approx. 300km away.

On my many working trips to W/worth I saw that blue cable being laid, it was layed quite quickly IMHO and thought that maybe, just maybe we would see high speed access a lot sooner. Throw in a change of govt. and lots of lobbying all leading to, how wrong can one be?

From the NBN Co site, rollout in B/Hill will start in H2 2017 and my guess it will be mid Dec next year. Am so over the hype, the b/s, the revamp, the rethinks, and the kicker, being delegated to second class citizen status that govts from both sides put us in. Then there will be the cost of having the service.

No doubt that said cable is also linked to the twin satellite dishes the NBN has a few kms out of town and that any current "NBN service" is for govt. or/and Big End of town use only.

Yeah so obviously, equal playing fields are different for the Retail Consumer and the location of where one lives that's for sure plus, to think we'd all get up to 100Mbps speeds both ways... 

Turnbull's "Ideas Boom" must of had a brain fart on this one!


----------



## NBNMyths

Telstra's recent 'free data day' provided some opportunity to see the result of increased traffic on mobile networks, indicating how they'd cope if everyone shifted to mobile as some people suggest will occur. And it was a nice piece of evidence to support the techies claims that mobile can't cope with a decent percentage of fixed-line data volumes.


The day resulted in Telstra users downloading 2848TB of data, which is about 3 times the usual volume.

It also resulted in numerous complaints from customers about unusably slow data due to congestion. Many customers couldn't even perform basic tasks like sending an iMessage or browsing Facebook because the network was too slow in populated areas.


Meanwhile, the fixed line network carries (on average) around 23000TB of data each day, which is increasing at the rate of 50% each year. By this time next year, average daily volume will be around 34000TB. 

So the fastest 4G mobile network in Australia struggled with 1/7th of the current average daily fixed line usage.


----------



## CanOz

NBNMyths said:


> Telstra's recent 'free data day' provided some opportunity to see the result of increased traffic on mobile networks, indicating how they'd cope if everyone shifted to mobile as some people suggest will occur. And it was a nice piece of evidence to support the techies claims that mobile can't cope with a decent percentage of fixed-line data volumes.
> 
> 
> The day resulted in Telstra users downloading 2848TB of data, which is about 3 times the usual volume.
> 
> It also resulted in numerous complaints from customers about unusably slow data due to congestion. Many customers couldn't even perform basic tasks like sending an iMessage or browsing Facebook because the network was too slow in populated areas.
> 
> 
> Meanwhile, the fixed line network carries (on average) around 23000TB of data each day, which is increasing at the rate of 50% each year. By this time next year, average daily volume will be around 34000TB.
> 
> So the fastest 4G mobile network in Australia struggled with 1/7th of the current average daily fixed line usage.




Amazing, thanks for the update. I'm quite happy i didn't go with a 4G option as some had mentioned to me...


----------



## Logique

Logique said:


> We're about to get the NBN rollout in my area. To those who've migrated to NBN, could I ask some dumb questions please?
> -Does the chosen NBN plan include fixed line telephone rental?
> -What happens with existing ADSL contracts, are they allowed as a $ credit on new NBN plans?
> -Is the switch over to NBN instantaneous, i.e any internet connection down time?
> -The cost of a base level 100GB NBN plan seems to be ~$75/mth..?
> Grateful for any guidance on this.



All subsequently answered by NBN Co, thanks all.

Feedback to me from 4G users, is that it's neither the fastest, most reliable nor most inexpensive alternative to fibre/copper broadband.


----------



## So_Cynical

Logique said:


> We're about to get the NBN rollout in my area. To those who've migrated to NBN, could I ask some dumb questions please?
> 
> -Does the chosen NBN plan include fixed line telephone rental?
> 
> -What happens with existing ADSL contracts, are they allowed as a $ credit on new NBN plans?
> 
> -Is the switch over to NBN instantaneous, i.e any internet connection down time?
> 
> -The cost of a base level 100GB NBN plan seems to be ~$75/mth..?
> 
> Grateful for any guidance on this.




Fibre NBN or other NBN?

I live in a fibre area, some plans include line rental some don't, your DSL service will be turned off after your fibre install, 2 completely different systems, if you are changing provider there will be a service overlap with billing double bill for 1 month, yep base plan around $75 per month from the good providers and about $50 for the bad.

I originally stupidly decided to go with a bad provider and paid the price, 1 week after my install that i waited 3 weeks for, an installer for next door (unit block) killed my install by unplugging my cable at the street node, my bad provider (Exetel) told me it would take 17 days to fix as that was the first date available (that's why they're bad) i cancelled my contract and they took 6 weeks and 4 phone calls to refund my money.

iinet took just 2 days to install and then when i lost connection after 3 weeks with them they took 2 days to fix...that's why they're good and worth the extra money.


----------



## trainspotter

NBN WEBSITE ...





IINET WEBSITE


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> https://delimiter.com.au/2016/04/04/new-leaked-docs-show-fttn-delays/
> 
> 
> 
> The above is part of an article about another leak and FTTN rollout delays.
> 
> The Excel table in the above RFS service update from the end of Feb is interesting in that it allows more detailed information on internal targets relative to publically published rollout targets. It confirms two things.
> 
> Firstly, the buffer between internally published and publically published targets in last year's corporate as noted in this thread and missed in media commentary.
> 
> Secondly, the magnitude of that buffer to June 30 as at the end of Feb. Despite the FTTN delays relative to internal targets, an addition of the columns reveals approximately 480k brownfield FTTP/FTTN premises are scheduled to be RFS over the 4 months from March to June. This compares to a requirement of approximately 320k over the same period to satisfy the June 30 2016 1580k FTTP/FTTN brownfields target as outlined in last year's corporate plan.
> 
> That equates to a buffer of approximately 160k.



A total of 78,148 brownfields premises were passed and RFS over the 4 weeks from March 4 to March 31. 82,000 were scheduled to be passed over the month of March from the Excel spread sheet accessible from the link in the above post. 

Brownfields RFS slowed significantly in the week to Apr 7 to 5,723. No street node FTTN was scheduled to be RFS over that week. A total of 83,300 is scheduled for April, 151,200 for May and 162,800 for June for a total 397,300 over the 3 months from April to June. The increase in May and June is due to the speed up in expected completions of street node FTTN rollouts.

A total of 1,347,173 brownfields premises were RFS as at Apr 7. To reach the target of 1,580,000 brownfields RFS by June 30, an additional 232,827 need to be RFS over 12 weeks at an average rate of 19,402 per week. 

For the 3 months from April 1, the requirement is 238,500 resulting in a buffer of 158,800.


----------



## drsmith

There's been some change at the top of NBN Co.



> iiNet founder and former chief executive Michael Malone has been appointed to the board of NBN Co.
> 
> Mr Malone will replace Adelaide internet entrepreneur Simon Hackett, who has resigned to focus fully on his role as executive chairman of Redflow Limited, a company in which he is also the biggest shareholder.




https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/wa/a/31417257/malone-joins-board-of-nbn-co/


----------



## drsmith

NBN chief executive Bill Morrow comments on FTTdp,

http://www.afr.com/technology/web/n...n-fttdp-for-broadband-upgrade-20160508-gopfqt


----------



## drsmith

In the 5 weeks from the beginning of April to May 5, the brownfields rollout has passed RFS 83,300 against a schedule of 90,600 for that 5-week period. More importantly, the main FTTN rollout is ramping up as expected in the earlier leaked March RFS rollout plan. 

The Skymuster satellite service is also now active taking that to over 400,000 available and the total rollout to 2,467,061, 164,939 short of the 2,632,000m June 30 target. Brownfields is now at 1,427,748, 152,252 short of the June 30 target.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam...ollout-metrics/nbn-rollout-metrics-050516.pdf

Both targets should be reached easily.

On costs, the March 31 quarterly offers the following comparison on average per premise for the various technologies (2016 Corporate Plan)-(March Q update).

FTTP greenfields: $2100-$2713.
FTTP brownfields: $4400-$4403. 
FTTN: $2300-$2275.
Fixed wireless: $4900-$3479.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco2/documents/nbn third quarter financial results 2016.pdf

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco2/documents/nbn-corporate-plan-2016.pdf


----------



## drsmith

Federal Police raids Labor party offices in Melbourne over NBNCo leaks including that of Stephen Conroy according to the ABC.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-19/afp-raids-labor-party-offices-in-melbourne/7430346


----------



## noco

drsmith said:


> Federal Police raids Labor party offices in Melbourne over NBNCo leaks including that of Stephen Conroy according to the ABC.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-19/afp-raids-labor-party-offices-in-melbourne/7430346




No doubt the Labor Party will go all out to point the finger at who authorized the raids particularly during election time.


----------



## SirRumpole

noco said:


> No doubt the Labor Party will go all out to point the finger at who authorized the raids particularly during election time.




Of course they will.

Looking for information that the public have a right to know.

This looks bad for the LNP. 

What are they covering up ?


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> Federal Police raids Labor party offices in Melbourne over NBNCo leaks including that of Stephen Conroy according to the ABC.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-19/afp-raids-labor-party-offices-in-melbourne/7430346




The series of leaks on the MTM clusterf*ck were rather embarrassing for the Govt. But they were 5 months ago. A cynic might question the timing of the raids given the pending election.....


----------



## Tisme

How come the NBN has to answer to the Comms Minister, but when it reports breach of "commercial in confidence" it an independent entity?

Royal Commission required?


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> The series of leaks on the MTM clusterf*ck were rather embarrassing for the Govt. But they were 5 months ago. A cynic might question the timing of the raids given the pending election.....



I'm surprised you haven't realised there's a contingency between the rollout targets in the leaked documents and those in last year's corporate plan.


----------



## noco

SirRumpole said:


> Of course they will.
> 
> Looking for information that the public have a right to know.
> 
> This looks bad for the LNP.
> 
> What are they covering up ?




It also may look worse for the Labor Party

And the Labor Party would not have tried to do the same things given half an opportunity...Too right they would have.


----------



## overhang

Very suspicious indeed, the media knew about the raids before Labor did.  From leaks several months ago to a police raid now during election time screams of politics. 

But what ever happened to Turnbulls promises for a transparent NBN?



> Malcolm Turnbull has repeatedly promised transparency on the NBN. He has said:
> 
> "Maximum transparency is going to be given to this project."
> 
> Malcolm Turnbull MP, House of Representatives Hansard (11 February 2014)
> 
> "But our commitment is, our focus is, to have a much greater level of transparency and openness."
> 
> Malcolm Turnbull MP, Press Conference (24 September 2013)
> 
> "The bottom line is that as far as the NBN project is concerned, the government's commitment is to be completely transparent."
> 
> Malcolm Turnbull MP, House of Representatives Hansard (11 February 2014)
> 
> "The Government requires a high degree of transparency from NBN Co in its communication with the public and Parliament."
> 
> Malcolm Turnbull MP & Senator Mathias Cormann, Statement of Expectations to NBN Co (8 April 2014)




Given the leaks have shown the NBN is under a state of disarray under this government no wonder he wants it kept away from public eyes, we have seen nothing but delays and cost blowouts for an inadequate NBN.  Do it once and do it right.


----------



## Tisme

I my street there was a rush to pull in draw wires just before the sniff of double dissolution. When a neighbour asked if that meant we were getting NBN, the response was that it could be a long way away, but they were told to get as many draw wires in as possible around the traps.

I wonder what benchmark that was included in?


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> There's been some change at the top of NBN Co.
> https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/wa/a/31417257/malone-joins-board-of-nbn-co/



------------
I’m not pretending it’s wonderful.



> Mr Hackett, who joined the NBN Co board in 2013, attributed his departure to the growing needs of the Redflow business rather any frustration on his part on the state of the project.
> 
> Speaking to The Australian last month, Mr Hackett said that the NBN may not be perfect but it was making significant progress.
> 
> “I’m in the tent being part of the solution not complaining how the solution doesn’t seem to be there,” he said.
> 
> “I’m not pretending it’s wonderful because it’s a creature of political policy and has an annoying tendency to change over time but I’m telling you as strongly as i can that there’s a team of bloody dedicated people there.”




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...t/news-story/963442e0197f29defa34e546ea95256c


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> Given the leaks have shown the NBN is under a state of disarray under this government no wonder he wants it kept away from public eyes, we have seen nothing but delays and cost blowouts for an inadequate NBN.  Do it once and do it right.



Look at the weekly rollout progress report and you will note that the rollout is progressing well towards its June 30 targets from the corporate plan released last year. The rollout target of 2,632,000 premises RFS at June 30 2016 will be passed during June at the present rate.

As I've noted a number of times on recent pages of this thread, the delays outlined in the leaked documents refer to internal targets. These are more aggressive than the corporate plan targets allowing a level of contingency between the two. The organisation has, in short, allowed for a level of provision for unexpected problems and in terms of the present rollout progress, is still well within that provision.



So_Cynical said:


> I’m not pretending it’s wonderful.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...t/news-story/963442e0197f29defa34e546ea95256c



It's making significant progress which it wasn't under Labor.


----------



## So_Cynical

drsmith said:


> It's making significant progress which it wasn't under Labor.




Oh Bollocks - it was a real NBN under Labor, now its a half ass mish mash.


----------



## drsmith

So_Cynical said:


> Oh Bollocks - it was a real NBN under Labor, now its a half ass mish mash.



I never mind referring back to the ultimate reference when it comes to the state of the rollout under Labor.

https://simonhackett.com/2014/09/06/rebooting-the-nbn/

On matters AFP raids re-NBN, there's a deafening squeal presently coming from Labor. What are they afraid of ?


----------



## banco

drsmith said:


> I never mind referring back to the ultimate reference when it comes to the state of the rollout under Labor.
> 
> https://simonhackett.com/2014/09/06/rebooting-the-nbn/
> 
> On matters AFP raids re-NBN, there's a deafening squeal presently coming from Labor. What are they afraid of ?




Given Turnbull has spent the last 2 days answering questions on the raids I'd say Labor is quite happy with the outcome. LOL at the AFP trying to claim they aren't a highly politicized agency.


----------



## orr

Some Thoughts of Aboard-band Network

O, TO be in Latvia	 
Now that Internet 's there,	 
And whoever wakes in Latvia	 
Sees, some speeds, beyond compare,	 
That the lowest speeds of copper sheaf	         
In antipodes be their be-leaf,	 
While'st the future sings on the connected bough	 
In Latvia—now!

Apologies to R Browning....

The defence of ineptitude by some here is nothing less than incredulous. The disabling for poliical purpose of the NBN by Abbott is little less than treason.


----------



## Tisme

I had a very frustrating day o Friday when Telstra took out the ADSL and the NBN in the Gold Coast and regions  It's reminiscent of the good old days and Telstra performance, I wonder how hard it would be just to text all its customer to let word spread that they are the source of the problem


----------



## NBNMyths

Copper to the home:


----------



## SirRumpole

NBNMyths said:


> Copper to the home:
> View attachment 66780




Like


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> Look at the weekly rollout progress report and you will note that the rollout is progressing well towards its June 30 targets from the corporate plan released last year. The rollout target of 2,632,000 premises RFS at June 30 2016 will be passed during June at the present rate.
> 
> As I've noted a number of times on recent pages of this thread, the delays outlined in the leaked documents refer to internal targets. These are more aggressive than the corporate plan targets allowing a level of contingency between the two. The organisation has, in short, allowed for a level of provision for unexpected problems and in terms of the present rollout progress, is still well within that provision.




When reading the internal documents one must take into account the highly ambitious targets NBN co has set in their 3 year plan.  NBN co requires a doubling of premises passed each year to hit it's 2018 target of 9.1 million premises passed.  The internal documents seem to indicate that with the attempt to ramp up deployment to gauge if these targets are achievable are not going to plan, they have missed their internal targets by 2/3rds.  Reading between the lines I would say there is a lot of concern within NBN to speed up deployment to achieve the 2018 target.

The leaks also indicated that FTTN is well behind schedule, NBNco have attempted to hide the number of FTTN connections to date and in their annual results bundled FTTB and FTTN numbers together but as the leaks indicated only 1/3rd of those connections were FTTN and most coming from FTTB.  Combine these with the leaks showing the NBN company had severely underestimated the cost of remediating Telstra’s copper network by a factor of ten and things aren't looking too good for the government NBN.  

Again build it once build it right.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> When reading the internal documents one must take into account the highly ambitious targets NBN co has set in their 3 year plan.  NBN co requires a doubling of premises passed each year to hit it's 2018 target of 9.1 million premises passed.  The internal documents seem to indicate that with the attempt to ramp up deployment to gauge if these targets are achievable are not going to plan, they have missed their internal targets by 2/3rds.  Reading between the lines I would say there is a lot of concern within NBN to speed up deployment to achieve the 2018 target.
> 
> The leaks also indicated that FTTN is well behind schedule, NBNco have attempted to hide the number of FTTN connections to date and in their annual results bundled FTTB and FTTN numbers together but as the leaks indicated only 1/3rd of those connections were FTTN and most coming from FTTB.  Combine these with the leaks showing the NBN company had severely underestimated the cost of remediating Telstra’s copper network by a factor of ten and things aren't looking too good for the government NBN.



Those highly ambitious targets as you put it relate to the entire build and not just FTTN which has been the subject of leaks pointing to delays on internal targets.

What is important to consider here is a broader range of information than just the delays on internal targets. The Scale of the deployment document from Feb for example highlights delays both in longer term pre-construction and short term completion targets. The short term completion targets aren't a problem because of the contingency between internal and corporate plan targets which so much of the commentary has missed. The longer term pre-construction delays on some internal targets is more of an open question in terms of meeting corporate plan targets longer term but that to will depend on the level of contingency and management response.

Your point above regarding the build proportion between FTTN and FTTB also illustrates the problem with considering only limited information. In early April, I posted a reference to the following leaked document titled "Monthly Ready For Service Rollout Plan - Build commenced to the end of February 2016 - Brownfields." A direct link is below,

https://www.dropbox.com/s/dmdnmtvyvnjjqgr/March.xlsx?dl=0

Post reference including some commentary at the time,

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...21778&page=195&p=902140&viewfull=1#post902140

This is what I've been comparing the weekly rollout updates to and since posting in this thread. In it, you will notice there is a breakdown of both FTTN and FTTB and that FTTB is not that large in proportion.


----------



## drsmith

banco said:


> Given Turnbull has spent the last 2 days answering questions on the raids I'd say Labor is quite happy with the outcome. LOL at the AFP trying to claim they aren't a highly politicized agency.



Labor's aim with all its hyperventilation is to shake the tree and see what falls out in relation to the government exerting pressure on either NBNCo to go to the AFP or the AFP itself over the leaks. 

So far at least, that doesn't seem to have yielded very much.


----------



## explod

Regardless of what has been said by all sides and the press,  the fact that the AFP executed a warrant on the office of a sitting Parliamentarian DURING AN ELECTION CAMPAIGN smells and the stench hangs onto the incubents. 

Getting around the net that our NBN is one of the most expensive per capita on the planet and the  thing doesn't even go properly apparently. 

I no longer have a landline and due to my satsfaction with my Ipad working real well on more gigs a month for less than monthly land line rental will never likely hook up.   A growing part of the population going the same way. 

When are our pollies going to move on to useful matter with substance.   They wave thier arms about but do not say how and when.


----------



## banco

explod said:


> Regardless of what has been said by all sides and the press,  the fact that the AFP executed a warrant on the office of a sitting Parliamentarian DURING AN ELECTION CAMPAIGN smells and the stench hangs onto the incubents.
> .




My problem with the AFP is they go hard against leaks against those in power but go slow/soft on leaks apparently by the government side (I doubt we'll see them kicking in any doors concerning the leak of the defence white paper or the submarine tender leaks this election campaign). They also go soft on investigations that might embarrass those in power (see the reserve bank's subsidiary bribing foreign officials or the Iraq wheat fiasco).


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

I predicted all this kerfuffle when I first started this thread. 

Having Rudd and Conroy come up with a brainfart which has gobbled up and continues to gobble up billions of our taxpayer dollars was doomed to failure.

Two bigger muppets in business I could never pick. 

It's all downhill from here. 

gg


----------



## SirRumpole

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I predicted all this kerfuffle when I first started this thread.
> 
> Having Rudd and Conroy come up with a brainfart which has gobbled up and continues to gobble up billions of our taxpayer dollars was doomed to failure.
> 
> Two bigger muppets in business I could never pick.
> 
> It's all downhill from here.
> 
> gg




So why didn't the Libs just can it completely when they got in ?

If it was doomed from the start then the Abbott/Turnbull government carries responsibility too does it not ?


----------



## NBNMyths

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I predicted all this kerfuffle when I first started this thread.
> 
> Having Rudd and Conroy come up with a brainfart which has gobbled up and continues to gobble up billions of our taxpayer dollars was doomed to failure.
> 
> Two bigger muppets in business I could never pick.
> 
> It's all downhill from here.
> 
> gg




The problem with your analysis is that the 'brainfart' was the best technical solution. It's the hodge-podge that the Coalition have changed to which is causing all the current problems.


----------



## Tisme

Poor old Chris Pyne and his commentary about the NBN last night on QANDA = NFI = loud mouthed idiot. 

Apparently the time length of five simultaneous movies is the benchmark of bandwidth.... and on 25 megs no less. We must be talking five of those ultra lo res B&W westerns from John Howard's relaxed 1950's, even then I reckon you wouldn't be able to get onto Aussie Stock forums LOL 

Somewhere in a universe far far away we will be wanting bluray quality and god help us 4k resolution to enjoy current technology TVs : e.g. 60 frames per second.


----------



## So_Cynical

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I predicted all this kerfuffle when I first started this thread.
> 
> Having Rudd and Conroy come up with a brainfart which has gobbled up and continues to gobble up billions of our taxpayer dollars was doomed to failure.
> 
> Two bigger muppets in business I could never pick.
> 
> It's all downhill from here.
> 
> gg




More like brilliant simplicity, connect everyone to the best available technology whatever the cost, billions for sure however the Noalition has to take responsibility for turning it into a dogs breakfast and the partial failure it has become.

I live in a Fibre NBN area and its wonderful.


----------



## pixel

So_Cynical said:


> More like brilliant simplicity, connect everyone to the best available technology whatever the cost, billions for sure however the Noalition has to take responsibility for turning it into a dogs breakfast and the partial failure it has become.
> 
> *I live in a Fibre NBN area and its wonderful. *




Lucky you.
I live in a "Corroded Copper to the Home" area, could hit the next Exchange building with a pea shooter across the River, but won't even get a steam phone connection after the first drop of rain. When I was still on iiNet's ADSL, I managed to set a record of 111 transmission breaks in 24 hours. In the end, they gave up, refunded me the last year's ADSL subscription fees (but NOT the Telstra Line rental ) and terminated the contract.

Luckily, our suburb is covered by VividWireless on 4G. Most of the time, I get speeds above 2Mbps, in the mornings even more than 10Mbps. As they're already working on 5G at rates in the order of of 100Gbps, I wonder when the FTTP-FTTH debate will be totally obsolete. In areas like ours, the cr@p CTTH infrastructure that Telstra sold for $Billions and refuses to maintain in working order, will render any NBN roll-out a waste of money.


----------



## luutzu

pixel said:


> Lucky you.
> I live in a "Corroded Copper to the Home" area, could hit the next Exchange building with a pea shooter across the River, but won't even get a steam phone connection after the first drop of rain. When I was still on iiNet's ADSL, I managed to set a record of 111 transmission breaks in 24 hours. In the end, they gave up, refunded me the last year's ADSL subscription fees (but NOT the Telstra Line rental ) and terminated the contract.
> 
> Luckily, our suburb is covered by VividWireless on 4G. Most of the time, I get speeds above 2Mbps, in the mornings even more than 10Mbps. As they're already working on 5G at rates in the order of of 100Gbps, I wonder when the FTTP-FTTH debate will be totally obsolete. In areas like ours, the cr@p CTTH infrastructure that Telstra sold for $Billions and refuses to maintain in working order, will render any NBN roll-out a waste of money.




I guess the bright side to delay and incompetence in tech is that if we're bad (good?) enough at it, there'll no longer be a need for it by the time we got round to it.


----------



## luutzu

Tisme said:


> Poor old Chris Pyne and his commentary about the NBN last night on QANDA = NFI = loud mouthed idiot.
> 
> Apparently the time length of five simultaneous movies is the benchmark of bandwidth.... and on 25 megs no less. We must be talking five of those ultra lo res B&W westerns from John Howard's relaxed 1950's, even then I reckon you wouldn't be able to get onto Aussie Stock forums LOL
> 
> Somewhere in a universe far far away we will be wanting bluray quality and god help us 4k resolution to enjoy current technology TVs : e.g. 60 frames per second.




Too much HD, ultra?, ruin movies anyway 

Takes away the classic look and feel of a proper cinema masterpieces, replaced it with cheap looking pixelated CGI with action all slowed down like the superheroes are only actors trying to do Kung Fu kicks and jump.

Bring back Kurosawa any day.


----------



## So_Cynical

pixel said:


> Lucky you.
> I live in a "Corroded Copper to the Home" area, could hit the next Exchange building with a pea shooter across the River, but won't even get a steam phone connection after the first drop of rain..




And thats it...some are lucky and some are not, and that's just not appropriate for a NATIONAL broadband network, luck should not play a part.



pixel said:


> FTTP-FTTH debate will be totally obsolete.




NO - NEVER, speed of light with almost unlimited capacity will never be obsolete.


----------



## Tisme

pixel said:


> Lucky you.
> I live in a "Corroded Copper to the Home" area, could hit the next Exchange building with a pea shooter across the River, but won't even get a steam phone connection after the first drop of rain. When I was still on iiNet's ADSL, I managed to set a record of 111 transmission breaks in 24 hours. In the end, they gave up, refunded me the last year's ADSL subscription fees (but NOT the Telstra Line rental ) and terminated the contract.
> 
> Luckily, our suburb is covered by VividWireless on 4G. Most of the time, I get speeds above 2Mbps, in the mornings even more than 10Mbps. As they're already working on 5G at rates in the order of of 100Gbps, I wonder when the FTTP-FTTH debate will be totally obsolete. In areas like ours, the cr@p CTTH infrastructure that Telstra sold for $Billions and refuses to maintain in working order, will render any NBN roll-out a waste of money.




100 gigs doesn't mean you will enjoy that kind of speed. The upcoming 4GX system is supposed to provide category 16 devices with 1000 gigs, but downloads actually fall between 2 and ~80ish megs. 

I made a big mistake getting a "turbo" wireless connection for my holiday home, that crackled, piss farted and choked at a blindingly rapid <1 meg when I was supposed to get 8 megs++ ; conned. Eventually convinced them that I was more important than anyone else and got a direct wire to dslam, bypassing any rims in the way.


----------



## NBNMyths

Some none-too-pleased commentary on Turnbull's NBN from Innovation Australia:

http://www.innovationaus.com/2016/05


----------



## CanOz

pixel said:


> Lucky you.
> I live in a "Corroded Copper to the Home" area, could hit the next Exchange building with a pea shooter across the River, but won't even get a steam phone connection after the first drop of rain. When I was still on iiNet's ADSL, I managed to set a record of 111 transmission breaks in 24 hours. In the end, they gave up, refunded me the last year's ADSL subscription fees (but NOT the Telstra Line rental ) and terminated the contract.
> 
> Luckily, our suburb is covered by VividWireless on 4G. Most of the time, I get speeds above 2Mbps, in the mornings even more than 10Mbps. As they're already working on 5G at rates in the order of of 100Gbps, I wonder when the FTTP-FTTH debate will be totally obsolete. In areas like ours, the cr@p CTTH infrastructure that Telstra sold for $Billions and refuses to maintain in working order, will render any NBN roll-out a waste of money.




I've got a mate in Noosa getting cracking speeds on Wireless. Can't recall the name of the outfit though. He's very happy.


----------



## pixel

I don't understand the excitement over "leaks".
NBN Co is being micro-managed by the Turnbull Government. Surely, there is no "National Security" issue that could serve as an excuse to keep differing opinions under wraps.
A former company director, Simon Hackett, has been outspokenly critical of the flawed plans, to the point that he quit his well-paid directorship rather than remaining associated with the waste and BS.

As far as the tenfold blow-out of maintenance costs for the last mile of copper is concerned: It wouldn't take an inside whistleblower to work that out. Any electrical contractor, who has in recent years attended a repair request, will know the truth. 
When I went through the experience mentioned above, I had the pleasure of meeting eight different technicians, contracted to either Telstra or Service Stream. Every one of them explained how the problem arose from corrosion inside the roadside columns. And it goes like this:
A customer reports a problem with his line. Technician verified the line is flakey. Technician looks for another wire that - at the time - appears to have a cleaner connection through to the Exchange. Technician swaps wires. Customer is happy - for a while. ... until the customer, who used to be connected through the "cleaner" line, reports a line problem and requests it be fixed. 
Given the frequency of repair requests and the number of different contractors, it can't surprise anyone that documentation of lines and routes is unreliable to the point that nobody even looks at it anymore.


----------



## drsmith

pixel said:


> A former company director, Simon Hackett, has been outspokenly critical of the flawed plans, to the point that he quit his well-paid directorship rather than remaining associated with the waste and BS.



On what basis to you make that statement ?

A few days ago, the following was posted in this thread,



> Mr Hackett, who joined the NBN Co board in 2013, attributed his departure to the growing needs of the Redflow business rather any frustration on his part on the state of the project.




https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...21778&page=196&p=907456&viewfull=1#post907456


----------



## Tisme

There was a lot of pressure brought to bear by the industry to have Hackett go through the revolving door to the NBN board room. He left iinet/internode to fill the seat and now he is off, his iiNet compatriot is coming in.

Simon's tweets show him to be a forthright fella and he's let his opinions be known on a few occasions. He cautioned the bleeding obvious prediction of the then future NBN dominance by Telstra in 2011 and the demise of the little providers in the fallout.  

His statement on leaving NBN for his battery business is the usual twaffle that men gaining freedom say to lock the gate safely behind them.


----------



## orr

drsmith said:


> On what basis to you make that statement ?
> 
> A few days ago, the following was posted in this thread,
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...21778&page=196&p=907456&viewfull=1#post907456





How's your arithmetic? if you can deal with 1 +1 ... try what's inferred here; 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...s/news-story/025b23a887d2c03d2c405fdec2f3349f

still too complex?? from Merde-doch no less ..... took all of 3 seconds of looking, but that of corse means you want to look.


----------



## drsmith

orr said:


> still too complex?? from Merde-doch no less ..... took all of 3 seconds of looking, but that of corse means you want to look.






> Despite the rather exuberant comments, Hackett is acutely aware that as much as he may wish it, NBN Co isn’t going to ditching FTTN. It's the least preferred option of deploying broadband but unfortunately *it's also the most cost effective one.*




My bolds.


----------



## SirRumpole

drsmith said:


> My bolds.




Cost effective for now maybe, but what about when they have to replace the copper wire ?


----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> His statement on leaving NBN for his battery business is the usual twaffle that men gaining freedom say to lock the gate safely behind them.



Alternatively, he might be interested in his battery business.


----------



## drsmith

SirRumpole said:


> Cost effective for now maybe, but what about when they have to replace the copper wire ?



Take that argument up with orr.

He posted the link to the article.


----------



## orr

drsmith said:


> My bolds.




Are they Hacketts words??? or the Jorno's ???(your bolds)  and if they're the jorno's? how are they quantified....
And when your ready you can address the crux of your original point of crtique of Hackett i.e. flawed plans of the LNP's(srivelded)_ nbn _


----------



## pixel

drsmith said:


> On what basis to you make that statement ?




Google "simon hackett nbn". 


> NBN Co director Simon Hackett has slammed the federal government's use of fibre-to-the-node technology as part of the national broadband network, saying he wishes it would disappear.
> 
> The Coalition's version of the NBN is heavily reliant on the technology, which provides slower broadband speeds at lower costs compared with Labor's preferred method of connecting homes and businesses directly to fibre optic cabling.
> 
> "Fibre to the node is the least-exciting part of the current policy – no argument," he said. "If I could wave a wand, it's the bit I'd be erasing."
> 
> Speaking at the Rewind/Fast Forward event in Sydney on Wednesday, Internode founder Mr Hackett said he was a strong supporter of connecting premises directly to fibre and was on the board of NBN Co to make it "as least worse as possible".
> 
> Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/nbns...technology-20150325-1m77el.html#ixzz49fKwvfSV


----------



## drsmith

orr said:


> Are they Hacketts words??? or the Jorno's ???(your bolds)  and if they're the jorno's? how are they quantified....
> And when your ready you can address the crux of your original point of crtique of Hackett i.e. flawed plans of the LNP's(srivelded)_ nbn _



You're the one who tried to claim that point carried extra weight because it was in the Murdoch press. 

As can be seen from the date, it's old news. 

It was also covered in this thread in September last year and at that time, I commented as follows,

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...21778&page=190&p=883596&viewfull=1#post883596

A useful starting point if you wish to critique homework is to start with your own.



pixel said:


> Google "simon hackett nbn".




See above.


----------



## drsmith

Bloody hell!

I searching for the above from last year, I've let the f'n fire go out.

Not to worry, auxiliary kindling at hand.


----------



## Tisme

drsmith said:


> Alternatively, he might be interested in his battery business.




A life boat he bought in readiness. Twitter is your friend when one wants to get the vibe when the lips are moving. He's a very astute man who works by the number 1 rule of business = never justify.


----------



## drsmith

NBN Co chairman Ziggy Switkowsk and leaks,



> A year ago, the board of NBN set the commercial objectives for which the CEO and his executive team would be held accountable in the 2015-16 operating year.
> 
> We are now just a few weeks away from year end and so can point with some confidence to how the scorecard will look.
> 
> The targets for network rollout, in terms of homes ready for service, will be met or exceeded.
> 
> The number of paying customers will be at or better than plan.
> 
> Revenues will exceed plan. The assessments of our retail service providers and end users are positive and the various technology platforms are operating to specification.
> 
> The company will meet its targets for the ninth quarter in a row.
> 
> We will end the financial year with good momentum, connecting homes at record pace, on the way to completing the rollout in 2020 at a peak cash cost of about $49 billion.
> 
> None of this is new news. The enterprise updates its rollout footprint every week and informs the market of its commercial progress quarterly as required by its shareholder, the government.
> 
> It is also subject to vigorous public interrogation by parliamentary committees on a regular basis – its executives appearing before Senate committees for more than 27 hours in 2015 alone.
> 
> NBN is a company subject to the Corporations Act, the PGPA Act, and the NBN Co Act and is responsible for the creation and security of critical national infrastructure. Management is accountable to a board that takes its responsibilities very seriously. So misinformation about NBN and accusations of underperformance are inexcusable and galling.
> 
> When dozens of confidential company documents are stolen, this is theft. When they are the basis of media headlines and partisan attacks, they wrongly tarnish our reputation, demoralise our workforce, distract the executive, and raise doubts where there is little basis for concern. The process is a form of political rumourtrage – the circulation of misinformation to diminish an enterprise for political gain.
> 
> Were we a listed company, such activity would be illegal and the penalties harsh.
> 
> But, some say, we are a government business enterprise accountable to all Australians and this is true. That's why publications of our progress and the corporate plan reveal more information than most listed companies including forward estimates. Extensive reports are provided to shareholder departments monthly with regular detailed feedback.
> 
> While NBN has much commercially sensitive and national-interest material in its possession that must be kept confidential, the organisation accepts a very high level of commentary, and diverse and often expert opinion about our strategy and operations. But information taken out of context for political gain is not in the interest of the public and is corrosive to our culture.
> 
> Furthermore, the GBE implements government policy and all employees should be working to that end. No employee may decide that they would point and run the enterprise differently and then set about undermining the organisation by leaking various documents in part or whole.
> 
> One rationalisation has appeared that this theft is the action of whistleblowers. No, it is not. NBN has a well-established process for responding to information  from whistleblowers with a notification process managed by an independent third party. None of the matters in the stolen documents have been raised through this channel. And whistleblowing usually emerges from concerns about the legality or morality of actions within a company, or unconscionable behaviour inconsistent with company values.
> 
> If an employee has strong personal conviction unsupportive of a company's strategy, they can argue their case with management or resign. They cannot give voice to their preferred ideology by passing on stolen documents.
> 
> Contrary to media commentary, the documents did nothing to highlight poor management of the business. There are no "cost blowouts" or "rollout delays" to the publicly released plans – all one has to do is compare the data that is readily available. The documents show progress updates, options to ensure targets are met and ways to solve problems which are all normal parts of doing good business.  It's simply wrong to diminish NBN's performance, because such accusations are not supported in fact.
> 
> While the company was duty bound under the law to refer the issue to the authorities, more importantly it was the right thing to do. The fact was that confidential and commercially sensitive information was unlawfully leaving the company, and that this was ongoing over many months.
> 
> The national broadband network has always been charged with passion and debate, but two things remain constant – we all know we need better broadband and we all believe access to connectivity should be extended to every Australian.
> 
> We make no apologies for acting in the best interests of the company, its shareholders, and ultimately the Australian taxpayers.




http://www.theage.com.au/comment/nb...ocument-theft-to-the-afp-20160527-gp5g2g.html


----------



## Tisme

drsmith said:


> NBN Co chairman Ziggy Switkowsk and leaks,
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/comment/nb...ocument-theft-to-the-afp-20160527-gp5g2g.html




I guess if the highly flexible bar is set low enough, KPIs and Milestones are easily achieved. Be interesting to find out what they are afraid of, with Conroy on their ginger.

The management of a greenfield site in my area fronted up to a meeting the other day and when asked about NBN, they assured us it was a lock in, but unable to say what year that might be....no one was surprised.


----------



## Tisme

Opration Cluster F#@k

not sure if these papers are owned and operated by the Labor Party?

SMH

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/in...ation-cluster--something-20160315-gnjbsp.html

Age

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...ut-falters-20160228-gn5l0s.html#ixzz42wKvXMzN

on the 2nd of December 2010 Conroy introduced a bill to force the structural separation of Telstra, which was seen as crucial to the construction of the NBN


----------



## drsmith

The following in a election flyer from the local Labor candidate offers a hint on Labor's upcoming NBN rollout policy,



> That's why I support a plan for Jobs in WA, protecting your penalty rates and *a fibre-to-the-premise nbn to foster innovation*.


----------



## drsmith

The above is from Bill Leadbetter, the Labor candidate for the federal seat of Hasluck.

That statement is pretty clear and I say it's blown Labor's cover on their upcoming NBN rollout policy which I would now anticipate being released very soon.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> The above is from Bill Leadbetter, the Labor candidate for the federal seat of Hasluck.
> 
> That statement is pretty clear and I say it's blown Labor's cover on their upcoming NBN rollout policy which I would now anticipate being released very soon.




I wouldn't count on that being very strong evidence. I don't think the backbenchers would be too filled in on unreleased policy details. They might back FTTP, but I'd suggest it would be more along the lines of _"FTTP or FTTdp, if the trials prove successful"._


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> I wouldn't count on that being very strong evidence. I don't think the backbenchers would be too filled in on unreleased policy details. They might back FTTP, but I'd suggest it would be more along the lines of _"FTTP or FTTdp, if the trials prove successful"._



He's not a backbencher but rather a candidate for a currently held Liberal seat that will be hotly contested.

There's a picture of Bill Shorten and him standing together at the top of the flyer.


----------



## noco

Whoopie......Been advised today.....my optic fibre hook up to inside the premises will take place June 20.


----------



## pixel

noco said:


> Whoopie......Been advised today.....my optic fibre hook up to inside the premises will take place June 20.




...just in time to bribe you for a vote for the Lib/Nat Reactionaries 
What a waste! You'd give them your vote anyway, wouldn't you.


----------



## noco

pixel said:


> ...just in time to bribe you for a vote for the Lib/Nat Reactionaries
> What a waste! You'd give them your vote anyway, wouldn't you.




So you should be confused the way it was designed by a couple idiots.

Mate...the bloody line went past the door 6 months ago......the box on the outside of the wall was installed 3 months ago.......If Labor had  still been in power I would probably have been waiting another 3 years because they were so far behind schedule ........NBN was a brain fart between Conroy and Rudd in mid air designed on paper serviette with no business plan......It took an adult  business man with economic experience to sort out the mess and legacy Labor left behind.

Conroy and Rudd had no idea what it would cost or how long it would take....


----------



## SirRumpole

noco said:


> So you should be confused the way it was designed by a couple idiots.
> 
> Mate...the bloody line went past the door 6 months ago......the box on the outside of the wall was installed 3 months ago.......If Labor had  still been in power I would probably have been waiting another 3 years because they were so far behind schedule ........NBN was a brain fart between Conroy and Rudd in mid air designed on paper serviette with no business plan......It took an adult  business man with economic experience to sort out the mess and legacy Labor left behind.
> 
> Conroy and Rudd had no idea what it would cost or how long it would take....




That adult businessman who said Labor's NBN would cost $96 billion ?

The Coalitions NBN is a mess, but don't take my word for it, read this.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...t/news-story/74dadb937448c9efefecde5e7d6f56b2



> A key reason why FTTP connection costs should decrease is the use of new technologies including the move from multi-port to mini-port devices that are used to connect fibre running past premises to the drop lines that go into premises. Another step that should be taken is the adoption of aerial fibre distribution, micro trenching and sheathed fibre and other approaches that have been shown to reduce the cost of distribution and drop fibre rollout in locations where existing infrastructure is old and degraded. The option of self-installation of drop lines should be explored too.
> 
> In his recent speech, Tucker went on to argue that Australia should have continued the global trend to rollout FTTP *rather than FTTN which has no more than a five year life-time so many Australians will be provided with an obsolete technology by 2020.*


----------



## drsmith

Something current;



> Communications Minister Mitch Fifield had reason to celebrate on Tuesday when a relatively low-key release from the competition regulator included positive independent endorsement of the government's NBN strategy.




http://www.afr.com/brand/chanticlee...s-up-from-independent-experts-20160531-gp8hh7


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> Something current;
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.afr.com/brand/chanticlee...s-up-from-independent-experts-20160531-gp8hh7




The review was more focused on regulatory framework of the SAU and not about the type of infrastructure used.



> When preparing the analysis, the terms of reference given to Analysys Mason meant that it didn’t assess whether the switch from an FTTP-only model to the MTM model was a wise decision.


----------



## NBNMyths

Great that the 'adults' are doing such a great job rolling out their obsolete NBN. Putting powered nodes on riverbanks, blocking footpaths and even putting them right outside telephone exchanges. I wonder if I'll be lucky enough to have two of them on my footpath, like a few other residents are now enjoying?





https://delimiter.com.au/2016/06/09/photos-nbn-co-builds-node-flooded-riverbank/



https://delimiter.com.au/2016/06/09/photos-nodes-behaving-badly-fttn-placement-goes-wrong/


----------



## DB008

NBNMyths said:


> Great that the 'adults' are doing such a great job rolling out their obsolete NBN. Putting powered nodes on riverbanks, blocking footpaths and even putting them right outside telephone exchanges. I wonder if I'll be lucky enough to have two of them on my footpath, like a few other residents are now enjoying?
> 
> View attachment 67063
> 
> 
> https://delimiter.com.au/2016/06/09/photos-nbn-co-builds-node-flooded-riverbank/
> 
> View attachment 67064
> 
> https://delimiter.com.au/2016/06/09/photos-nodes-behaving-badly-fttn-placement-goes-wrong/





I agree with what you have said, but is this the result of Libs v ALP rollout, or a bit lower down the food chain and it would have happened either way ???

The election is looming - Libs to lose, ALP to win.
If that happens, will everything change again regarding the NBN? A period of re-thinking, new revised project/technology rollout - wasting money and more importantly, time to actually roll it out??


----------



## NBNMyths

DB008 said:


> I agree with what you have said, but is this the result of Libs v ALP rollout, or a bit lower down the food chain and it would have happened either way ???




Certainly down the food chain, but wouldn't be happening without the switch to FTTN.

FTTP needs fewer cabinets (about 1/10 as many), they are about 1/4 the size and they are passive (unpowered), so it doesn't matter if they get wet. Also, since they started, they have changed to 'skinny' fibre for FTTP, and that can fit into underground pits, so no need for cabinets at all.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Certainly down the food chain, but wouldn't be happening without the switch to FTTN.



While the physical characteristics of a particular locality may be a factor in the choice of technology at some specific locations, that does not necessarily invalidate a specific technology as a whole.

For example, not all potential nodes locations are subject to flood risk.


----------



## drsmith

Labor's NBN rollout policy,

https://cdn.australianlabor.com.au/documents/Labors_Positive_NBN_Policy.pdf

The substantive change from current is replacing ~2m FTTN with FTTP (19%) of the total rollout. HFC will remain.

To facilitate the above, Labor intends to renegotiate some of the 3.5m FTTN design contracts that are presently expected to be in place at June 30 2016. 1.3m FTTN construction contracts would however be honoured representing most of the 2016/17 FTTN build. 

45%/83% of the final FTTN/B build (2035k/3745k of 4.5m) are projected to be RFS at June 30 2017/2018 respectively according to the current corporate plan. At that rate, this component of the rollout will be easily completed by June 30 2019. Under Labor's policy, this will slow to June 30 2022. Detailed costings are not provided however the delay may explain the peak funding change of $1bn. The above, delayed as it is only as good as it is if peak funding doesn't breach $57b. FTTP is assumed to cost $3,000pp excluding infrastructure leases, a reduction of 17% or $700 from the $3,700 corporate plan cost. That's made up of $450 from the skinny fibre trial and an additional $250 from unspecified cost efficiencies as the rollout progresses. That, if it's achievable, is still $1,400pp more than FTTN. 

Capex is expected to be $3.4bn higher than the current plan. With funding constrained by the peak funding cap of $57bn ($1bn more than the current cap of $56bn), the 19% extra FTTP may be left dependent on positive cash flow from operating parts of the network to fund the increased capex. That possibly explains why the rollout profile has been delayed by as much as 3 years and doesn't inspire confidence that it's even financially deliverable.

It looks like a plan B when it became clear that FTTdp trials wouldn't be sufficiently advanced to offer a policy based on that for this election. That may have been deliverable with the $1bn extra on top of the $56bn peak funding for the above 19%.

On the rollout itself, the weekly progress report to June 2 shows 2,587,411 premises RFS, 44,589 short of the June 30 target of 2,632,000. At the present rate of progress, that should be passed with two weeks to spare.


----------



## sptrawler

drsmith said:


> Labor's NBN rollout policy,
> 
> https://cdn.australianlabor.com.au/documents/Labors_Positive_NBN_Policy.pdf
> 
> The substantive change from current is replacing ~2m FTTN with FTTP (19%) of the total rollout. HFC will remain.
> 
> To facilitate the above, Labor intends to renegotiate some of the 3.5m FTTN design contracts that are presently expected to be in place at June 30 2016. 1.3m FTTN construction contracts would however be honoured representing most of the 2016/17 FTTN build.
> 
> 45%/83% of the final FTTN/B build (2035k/3745k of 4.5m) are projected to be RFS at June 30 2017/2018 respectively according to the current corporate plan. At that rate, this component of the rollout will be easily completed by June 30 2019. Under Labor's policy, this will slow to June 30 2022. Detailed costings are not provided however the delay may explain the peak funding change of $1bn. The above, delayed as it is only as good as it is if peak funding doesn't breach $57b. FTTP is assumed to cost $3,000pp excluding infrastructure leases, a reduction of 17% or $700 from the $3,700 corporate plan cost. That's made up of $450 from the skinny fibre trial and an additional $250 from unspecified cost efficiencies as the rollout progresses. That, if it's achievable, is still $1,400pp more than FTTN.
> 
> Capex is expected to be $3.4bn higher than the current plan. With funding constrained by the peak funding cap of $57bn ($1bn more than the current cap of $56bn), the 19% extra FTTP may be left dependent on positive cash flow from operating parts of the network to fund the increased capex. That possibly explains why the rollout profile has been delayed by as much as 3 years and doesn't inspire confidence that it's even financially deliverable.
> 
> It looks like a plan B when it became clear that FTTdp trials wouldn't be sufficiently advanced to offer a policy based on that for this election. That may have been deliverable with the $1bn extra on top of the $56bn peak funding for the above 19%.
> 
> On the rollout itself, the weekly progress report to June 2 shows 2,587,411 premises RFS, 44,589 short of the June 30 target of 2,632,000. At the present rate of progress, that should be passed with two weeks to spare.




Doc, what is the current take up of the NBN? I have a place in Mandurah, that has a fibre optic cable sitting in space doing nothing.

What's funny is the place next door is the same and the one next to that also. 
The only two other people I know really well in Mandurah, one has wireless and doesn't want a land line, so he isn't connected.
The other is also wireless, so isn't interested.

I guess what I'm saying, is how many are actually connecting up, whether it is bling speed or slow speed? 

I think Bill is sniffing Kev's brain fart, not many give a $hit. IMO

The only people who care about the internet, apart from business, are young people on facebook and they use their phone.

Labor really stuffed up, by not rolling it out to business and CBD's first, rather than fringe dwellers.


----------



## drsmith

sptrawler said:


> Doc, what is the current take up of the NBN? I have a place in Mandurah, that has a fibre optic cable sitting in space doing nothing.



Premises passed and premises activated for various categories are provided in the weekly progress report. To June 2 is as follows,

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam...ollout-metrics/nbn-rollout-metrics-020616.pdf

In Brownfields, almost half the premises passed are connected but there's no distinction between FTTP and FTTN. I'd imagine that a greater proportion of FTTP would be activated relative to FTTN due to the later commencement of FTTN.


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> Labor's NBN rollout policy,
> 
> https://cdn.australianlabor.com.au/documents/Labors_Positive_NBN_Policy.pdf
> 
> The substantive change from current is replacing ~2m FTTN with FTTP (19%) of the total rollout. HFC will remain.
> 
> To facilitate the above, Labor intends to renegotiate some of the 3.5m FTTN design contracts that are presently expected to be in place at June 30 2016. 1.3m FTTN construction contracts would however be honoured representing most of the 2016/17 FTTN build.
> 
> 45%/83% of the final FTTN/B build (2035k/3745k of 4.5m) are projected to be RFS at June 30 2017/2018 respectively according to the current corporate plan. At that rate, this component of the rollout will be easily completed by June 30 2019. Under Labor's policy, this will slow to June 30 2022.




More on the above,



> So Clare is not disputing the idea of FttN being completed by NBN's 2020 deadline -- he is proposing to delay the fixed line rollout by two years in exchange for fibre.




http://www.zdnet.com/article/the-dilemma-at-the-heart-of-labors-nbn-policy/



drsmith said:


> On the rollout itself, the weekly progress report to June 2 shows 2,587,411 premises RFS, 44,589 short of the June 30 target of 2,632,000. At the present rate of progress, that should be passed with two weeks to spare.



As at June 9, overall rollout/brownfields RFS is 2,618,102/1,550,576 premises respectively, 13,898/29,422 short of respective June 30 targets.

Brownfields FTTP/N over the past 7 weeks has progressed at an average rate of ~26k per week. While short of internal targets, the June 30 publically published target of 1,580k will be exceeded by ~50k at June 30 at this rate. This needs to average ~32k per week over the next 55 weeks to meet the June 30 2017 corporate plan target of 3,305k.


----------



## drsmith

If the following is correct, FTTN is going to have a big week of premises RFS in the weekly update ending June 23.

http://www.finder.com.au/nbn-tracker/recent/copper

June 17 tallies to 52,200.

The update for the week to June 16 however will be somewhat leaner at 15,600.

Note the above is for FTTN only and not brownfields as a whole. FTTB on the above pages looks to me like it's listed on a separate page under High Value Build.


----------



## Tisme

Playing devils advocate to test one's resolve:

https://delimiter.com.au/2016/06/14/devils-advocate-gaping-holes-labors-new-nbn-policy/


----------



## Tisme

if you have a twitter account 

https://mobile.twitter.com/MarkDiStef/status/742168694172721153


----------



## So_Cynical

Fact check: Has Australia's internet speed dropped from 30th to 60th in the world under the Coalition?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-21/fact-check-australias-internet-speed-rank/7509352

Yes - yes it has, ABC is biased of course. 

----------------

Interestingly our average speed has increased under the Noalition while the rest of the developed world has gone past us like we were standing still.



> The reports show Australia's average peak connection speed of 30.1 megabits per second ranked 30th in the world in the quarter ending in September 2013, the month the Coalition took office.
> 
> The most recent report available at the time the claim was made shows Australia's average peak connection speed of 39.3 mbps ranked 60th in the world in the quarter ending in December 2015.


----------



## drsmith

For anyone looking to easily see when the rollout is occurring in their area, the Department of Communications and Arts publishes rollout briefs by electorate.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=911042

I don't know how often this updated but the above is as at May 30 2016.


----------



## Tisme

Finder gives status of NBN by address, although it appears NBN are, generally, no longer releasing information about build prep status, which is rather odd.


e.g.

http://www.finder.com.au/nbn-tracker/rollout/list/technology/mtm/status/preparation


----------



## Tisme

Tweets an hour or less ago by opinion leaders



> 44m
> Mike Carlton‏ @MikeCarlton01
> The hard fact is that, by delivering a 3rd rate NBN, Abbott and Turnbull have blighted the lives of generations to come. Culpable folly.






> Mike Carlton‏ @MikeCarlton01
> Sackable ?? There should be rioting in the streets. Fact is that Turnbull has right royally stuffed the NBN.
> 
> 
> Quentin Dempster‏ @QuentinDempster
> Fact Check confirms Australia is disadvantaged by broadband capacity. Is this a sackable offence?  (link: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-21/fact-check-australias-internet-speed-rank/7509352) abc.net.au/news/2016-06-2… via @abcfactcheck




Glenn asks the question




> Glenn Lazarus‏ @SenatorLazarus
> Mr Turnbull why is Coalition advertising NBN jobs overseas when so many people including tradies are unemployed/desperate for work? #qanda
> 
> 8457





wonder what happened with this:

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ions-investigation-finds-20160614-gpj809.html


----------



## Tisme

Choice article about NBN and how quickly the budget blew out (once the snouts in the trough old boys . like astro *fizz*acists got their hooks into it):

https://www.choice.com.au/electroni...g-to-the-internet/articles/nbn-rollout-update


----------



## Tisme

Another bloke who doesn't have a clue chiming in with his communist manifesto:



> The founding chief executive of NBN Co, Mike Quigley, has intervened in the last two weeks of the federal election, slamming the Coalition for making a “huge miscalculation” with the network’s use of copper access technologies.]







> “Forty-five billion is still the correct peak funding cost if the project (FTTP) had been allowed to continue," he said.
> 
> “To believe that the original FttP deployment would have required a peak funding of somewhere between $64bn and $94bn you have to make totally unrealistic assumptions about take-up rates and ARPUs, assumptions that have proven to be wrong.
> 
> “You have to distort per premise capex numbers, and finally you have to ignore the improvements in technology that are driving down FttP costs, increasing productivity and reducing FttP build times everywhere else in the world.
> 
> “Given the complexity of all of this information it is little wonder that it is very difficult for the average person, or even the media, to sort out fact from fiction concerning the peak funding costs for the original FttP-based NBN.
> 
> “But what is clear is that every forecast regarding the NBN that the Coalition has made, for which there is now data, whether for their own MTM or for the original FTTP plan - every one of them has been wrong.”




http://www.itwire.com/it-industry-n...ction-to-slam-coalition’s-broadband-plan.html


----------



## SirRumpole

Tisme said:


> Another bloke who doesn't have a clue chiming in with his communist manifesto:




Fabians everywhere . 

Mal has stuffed the NBN and everyone knows it.

30th to 60th place in internet speeds under the Libs. It's humiliating for the country and the Coalition.

If we want a modern NBN , don't vote Liberal.


----------



## noco

I had NBN connected to my house last Monday and I cannot distinguish any difference to ADSL....


----------



## Tisme

noco said:


> I had NBN connected to my house last Monday and I cannot distinguish any difference to ADSL....




That's proof in itself of the failure to launch. Do you know how your connection is configured? e.g. fibre to copper to pit to copper to home to copper or do you have fibre to the premises(home) and what speed did you opt for?


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> Fabians everywhere .
> 
> Mal has stuffed the NBN and everyone knows it.
> 
> 30th to 60th place in internet speeds under the Libs. It's humiliating for the country and the Coalition.
> 
> If we want a modern NBN , don't vote Liberal.




I'm not sure the NBN will be retrievable. It's like we didn't learn from the days of states and railways, where cheap dictated the gauge and strength of the systems and the incompatibility between long haul freight between state borders. Trains had to stop at marshalling yards and have their bogies changed FFS

Back in the 70s Gough tried to nationalise the interstate rail transport to standardise cross country rail, but as usual is was a communist plot that had to be unscrambled by the personal freedom loving Libs..... eventually of course commonsense won out..kinda.


----------



## noco

Tisme said:


> That's proof in itself of the failure to launch. Do you know how your connection is configured? e.g. fibre to copper to pit to copper to home to copper or do you have fibre to the premises(home) and what speed did you opt for?




I have FTTP.

I will have to check for the speed and get back to you.

I am happy with the current speed....It is plenty for my use.


----------



## Tisme

noco said:


> I have FTTP.
> 
> I will have to check for the speed and get back to you.
> 
> I am happy with the current speed....It is plenty for my use.




Thanks for that. A friend of mine signed up to 50 megs FTTP and teased me endlessly about my then mere 30 megs cable speed (he's a LNP party faithful and hosted our previous Canberra boss on a few occasions) he loves it and is considering a faster throughput to keep pace with his increased use of features. I'm going to be particularly jealous when ultraHD starts streaming..... my current 20meg ADSL can't handle Stan high res without stalling and Netflix kicks down to medium as well.


----------



## drsmith

The weekly progress report to June 16 shows that the rollout has now passed 2,642,779 premises RFS. This surpasses the June 30 2016 target of 2,632k as set out in last year's corporate plan.


----------



## noco

Tisme said:


> Thanks for that. A friend of mine signed up to 50 megs FTTP and teased me endlessly about my then mere 30 megs cable speed (he's a LNP party faithful and hosted our previous Canberra boss on a few occasions) he loves it and is considering a faster throughput to keep pace with his increased use of features. I'm going to be particularly jealous when ultraHD starts streaming..... my current 20meg ADSL can't handle Stan high res without stalling and Netflix kicks down to medium as well.




Tisme you seem to be a wizard om=n this NBN stuff so perhaps you may be able to suggest a remedy for a current problem I have experienced since being connected on Monday...I had all commercial channels on Monday morning up until the NBN was connected 

Everything is working fine except the loss of free to air commercial TV channels.

I have been in contact with my server Iprimus, who then redirected me to NBN who in turn redirected me to Foxtel.

Foxtel palmed me back to NBN......NBN then said perhaps I should engage a TV techo.

I have tried to auto tune the TV 3 times without success. 

So I am up the creek without a paddle.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## Knobby22

Noco

Do the following:

1. Check aerial is connected.
2. Check TV is set to DTV. Note, it might be set to HDMI to get Foxtel or whatever. I suspect this is most likely the problem.


----------



## noco

Knobby22 said:


> Noco
> 
> Do the following:
> 
> 1. Check aerial is connected.
> 2. Check TV is set to DTV. Note, it might be set to HDMI to get Foxtel or whatever. I suspect this is most likely the problem.




Thanks Knobby...I have just found the problem......I have rectified it and now everything is fine.


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> The following in a election flyer from the local Labor candidate offers a hint on Labor's upcoming NBN rollout policy,
> 
> _That's why I support a plan for Jobs in WA, protecting your penalty rates and a fibre-to-the-premise nbn to foster innovation._



Got another one today from the local Labor member in the form of a personalised letter stating that Labor will prioritise the delivery of FTTH NBN in my suburb by 2018.

Should Labor be elected on July 2, they're effectively giving themselves ~18 months to plan, design and construct.


----------



## drsmith

In a state of unrestrained excitement, I contacted the office of the local Labor candidate and when I read out the above and mentioned 18 months, the above timetable immediately slipped. I was advised that the beginning of 2018 is 1.5 years and the end of 2018 is 2.5 years.

The suburb I'm in is in a 3-year first priority list. Presently, FTTN is scheduled to be rolled out in H1 2018.


----------



## trainspotter

drsmith said:


> In a state of unrestrained excitement, I contacted the office of the local Labor candidate and when I read out the above and mentioned 18 months, the above timetable immediately slipped. I was advised that the beginning of 2018 is 1.5 years and the end of 2018 is 2.5 years.
> 
> The suburb I'm in is in a 3-year first priority list. Presently, FTTN is scheduled to be rolled out in H1 2018.




By then 18G technology will be all over the airwaves Doc. Recently got NBN and not much different to ADSL turbo that I had previously except for the  to bundle the telephone into the same system. Oh yes Mr Trainspotter you can have faster speeds but you MUST PAY FOR IT - nearly double what I was on originally. Been with same company 11 years and 10 months - Loyalty for ya !


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> If the following is correct, FTTN is going to have a big week of premises RFS in the weekly update ending June 23.
> 
> http://www.finder.com.au/nbn-tracker/recent/copper
> 
> June 17 tallies to 52,200.
> 
> The update for the week to June 16 however will be somewhat leaner at 15,600.
> 
> Note the above is for FTTN only and not brownfields as a whole. FTTB on the above pages looks to me like it's listed on a separate page under High Value Build.



The above has flowed through to the official weekly rollout update to June 23.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco2/documents/nbn-rollout-metrics/rollout-metrics-230616.pdf

Brownfields/total was ~67k/~73k RFS for the week respectively. Brownfields/total are now ~52k/~84k above their respective June 30 targets.


----------



## Tisme

trainspotter said:


> By then 18G technology will be all over the airwaves Doc. Recently got NBN and not much different to ADSL turbo that I had previously except for the  to bundle the telephone into the same system. Oh yes Mr Trainspotter you can have faster speeds but you MUST PAY FOR IT - nearly double what I was on originally. Been with same company 11 years and 10 months - Loyalty for ya !




What kind of NBN trainspotter (e.g. copper?)  Latency and jitter are becoming a problem at night on some NBN connections due to congestion.

Be interesting to see how your service performs through the day using TPG (ookla) speedtest.   http://speedtest.tpg.com.au/


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> The above has flowed through to the official weekly rollout update to June 23.
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco2/documents/nbn-rollout-metrics/rollout-metrics-230616.pdf
> 
> Brownfields/total was ~67k/~73k RFS for the week respectively. Brownfields/total are now ~52k/~84k above their respective June 30 targets.



The week to June 30 looks like it will be even bigger based on recent activations (Finder). FTTN > 80k and total over 100k. Not included in that is 18.8k HFC quietly announced by NBN Co on June 30.

The rollout should therefore be ~200k over the June 30 target of 2,632k outlined in last year's corporate plan when we see the weekly rollout update to June 30.


----------



## drsmith

The rollout has finished the FY with a bang. 

177,753 additional lots/premises were passed/covered by the network during the week ending June 30, of which 153,356 were Brownfield. The numbers are so large that they possibly include all those originally scheduled for July 1 2016. That will become clear in next week's update. The 18,800 HFC noted above are not mentioned specifically but would likely form part of the total given the announcement was on June 30. 

Premises RFS relative to June 30 2016 targets are as follows,

*Brownfields (including HFC)*

Target: 1,590,000
Actual: 1,785,152 which is 195,152 above target.

*Total*

Target: 2,632,000
Total: 2,893,474 which is 261,474 above target.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-i...co/corporate-plan/weekly-progress-report.html

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco2/documents/nbn-rollout-metrics-300616.pdf

It looks like the rollout will slow somewhat from the above figures in the weeks ahead with the Finder site indicating ~120k FTTN/MTM scheduled for RFS in the 6 weeks from July 8. Next week will depend on the proportion of July 1 scheduled for RFS that occurred in the week ending June 30.


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> The numbers are so large that they possibly include all those originally scheduled for July 1 2016. That will become clear in next week's update.



And that was the case.

Only 437 Brownfield premises were passed in the week ending July 7.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-i...co/corporate-plan/weekly-progress-report.html


----------



## pixel

drsmith said:


> And that was the case.
> 
> Only 437 Brownfield premises were passed in the week ending July 7.
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-i...co/corporate-plan/weekly-progress-report.html




So, the figures lied to make the Government look better on Election Day.
What a novel strategy


----------



## drsmith

The bumper weekly rollout numbers to June 30 were published after the election.


----------



## drsmith

The 2017 corporate plan has been released and includes rollout projections through to 2020.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco2/documents/nbn-corporate-plan-2017.pdf

An accompanying document is the associated media release.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco2/documents/nbn-media-presentation-corporate-plan-2017.pdf

2016 corporate plan (for reference).

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco2/documents/nbn-corporate-plan-2016.pdf

There are a mix of positive and negative in the above. Firstly, the rollout targets from last year's plan are maintained which is a positive and the completion year of 2020 also remains unchanged.

In terms of cost per premise projections, FTTP greenfields, FTTP brownfields) and FTTN are unchanged. HFC has blown out from $1800pp to $2300pp and fixed wireless has dropped from $4900pp to $4600pp.

Rollout footprint has changed as follows,

FTTP: Reduced from 2.4m to 2.0m (range 2.0m to 2.5m).
FTTN: increased from 4.5m to 6.1m (range 5.1m to 6.5m). Category includes FTTN/B/dp.
HFC: decreased from 4.0m to 2.8m. (range 2.5m to 3.2m).
Fixed wireless and satellite combined remains at 1.0m (range 0.9m to 1.1m).

In that detail, the HFC cost per premise increase and footprint reduction is clearly a negative.

I haven't looked in detail but slightly improved financial metrics appears to be driven by an increase in projected ARPU.

Some further commentary for reference,

https://www.finder.com.au/far-fewer-nbn-customers-will-be-connected-via-cable


----------



## NBNMyths

Well, who'd have thought. Trying to upgrade and integrate the old, unmaintained and obsolete HFC into the NBN was a waste of time and money. If only some sort of expert had said that before they started down that path and thrown a few (b/m)illion at the integration systems and network upgrades.

And (thanks to FTTP users), ARPU is actually exceeding Labor's original NBN target. You know, the target that Malcolm said was invalid and wouldn't happen, therefore making Labor's NBN unviable. And the driver for the increased ARPU? FTTP users. Because they can actually get (and therefore pay for) 100Mbps services.


----------



## Tisme

NBNMyths said:


> Well, who'd have thought. Trying to upgrade and integrate the old, unmaintained and obsolete HFC into the NBN was a waste of time and money. If only some sort of expert had said that before they started down that path .




Malcolm is an expert and if he didn't see it, nobody would have.


----------



## Smurf1976

Anyone know if there's a downside (apart from the obvious of having no communications) to not connecting to NBN before the copper network is turned off?

If someone chooses to not have it installed now, do they incur any sort of penalty or additional cost to get it installed later? 

Specific situation is FTTH with the fibre already installed to the box on the outside of the house but nothing connected to it.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

How can governments be trusted with *anything*, when this happens?  

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/t...00-times-faster-than-nbn-theoretically-2016-9


----------



## NBNMyths

Gringotts Bank said:


> How can governments be trusted with *anything*, when this happens?
> 
> http://www.businessinsider.com.au/t...00-times-faster-than-nbn-theoretically-2016-9




Because (as it partially hints in the article) it doesn't mean anything for two reasons: 
1. Mobile networks never meet their headline speeds.
2. The NBN can be upgraded to faster speeds relatively easily (at least the original fibre sections can).

Telstra's current 4G network is already *theoretically* 3x faster than the NBN. It can do 300Mbps, while the NBN is currently limited to 100Mbps (although the fibre is set up for 1000Mbps). Despite the theoretical speed, the mobile network typically delivers about 10Mbps, and its real-world speed has actually fallen since it was launched a few years ago, as more people have joined the network.

Mobile networks are shared mediums. Fibre is not. The more people connected to a mobile tower, the slower the network gets. They are also limited by the amount of radio spectrum available.

That's why there isn't a single carrier anywhere in the World that is proposing to replace fixed line networks with mobile. To the contrary, they do everything they can to shift data off their cellular networks by charging huge prices, capping data volumes and rolling out WiFi grid networks (e.g. Telstra Air). All of these things only exist to move traffic off cellular (4G/5G) networks and onto the fixed line, to keep the cellular networks chugging along.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

NBNMyths said:


> Because (as it partially hints in the article) it doesn't mean anything for two reasons:
> 1. Mobile networks never meet their headline speeds.
> 2. The NBN can be upgraded to faster speeds relatively easily (at least the original fibre sections can).
> 
> Telstra's current 4G network is already *theoretically* 3x faster than the NBN. It can do 300Mbps, while the NBN is currently limited to 100Mbps (although the fibre is set up for 1000Mbps). Despite the theoretical speed, the mobile network typically delivers about 10Mbps, and its real-world speed has actually fallen since it was launched a few years ago, as more people have joined the network.
> 
> Mobile networks are shared mediums. Fibre is not. The more people connected to a mobile tower, the slower the network gets. They are also limited by the amount of radio spectrum available.
> 
> That's why there isn't a single carrier anywhere in the World that is proposing to replace fixed line networks with mobile. To the contrary, they do everything they can to shift data off their cellular networks by charging huge prices, capping data volumes and rolling out WiFi grid networks (e.g. Telstra Air). All of these things only exist to move traffic off cellular (4G/5G) networks and onto the fixed line, to keep the cellular networks chugging along.




Thanks.  Do you support NBN?


----------



## NBNMyths

Gringotts Bank said:


> Thanks.  Do you support NBN?




The original one. Not a fan of the hobbled FTTN version the coalition is running out now, as I believe it will be quickly obsolete and cost us more in the long term for upgrades.


----------



## drsmith

The following opinion piece on Stephen Conroy's legacy was in today's AFR,



> Who would have thought? It turns out that a massive government-run telecommunications monopoly that was built from scratch and which aims to push other competitors out of the market is very expensive. As things stand, the grand monument dreamt up by the Rudd government's telecommunications minister Stephen Conroy will leave Australia with close to the highest broadband prices in the developed world.
> 
> As our Chanticleer column reported yesterday, telco retailer TPG has downgraded its profit outlook to reflect a sharp hike in its access fees to the national broadband network. NBN charges, including a controversial charge based on increased movie streaming, are driving this increase. Under its business plan, the NBN has to recoup the costs of capital over time. So the $54 billion it will eventually cost to build will be passed on to retailers, whose profit margins will be squeezed, and eventually consumers who will have nowhere else to go.
> 
> By now, competition would force a normal business  to write off a chunk of this as a bad investment. In February a PricewaterhouseCoopers report suggested the NBN was worth less than half of its construction cost. Well here's the rub, the previous Labor government kept the NBN off the budget books by arguing it would generate a quasi-commercial return. That allowed it to keep the project's early shortfalls from adding to the budget deficit. But writing down a massive amount of the value would expose the fantasy of the entire exercise.
> 
> So now we live in a crazy world where both sides of politics pretend that the NBN will generate a quasi-commercial return on equity while also providing its services at competitive prices. The government doesn't want a bigger deficit on its balance sheet, and Labor thinks the NBN is a great idea no matter the cost. So the NBN has to be allowed to do what monopolies naturally do: charge monopoly prices.
> 
> The NBN was of course, the brainchild of Senator Stephen Conroy, who suddenly quit the Senate last week. One of the lowest-quality federal ministers in Australian history, Senator Conroy claimed he had "unfettered legal power" to order Australian telcos to "wear red underpants on their head" if he so desired. He claimed the NBN would cut prices for consumers and futureproof access to the internet. Well, in a sense he has futureproofed the NBN, because it is illegal for anyone from Telstra to TPG to advertise other internet technologies as alternatives to the NBN.
> 
> The Turnbull government vows to crack down on businesses whose activities have the effect of diminishing competition. Yet it has inherited a government monopoly at the heart of the information economy whose business model is based on doing just that. Under Labor, Telstra struck a terrific deal for handing over key parts of its broadband infrastructure to the NBN. That windfall for Telstra shareholders loaded more monopoly costs into the NBN business model, which it now seeks to pass on to its captive customers. Turns out we're all wearing red underpants on our head thanks to Senator Conroy.




http://www.afr.com/opinion/editoria...d-underpants-on-all-our-heads-20160921-grkz3h


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> The following opinion piece on Stephen Conroy's legacy was in today's AFR,
> 
> http://www.afr.com/opinion/editoria...d-underpants-on-all-our-heads-20160921-grkz3h




All very nice to say, but what is a viable alternative?

Leaving it to the market clearly didn't work. Prices were no cheaper and the product was no better (for most people).

I would argue that telecommunication cables are a natural monopoly, like power cables, gas lines and water pipes. It makes no sense to overbuild multiple sets of cables, as Telstra and Optus discovered 20 years ago.

The NBN is about providing modern comms infrastructure for *all* Australians, based on a cross-subsidy model, just like every other utility.

By creating one regulated wholesale infrastructure monopoly, you gain economies of scale and equity of service/price for everyone. 

Leaving it to the market would result in all but dense suburbs getting greatly inferior infrastructure at higher prices.

Allowing fixed-line competition blows away the business case, because competitors could cherry-pick small profitable areas and undercut the NBN in those areas, which would in turn reduce NBN revenue, driving up prices for everyone else. Imagine if power companies were permitted to overbuild powerlines, and one decided to only build within 2km of every substation. Their costs would be far lower than the big network operator, so they could charge less. That would take away the 'cheap' customers of the big operator who were cross-subsidising the rest of the network, either sending them into the red or forcing them to charge more to their remaining customers. What a shambles that would be, and we wouldn't allow it. So why should we allow it for communications?


Back to the original question, if not an infrastructure monopoly, what alternative would you propose and what impacts would it have?


----------



## Tisme

> "As the first national, wholesale-only broadband service, the nbn provides wholesale access speeds to telephone and internet service providers who then deliver these services onto you.
> 
> Below are the speed tiers that are available to our service providers over NBN fibre. Of course, the actual speeds you experience depend on a number of factors outside our control, like your equipment quality, software, broadband plans and how your service provider designs its network.
> 
> 
> Below are the speed tiers that are available to our service providers over NBN fibre. Of course, the actual speeds you experience depend on a number of factors outside our control, like your equipment quality, software, broadband plans and how your service provider designs its network.
> 
> Speed tiers
> 1-mbps
> This speed tier provides your service provider with wholesale access speeds of 12Mbps download and 1 Mbps upload over NBN fibre.
> 5-mbps
> This speed tier provides your service provider with wholesale access speeds of 25 Mbps download and 5 Mbps upload over NBN fibre.
> 10-mbps
> This speed tier provides your service provider with wholesale access speeds of 25 Mbps download and 10 Mbps upload over NBN fibre.
> 20-mbps
> This speed tier provides your service provider with wholesale access speeds of 50 Mbps download and 20 Mbps upload over NBN fibre.
> 40-mbps
> This speed tier provides your service provider with wholesale access speeds of 100 Mbps download and 40 Mbps upload over NBN fibre"




Interesting how the term "access speeds" is used. I'm guessing that is a way to create the illusion that bandwidth is the same as goodput.


----------



## NBNMyths

Tisme said:


> Interesting how the term "access speeds" is used. I'm guessing that is a way to create the illusion that bandwidth is the same as goodput.




It's because actual and theoretical speeds will always be different. If you order 100/40, then you can theoretically get that speed, and if your ISP is good and you are downloading from a website with sufficient capacity, then you'll get very close to that speed.

But there is another major factor _within_ the NBN (aside from all the ones outside it). The ISP also needs to buy enough total capacity at the point of interconnect to deliver to all their customers. So they balance/estimate how many of their customers will be using the service simultaneously and buy enough capacity for that estimate. Cheaper ISPs tend to under specify the back end, leading to congestion within their NBN network. e.g.: A 'good' ISP might have a ratio of 20:1. A 'bad' ISP might have a ratio of 30:1.


----------



## Tisme

NBNMyths said:


> It's because actual and theoretical speeds will always be different. If you order 100/40, then you can theoretically get that speed, and if your ISP is good and you are downloading from a website with sufficient capacity, then you'll get very close to that speed.
> 
> But there is another major factor _within_ the NBN (aside from all the ones outside it). The ISP also needs to buy enough total capacity at the point of interconnect to deliver to all their customers. So they balance/estimate how many of their customers will be using the service simultaneously and buy enough capacity for that estimate. Cheaper ISPs tend to under specify the back end, leading to congestion within their NBN network. e.g.: A 'good' ISP might have a ratio of 20:1. A 'bad' ISP might have a ratio of 30:1.





I'm sure everyone who signs up to, say 100mps, with get that as a bandwidth guarantee, but I doubt that speed goodput would translate to the ISP in the first instance. Sure the ISP's downstream switches, multiplexing, etc will degrade the throughput...that's not an issue people are unused to.


----------



## sptrawler

The latest S.A blackout should give the NBN a real test, let's see the feedback from those on the copper vs those on the fibre.

Let's see how those on the NBN went, phoning a friend, good real world test for the battery back up.


----------



## NBNMyths

Remember those leaks last year about _'Operation ClusterF*#k'_ AKA the Optus HFC network?

The leaks that said the Optus HFC was not fit for purpose? 

The leaks that NBN Co said were rubbish?

The Optus HFC that was fine and would bring down the cost of the NBN and speed the rollout? 

The very same HFC that all the tech heads and real-NBN fans said was rubbish?


Guess what.....

*'A lemon': NBN backflips, abandons plan to use Optus cables it purchased for $800 million*

_The National Broadband Network has dumped its plan to use Optus cables to deliver high-speed broadband less than a year after rubbishing reports the $800 million network was in a dire state and may be unusable....Acknowledging the Optus HFC network was not "NBN-ready", the company said FTTdp would provide a better customer experience and value for money than upgrading the old network._

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...urchased-for-800-million-20160928-grquam.html


----------



## Tisme

NBNMyths said:


> Remember those leaks last year about _'Operation ClusterF*#k'_ AKA the Optus HFC network?
> 
> The leaks that said the Optus HFC was not fit for purpose?
> 
> The leaks that NBN Co said were rubbish?
> 
> The Optus HFC that was fine and would bring down the cost of the NBN and speed the rollout?
> 
> The very same HFC that all the tech heads and real-NBN fans said was rubbish?
> 
> 
> Guess what.....
> 
> *'A lemon': NBN backflips, abandons plan to use Optus cables it purchased for $800 million*
> 
> _The National Broadband Network has dumped its plan to use Optus cables to deliver high-speed broadband less than a year after rubbishing reports the $800 million network was in a dire state and may be unusable....Acknowledging the Optus HFC network was not "NBN-ready", the company said FTTdp would provide a better customer experience and value for money than upgrading the old network._
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...urchased-for-800-million-20160928-grquam.html





What front page was that on? Did Malcolm get the deserved credit for a job well done?


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Back to the original question, if not an infrastructure monopoly, what alternative would you propose and what impacts would it have?



As the article points out, Labor and Stephen Conroy thought the NBN a great idea no matter the cost and spent accordingly under its monopoly model.

The $800m payment to Optus in relation to its HFC network is a case in point.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> As the article points out, Labor and Stephen Conroy thought the NBN a great idea no matter the cost and spent accordingly under its monopoly model.
> 
> The $800m payment to Optus in relation to its HFC network is a case in point.




And how much more time and money was wasted renegotiating the agreement, developing systems to integrate HFC into a back end that was never designed for it, repairing it, testing it only to find out that it was just as useless as all the experts had already told them it was?


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> And how much more time and money was wasted renegotiating the agreement, developing systems to integrate HFC into a back end that was never designed for it, repairing it, testing it only to find out that it was just as useless as all the experts had already told them it was?



You're welcome to substantiate a figure if you like but don't forget that the upgrade of Telstra's HFC network is proceeding.

Also, the decision not to proceed with upgrading the Optus HFC network doesn't let Stephen Conroy off the hook. It only serves to illustrate what was done wrong under his tenure.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> You're welcome to substantiate a figure if you like but don't forget that the upgrade of Telstra's HFC network is proceeding.
> 
> Also, the decision not to proceed with upgrading the Optus HFC network doesn't let Stephen Conroy off the hook. It only serves to illustrate what was done wrong under his tenure.




Why was it wrong? The Optus deal existed to ensure the maximum possible uptake of the NBN, and therefore create a return for taxpayers and minimise costs for all NBN subscribers. You might have a philosophical opposition to that method/decision, but that doesn't make its 'wrong'. It makes it 'wrong in your opinion'.


----------



## drsmith

NBNMyths said:


> Why was it wrong? The Optus deal existed to ensure the maximum possible uptake of the NBN, and therefore create a return for taxpayers and minimise costs for all NBN subscribers. You might have a philosophical opposition to that method/decision, but that doesn't make its 'wrong'. It makes it 'wrong in your opinion'.



:nono:

Your attention span is better than that.


----------



## NBNMyths

drsmith said:


> :nono:
> 
> Your attention span is better than that.




Are you referring to the AFR editorial? In that case, it makes it 'wrong in their opinion' too.

I think it was right, you think it was wrong. It's possible to make arguments to support each case, but 'right' and 'wrong' are philosophical opinions on this particular strategy. They are not factual arguments.


----------



## drsmith

Along with the announcement last week of an increase in the FTTdp footprint, there was also a media release which included a breakdown between FTTN and FTTB so far since FTTN was launched in September last year,



> 27 September 2016
> 
> 745,000 Fibre-to-the-Node premises are now Ready for Service (RFS) and 235,000 premises have been activated just 12 months after commercial launch of the product.
> 
> Nearly three quarters of a million Australian premises can sign up for an nbn Fibre-to-the-Node (FTTN) service just one year after the company commercially launched FTTN services. Further, nearly a quarter of a million premises are now activated on the nbn™ network via FTTN.
> 
> If you include the figures from our Fibre-to-the-Building (FTTB) deployment then we have a total of 854,000 premises Ready for Service (RFS) across FTTN and FTTB combined.




http://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-i...-anniversary-of-Fibre-to-the-Node-launch.html


----------



## drsmith

NBN have today released their quarterly report to Sept 30 (Q3 2016),

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco2/documents/Q1 2017 Results Presentation.pdf

It outlines progress for the quarter but I couldn't see any reference against quarterly targets. Overall rollout progress however can be assessed from other publically available information.

In Q3 2016, the rollout passed an additional 338k premises. On the assumption of a linear passed profile from June 30 2016 actual of 2,893k to a June 30 2017 target of 5,442k, this is way behind schedule. Over the 4 quarters, the rollout needed to pass 637k per Q to reach the above June 30 2017 target.

From the June 30 2016 projection of 2632k outlined in the 2016 corporate plan, the rollout as at Sept 30 is 599k ahead of that. This though is also short of 703k quarterly target required between that June 30 2016 target and the June 30 2017 target. This is a more appropriate measure of progress relative to the annual targets outlined in the 2016 corporate plan but is still 104k behind based on linear extrapolation as at Sept 30.

This isn't necessarily cause for alarm as the rollout profile from quarter to quarter is not necessarily linear. It's highly unlikely for example that HFC passed is still going through a ramp up stage given that it's still the early stage of that component.

What is clear is that there is going to need to be a significant ramp up in numbers in the weekly rollout reports in the weeks and months ahead if the June 30 2017 target is to be achieved. Over the remaining 9 months of the year (39 weeks) the rollout needs to pass an average of ~57k premises per week to June 30 2017.

Other stats of interest is a breakdown between FTTN/B and HFC passed as at Sept 30 which is 926,624 and 27,506 respectively. A media article also outlines that portion of FTTN/B passed is FTTB, 



> The current count of total ready for service combined FTTN/B premises stands at 1.03 million, with 138,684 specifically on FTTB.




http://www.itnews.com.au/news/nbn-passes-1-million-fttn-b-premises-440904

That's later, possibly based additional commentary from the company around today's quarterly report. The most recent weekly rollout update published is to Oct 27.


----------



## SirRumpole

One man's NBN battle

NBN creating digital divide on New South Wales Central Coast

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-06/nbn-creating-digital-divide-on-nsw-central-coast/8096438


----------



## SirRumpole

Another demonstration of Turnbull's failure.

Global research opportunity stalled after connection failure

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-12/milroy-observatory-at-coonabarabran-nbn-internet/8113268


----------



## drsmith

SirRumpole said:


> Another demonstration of Turnbull's failure.
> 
> Global research opportunity stalled after connection failure
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-12/milroy-observatory-at-coonabarabran-nbn-internet/8113268



Sometimes it's a good idea to read more than the headline before being a critic. The observatory isn't on the fixed line network.



> The owner David Baker said the NBN satellite did not provide a strong enough connection to allow global access to the telescope.




https://www.google.com.au/maps/plac...c7d3e5ca2b8ab55!8m2!3d-31.220588!4d149.190378


----------



## SirRumpole

drsmith said:


> Sometimes it's a good idea to read more than the headline before being a critic. The observatory isn't on the fixed line network.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.google.com.au/maps/plac...c7d3e5ca2b8ab55!8m2!3d-31.220588!4d149.190378




The satellite system is part of the NBN and it's obviously not up to the required standard for this application. 

So much for connecting remote areas to the NBN if you can't even do a teleconference with it. It's making us a laughing stock and will hamper future investment.


----------



## drsmith

SirRumpole said:


> The satellite system is part of the NBN and it's obviously not up to the required standard for this application.
> 
> So much for connecting remote areas to the NBN if you can't even do a teleconference with it. It's making us a laughing stock and will hamper future investment.



The origin of the satellite network dates from Labor's time in office.


----------



## sptrawler

drsmith said:


> The origin of the satellite network dates from Labor's time in office.




Jeez doc, don't say that, Rumpole and Tisme think the LNP are responsible for Labors brain fart.

Everyone is still wondering, why labor rolled it out to suburbs, where people couldn't afford internet in the first place.

It was rolled out to a group of units I'm involved with 3 years ago, I have'nt connected next door hasn't connected and the old lady in the end unit is now in a nursing home. So she hasn't connected.

It was dumb policy, rolled out to inappropriate locations with resulting poor uptake.

Why they didn't roll it out to the CBD's first, is beyond belief and now we are expected to take Labor seriously.

Andrews in Victoria has shown, they've learnt sod all, union hacks given free reign = disaster.IMO


----------



## SirRumpole

drsmith said:


> The origin of the satellite network dates from Labor's time in office.




Ah yes, the old LNP mantra.

BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. 

When will this government take responsibility ? Never I think. It's always all LABOR'S FAULT.


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> Jeez doc, don't say that, Rumpole and Tisme think the LNP are responsible for Labors brain fart.
> 
> Everyone is still wondering, why labor rolled it out to suburbs, where people couldn't afford internet in the first place.
> 
> It was rolled out to a group of units I'm involved with 3 years ago, I have'nt connected next door hasn't connected and the old lady in the end unit is now in a nursing home. So she hasn't connected.
> 
> It was dumb policy, rolled out to inappropriate locations with resulting poor uptake.
> 
> Why they didn't roll it out to the CBD's first, is beyond belief and now we are expected to take Labor seriously.
> 
> Andrews in Victoria has shown, they've learnt sod all, union hacks given free reign = disaster.IMO




How do you know what my thoughts are?

Just because you don't like a product doesn't mean the product is a dud....it points to your bias, poor choices, slavishness to the LNP and belligerence to change. This must be true because I said it, just like you say untrue things as if they are fact.... of course it could just be that you *ARE A TROLL!!!* (cue Noco LOL)

Your post is like a cliche : anti NBN, anti Labor, anti union, anti Andrews, anti competition, anti technology, anti Tisme, anti Rumpole...... there is nothing redeeming about your spit and vitriol, which kind of makes me think you have issues of self esteem... no really I think you have some pretty concerning baggage that will require getting over your negative self before you can accept adult guidance.

We're here for you sp, you can count on the elders to guide you through adolescence into manhood, leadership, benevolence and all those meritorious traits that makes a man a man's man. ... the kind of man that forgives stupidity of youth and looks only to enrich culture and manners.

Atta boy, 

:


----------



## Tisme

Your town/suburb on the horizon?

Of course the problem is Bill Shorten has picked the wrong houses to run light pipes past, even if there is only FTTN and copper connection available way off in the future for grandmothers who hate fibre and prefer white bread.  And they say other people are dumbarses ... really Bill, you and those unions ,,, we need a real communications minister like ...say the inventor of the internet Malcolm Turnbull  

use ctrlF to search

https://www.telstrawholesale.com.au/content/dam/tw/nbn/Documents/rollout-list.pdf


----------



## drsmith

SirRumpole said:


> Ah yes, the old LNP mantra.
> 
> BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR. BLAME LABOR.
> 
> When will this government take responsibility ? Never I think. It's always all LABOR'S FAULT.



The satellite network dates from Labor's time in office. That's a simple fact you could have found out for yourself prior to posting.

You're also the one complaining about it.


----------



## SirRumpole

drsmith said:


> The satellite network dates from Labor's time in office. That's a simple fact you could have found out for yourself prior to posting.
> 
> You're also the one complaining about it.




I'm complaining about the Turnbull government promising to "fix" Labor's so called stuff up, and then failing to do so.


----------



## drsmith

SirRumpole said:


> I'm complaining about the Turnbull government promising to "fix" Labor's so called stuff up, and then failing to do so.



The satellite program was well advanced by the time of the Turnbull government. The first satellite was launched on October 1 last year, shortly after Malcolm became PM.

You can stop digging now. In fact, I strongly encourage you to do so. You're way out of your depth on this topic.


----------



## SirRumpole

drsmith said:


> The satellite program was well advanced by the time of the Turnbull government. The first satellite was launched on October 1 last year, shortly after Malcolm became PM.
> 
> You can stop digging now. In fact, I strongly encourage you to do so. You're way out of your depth on this topic.




One doesn't need to dig very far to uncover the dirt that Turnbull's NBN is. If you don't believe me, try the Fin Review.

http://www.afr.com/technology/web/nbn/malcolm-turnbulls-broadband-plan-is-incoherent-20160928-grq4oe


----------



## drsmith

SirRumpole said:


> One doesn't need to dig very far to uncover the dirt that Turnbull's NBN is. If you don't believe me, try the Fin Review.
> 
> http://www.afr.com/technology/web/nbn/malcolm-turnbulls-broadband-plan-is-incoherent-20160928-grq4oe




You've hit bedrock with that one.



> Michelle Rowland is the opposition spokeswoman for communications.


----------



## sptrawler

Tisme said:


> How do you know what my thoughts are?
> 
> Just because you don't like a product doesn't mean the product is a dud....it points to your bias, poor choices, slavishness to the LNP and belligerence to change. This must be true because I said it, just like you say untrue things as if they are fact.... of course it could just be that you *ARE A TROLL!!!* (cue Noco LOL)
> 
> Your post is like a cliche : anti NBN, anti Labor, anti union, anti Andrews, anti competition, anti technology, anti Tisme, anti Rumpole...... there is nothing redeeming about your spit and vitriol, which kind of makes me think you have issues of self esteem... no really I think you have some pretty concerning baggage that will require getting over your negative self before you can accept adult guidance.
> 
> We're here for you sp, you can count on the elders to guide you through adolescence into manhood, leadership, benevolence and all those meritorious traits that makes a man a man's man. ... the kind of man that forgives stupidity of youth and looks only to enrich culture and manners.
> 
> Atta boy,
> 
> :




My post is accurate, yours is verbosity, I'm not trolling just making a point.

It would be great if you tried doing the same, rather than waffling on endlessly.: 

I'm sure if you applied your obvious talent to adding to the debate, rather than sniping at people, you could enrich the debate. 
You just appear fixated on the LNP verses the ALP, which is your prerogative, but it doesn't add much to the debate, just titillates those who agree and further alienates those who don't.

My post gave examples of the NBN rollout in Mandurah W.A, with the highest unemployment rate in Australia, yet one of the first roll out areas.

Andrews in Victoria, is now talking about a ring road around Melbourne, when he ridiculed the idea pre election.

We would love you to join in the debate, Tisme, rather than trying to control and dominate it.
Ata boy, were here for you also.


----------



## SirRumpole

drsmith said:


> You've hit bedrock with that one.




At least I quotes a piece by an identified individual unlike your quote of #4002 which was by "The Australian Financial Review". Why did they hide behind their masthead ?

And if you wish to dispute Michelle Rowland's opinion, please do so instead of just kicking the author in the shin.


----------



## drsmith

SirRumpole said:


> At least I quotes a piece by an identified individual unlike your quote of #4002 which was by "The Australian Financial Review". Why did they hide behind their masthead ?
> 
> And if you wish to dispute Michelle Rowland's opinion, please do so instead of just kicking the author in the shin.



What I posted back then was an opinion piece by the AFR. What you posted above and presented as the view of the paper was nothing of the sort. It was an opinion piece by the opposition spokeswoman for communications.  If you can go back one page in this thread, you can read to the end of the articles you post. 

Don't stay up too late tonight. We've strayed far enough from your original flawed criticism of the government in relation to the satellite network.


----------



## Bill M

I am in a peri-urban suburb of Sydney and finally the NBN FTTN has been rolled out here.

7 years ago I could not even get ADSL. I had to go wireless and pay high costs. We were on what they call a "pair gain" system which could only allow a few ADSL connections.

Then Telstra must have laid some extra cables and we got ADSL2+. That was such a step up and it was quite reliable.

Today I had my NBN FTTN connected and I am getting very good speeds and I love it. I am grateful that the Government is building this network. I only wish that they had stuck to the original NBN that Labor Planned which would have been much better quality and future proofed. 

My old Monthly plan was 100 GB for $76 p/m. Under the new NBN plan I get better speeds and it is *unlimited *and I have access to a VOIP fixed landline if I want it. (calls costs are extra but I do not use the land line.) So even saving money for a better service.

So all in all I am very happy with my NBN, glad that we got something even though it's not the best we could have had, cheers.


----------



## drsmith

Bill M said:


> My old Monthly plan was 100 GB for $76 p/m.



I've had iinet ADSL with VOIP for many years now for $60. It too is a legacy plan but is broadly similar to their current $60 naked offering.


----------



## sptrawler

Bill M said:


> I am in a peri-urban suburb of Sydney and finally the NBN FTTN has been rolled out here.
> 
> 7 years ago I could not even get ADSL. I had to go wireless and pay high costs. We were on what they call a "pair gain" system which could only allow a few ADSL connections.
> 
> Then Telstra must have laid some extra cables and we got ADSL2+. That was such a step up and it was quite reliable.
> 
> Today I had my NBN FTTN connected and I am getting very good speeds and I love it. I am grateful that the Government is building this network. I only wish that they had stuck to the original NBN that Labor Planned which would have been much better quality and future proofed.
> 
> My old Monthly plan was 100 GB for $76 p/m. Under the new NBN plan I get better speeds and it is *unlimited *and I have access to a VOIP fixed landline if I want it. (calls costs are extra but I do not use the land line.) So even saving money for a better service.
> 
> So all in all I am very happy with my NBN, glad that we got something even though it's not the best we could have had, cheers.




Bill, if you don't mind me asking, did you stay with Telstra


----------



## Bill M

sptrawler said:


> Bill, if you don't mind me asking, did you stay with Telstra




No, I changed over to TPG FTTN 25/5 plan. That costs me $69.99 P/M. After some initial connection problems it got sorted and now I am getting download speeds of between 23 to 24 MBPS. The tech guy said my line would handle 61 MBPS downloads max.

I just had a thought about my first ADSL connection about 16 years ago, cost me $86 p/m for 1 GB at a 1 MBPS download speed plus line rental. So costs have come down about 30% over the years.


----------



## Tisme

Bill M said:


> No, I changed over to TPG FTTN 25/5 plan. That costs me $69.99 P/M. After some initial connection problems it got sorted and now I am getting download speeds of between 23 to 24 MBPS. The tech guy said my line would handle 61 MBPS downloads max.
> 
> I just had a thought about my first ADSL connection about 16 years ago, cost me $86 p/m for 1 GB at a 1 MBPS download speed plus line rental. So costs have come down about 30% over the years.





Should be able to live stream a widescreen movie with medium resolution without stutter.

I have my fingers crossed for a house hookup so I can go the 4k tv initially and then the UHD. 

I have my houses and commercials networked, not only the computers, but the stereo amps, tvs, dvds, NVR and POI camera systems, the security access systems, intercomms, etc and use web/browser based access to the automation systems, so the NBN will be good for me. I have been cisco ready for like forevva, but I never use the voip phones; been tempted by the beckoning screen, but have resisted.


----------



## SirRumpole

Rumblings in the interior about possible loss of landlines

*Rural phone users protest Productivity Commission suggestion landline phones be replaced by inferior satellite voice service*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-02/rural-residents-worry-landline-phone-phase-out/8234800


----------



## Tisme

Takes a bit of time for their site to build (must have had Telstra build it on an IBM platform), but now you can check your address to find out when you can access the NBN.

They had to employ an american accent @ $3m/annum wage to tow the LNP's line.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/connect-home-or-business/check-your-address.html


----------



## drsmith

Quigs didn't do too bad bearing in mind he rolled out naff all.


> CEO Mike Quigley, who last year donated his mega wage to charity, saw his salary package jump by more than $100,000 to $1.96 million.




http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...0e844e431?sv=e972bbde057cb508ffffe14a3f8aa44d


----------



## Tisme

Well I was stoked to find out my beach house will get NBN by years end. That was until I read the whole story that told me I get FTTN. Jebus Christ what the hell are we paying, what will no doubt be $100bn for?

"MTM" should stand for Malcolm Turnbull Mess. I lose because the LNP canned a fibre system to garner  votes from an electorate with NFI. I get pinged because lazy Australians can't be fagged questioning their blind faith in politicians. It's all about me and I'm not happy Jan.

Why bother killing ADSL if it isn't giving any real benefit?

https://iihelp.iinet.net.au/Speeds_on_the_NBN_network_explained


----------



## smallwolf

Tisme - you win some, you lose some.... I will be getting HFC....

.... BUT I HAVE TO WAIT TIL 2019 TO GET IT. (And I live about 15min from center of Brisbane)


----------



## Tisme

smallwolf said:


> Tisme - you win some, you lose some.... I will be getting HFC....
> 
> .... BUT I HAVE TO WAIT TIL 2019 TO GET IT. (And I live about 15min from center of Brisbane)





B4stard!!!!!


----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> Jebus Christ what the hell are we paying, what will no doubt be $100bn for?



On what information do you base that figure ?


----------



## Tisme

drsmith said:


> On what information do you base that figure ?




Not yours for sure.

It's already at $56bn from the original mid 20's, so my crystal ball says $100bn to finish. 

Of course I blame Noco for the blow out...he voted for Malcolm


----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> It's already at $56bn from the original mid 20's, so my crystal ball says $100bn to finish.



For a second time.......

On what information do you base that figure ?


----------



## Tisme

drsmith said:


> For a second time.......
> 
> On what information do you base that figure ?




for an umpteenth time f%&k orf  wot a dill


----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> for an umpteenth time f%&k orf  wot a dill



You posted it.

For a third time, on what information do you base that figure ?


----------



## SirRumpole

I tried the NBN's new website. Apparently I can get Sky Muster only but my neighbor 100 metres away can get fixed wireless. I'm actually closer to the place where they put all those aerials. I think I may wait a bit.


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> I tried the NBN's new website. Apparently I can get Sky Muster only but my neighbor 100 metres away can get fixed wireless. I'm actually closer to the place where they put all those aerials. I think I may wait a bit.




You may not have a choice.


----------



## SirRumpole

Tisme said:


> You may not have a choice.




I heard something about having your home phone cut off if you don't NBN by a certain date. Is that right ?


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> I heard something about having your home phone cut off if you don't NBN by a certain date. Is that right ?




You might have to put that up to the topic umpire to see if your statement is agreeable to him. 

Prima facie I would think you correct


----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> You might have to put that up to the topic umpire to see if your statement is agreeable to him.



I'm just interested in the basis of your cost claim.

For the fourth time, on what information do you base that figure ?


----------



## sptrawler

Well I posted years ago when discussing with Sydboy, that the nbn was available at my place in Mandurah, also at the two places next door, they weren't connected.
I also said my two sons and two daughters, didn't have the nbn and were completely wireless.
Well it must be three years on, and nothing has changed, biggest white elephant ever.


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> Well I posted years ago when discussing with Sydboy, that the nbn was available at my place in Mandurah, also at the two places next door, they weren't connected.
> I also said my two sons and two daughters, didn't have the nbn and were completely wireless.
> Well it must be three years on, and nothing has changed, biggest white elephant ever.




Indefensible is the word I've been using when saturating the webs with my groundless "opinions".

I can understand how dried up crusty people, who pine for the old days of gramophone records, Billy Hughes and lard sandwiches would be happy with third world connections, but for the rest of us who look forward to change with quality product ......... well I think it will be luutzu who gets to see that at this rate,


----------



## Tisme

"Never change horses in midstream" is one of those truisms that is particularly relevant in the construction and engineering industries. Most of us know how changing even minor things on a home construction results in extensions of time and a disproportionate increase in final price.

We all know the twofold spite behind Abbott's revised NBN plan: 1) to win govt 2) to keep rival Malcolm closer. 

The leadership teams have been revolving doors of industry oracles who leave once they realise what a pup and hotchpotch the network is to be and potential wrecker of their individual reputations.

The uptake says heaps about the product: "Today nbn services are available through retail service providers to 4.2 million homes and businesses with 1.8 million already connected around the country."

Meanwhile the site is crowing about FttDP which apparently means Netcomm will drop fibre to copper multiplexing switches in the telstra pits. I wonder if they will use the same empty fruit juice bottles and duct tape to keep the moisture and water out Telstra techs do now with PSTN.

_“We are delighted to be leading the world in the deployment of FTTC technology. This demonstrates that *nbn* is on the cutting edge of technological advancement in the global telecoms market._

_“Our goal is to deliver broadband in the most cost and time efficient manner possible and FTTC will help us do this in many parts of the *nbn™* network.”_


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> I heard something about having your home phone cut off if you don't NBN by a certain date. Is that right ?




 Just found a video that reminds me of .....


----------



## Tisme

NBN Corporate plan $56bn with $20bn loan/equity topped up from Mathius in Nov 2016

in the words of Ziggy in 12th Dec 2013: "It would reduce costs and bring forward revenues, reducing peak funding from an estimated $73bn to $41bn under the revised outlook."

That what you pay the big bucks for, expert costings that are blowout by 1.37 times in less time  than two years later.


----------



## SirRumpole

Tisme said:


> Just found a video that reminds me of .....





 Yeah it reminds me of someone very well.


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> Yeah it reminds me of someone very well.





It's like kismet of two people from the other side of the tracks converging into an undeniable truth!!


----------



## overhang

FTTN is currently being built in my town and it looks like I have lost out with Turnbulls NBN lottery.  I will be 800-900m from the node so won't be much of an upgrade.  It really is a poorly planned expensive waste to spend so much money on a project that people will see such vast differences in results which makes upgrading a lot more difficult in the future.  There will be some time in the future where 20mbps won't cut it, the problem is you're going to have some people on 20mbps whilst many others on 50mbps plus in which case we either spend big $ upgrading to FTTP or we spend big dollars on adding more nodes so that more people are within close proximity to a node.

Two major broken promises


   The network will be built by 2016
   Everyone would have access to at least 25mbps


----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> NBN Corporate plan $56bn with $20bn loan/equity topped up from Mathius in Nov 2016
> 
> in the words of Ziggy in 12th Dec 2013: "It would reduce costs and bring forward revenues, reducing peak funding from an estimated $73bn to $41bn under the revised outlook."
> 
> That what you pay the big bucks for, expert costings that are blowout by 1.37 times in less time  than two years later.



You need to first substantiate the basis of your $100bn figure before moving on to other numbers.

For the fifth time, on what information do you base that figure ?


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> You need to first substantiate the basis of your $100bn figure before moving on to other numbers.
> 
> For the fifth time, on what information do you base that figure ?



Maybe he used the same calculator the coalition used when calculating Labors FTTP NBN cost during the 2013 election, of course those figures turned out to be heavily inflated.  2016 and still no promised NBN to half the country.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> Maybe he used the same calculator the coalition used when calculating Labors FTTP NBN cost during the 2013 election, of course those figures turned out to be heavily inflated.  2016 and still no promised NBN to half the country.



You could always ask Tisme by PM if you like.

Based on his responses so far in this thread, I don't fancy your chances getting the answer.


----------



## Tisme

overhang said:


> Maybe he used the same calculator the coalition used when calculating Labors FTTP NBN cost during the 2013 election, of course those figures turned out to be heavily inflated.  2016 and still no promised NBN to half the country.





Nothing as clever as that, just some common sense apolitical observation based on practical experience with govt projects and very basic statistical prediction modelling. Not being a highly paid Liberal Party rocket scientist means my crystal ball has been and will continue to be more realistic than the deliberately  understated crowd pleasing cost in the report. 

Secondly I actually have decades of commercial, practical engineering and installation experience in comms, automation, light pipes, etc. Of course being at the coal face is nothing when you can get your smarts from Newscorp, the LNP , sympathetic web articles and glossy magazines. 

The figure so far is the anticipated ceiling govt equity amount of  $56bn, which is ~twice the 2013 electoral promise amount. The gross cost of the NBN itself is a different figure that is expected to diverge from the govt equity as sales revenue is ploughed back into capital expediture. The NBN predicted revenue is based on predicted uptake, which can't be enforced until the DSlams are turned off and so far their predictions have been way off..... as the old saying went "almost criminal".

As of 25 Feb :

2646158 premises ready for hard connection service or have cable running in the vicinity.  Got to feel sorry for the satellite and wireless premises = 878307 which is no small figure


----------



## Tisme

drsmith said:


> You could always ask Tisme by PM if you like.
> 
> Based on his responses so far in this thread, I don't fancy your chances getting the answer.




I have my very own fanboy !!!!! Gay much


----------



## drsmith

Peak funding is represented by the sum of capital expenditure to build the network and operating cash flow. This is outlined on page 47 of the 2017 corporate plan.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco2/documents/nbn-corporate-plan-2017.pdf

It is expected to reach $48.6bn by June 30 2020 by which time the rollout is expected to be complete. How much peak funding rises beyond that will depend on the operating cash flow of the business.


----------



## drsmith

Having now reached the three quarter mark in the financial year to June 30 2017, it's perhaps time to review the progress of the rollout.

4,531,300 premises have now been passed as at March 30 leaving 910,700 to be passed to reach the June 30 target of 5,442k in the 2016 corporate plan. The average weekly rate required to reach this target over the next 13 weeks to June 29 is 70,054. The rollout over the last 7 weeks to March 30 has passed 439,214 premises at an average rate of 62,745 per week. The average rate over the 13 weeks from Dec 29 to March 30 is 59,448 per week.

This progress indicates that if the rollout falls short of the June 30 2017 target above, it will only be by a small margin.


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> Having now reached the three quarter mark in the financial year to June 30 2017, it's perhaps time to review the progress of the rollout.
> 
> 4,531,300 premises have now been passed as at March 30 leaving 910,700 to be passed to reach the June 30 target of 5,442k in the 2016 corporate plan. The average weekly rate required to reach this target over the next 13 weeks to June 29 is 70,054. The rollout over the last 7 weeks to March 30 has passed 439,214 premises at an average rate of 62,745 per week. The average rate over the 13 weeks from Dec 29 to March 30 is 59,448 per week.
> 
> This progress indicates that if the rollout falls short of the June 30 2017 target above, it will only be by a small margin.




I can't fault the work ethic of the NBN workers at ground level.  They've been working long hours, 8-7PM and even as late as 9pm, working Sundays too.  So it's good to see their hard work is making progress.  The interesting thing is that last year they seemed to shift the rollout schedule, all of a sudden places such as mine that had no date were being built a few months later and other places that had a date marked for the next 6 months have been put back years. 

I have heard though that NBN co are targeting areas they can roll out FTTN faster which is regional areas where they generally aren't contending with concrete path ways over their node positions and problematic traffic.  If this is true their ambitious roll-out targets are likely to hit a few snags later in the roll-out but politically speaking might be late enough that it won't hurt Turnbull at the 2019 election given they would still have a year to complete the roll out post election.


----------



## Tisme

overhang said:


> I can't fault the work ethic of the NBN workers at ground level.  They've been working long hours, 8-7PM and even as late as 9pm, working Sundays too.  So it's good to see their hard work is making progress.  The interesting thing is that last year they seemed to shift the rollout schedule, all of a sudden places such as mine that had no date were being built a few months later and other places that had a date marked for the next 6 months have been put back years.
> 
> I have heard though that NBN co are targeting areas they can roll out FTTN faster which is regional areas where they generally aren't contending with concrete path ways over their node positions and problematic traffic.  If this is true their ambitious roll-out targets are likely to hit a few snags later in the roll-out but politically speaking might be late enough that it won't hurt Turnbull at the 2019 election given they would still have a year to complete the roll out post election.





Have you compared connection ready to cable roughed in data?


----------



## overhang

Tisme said:


> Have you compared connection ready to cable roughed in data?




Was this reply meant for me or Drsmith?  I didn't present any data.


----------



## Tisme

overhang said:


> Was this reply meant for me or Drsmith?  I didn't present any data.




You think the alternative would result in any plausible outcome?


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> I can't fault the work ethic of the NBN workers at ground level.  They've been working long hours, 8-7PM and even as late as 9pm, working Sundays too.  So it's good to see their hard work is making progress.  The interesting thing is that last year they seemed to shift the rollout schedule, all of a sudden places such as mine that had no date were being built a few months later and other places that had a date marked for the next 6 months have been put back years.
> 
> I have heard though that NBN co are targeting areas they can roll out FTTN faster which is regional areas where they generally aren't contending with concrete path ways over their node positions and problematic traffic.  If this is true their ambitious roll-out targets are likely to hit a few snags later in the roll-out but politically speaking might be late enough that it won't hurt Turnbull at the 2019 election given they would still have a year to complete the roll out post election.



There's no doubt that 2017/18 will be the acid test as they have to sustain an average of 70k premises per week to reach the June 30 2018 target of 9.1m (9,062k in 2016 corporate plan). That being said, HFC should be in full swing which should help boost the numbers. There's some scope for catch up in 2018/19 if June 30 2018 falls a little short.

If they've continued to set internal targets that are more aggressive than their publically published targets, a few snags shouldn't be a problem as they haven't been thus far relative to the delays identified in leaks of internal targets from early last year.


----------



## Tisme

https://www.lifehacker.com.au/2017/03/australias-internet-speeds-are-a-global-embarrassment/


----------



## drsmith

Latest word from inside the tent is that the rollout will reach the June 30 4017 target of 5,442k premises passed with perhaps a little to spare.



> Mr Ryan said NBN would make a further one million premises ready for service by the end of the financial year.
> 
> "The reality is, the only way you make one million FTTP RFS (ready for service) in three months in Australia – is to leverage existing network assets," he said.
> 
> "The other exciting point for me to make here is that nearly every home in this country is either in build, design or construction."




The rollout had passed 4,531,300 premises as at March 30 2017.

http://www.afr.com/technology/web/n...es-to-fibretodriveway-rollout-20170410-gvi9y0

Also of interest in the above is the FTTdp footprint is to be expanded by a further 300k taking that footprint to one million.


----------



## pixel

drsmith said:


> 5,442k premises passed



Regardless of how many premises are being passed, those numbers mean diddly-squat. In areas like our suburb where FTTN is planned - and we're still only scheduled for the second quarter 2018 - the copper between node and premises is still a very limiting factor. New cables have been put in between Exchange and roadside nodes less than ten years ago, but the conduits from there to homes are badly corroded and frequently flooded, rendering even simple phone calls scratchy and unreliable; ADSL 2+ doesn't stand a chance. It's the final leg that needs to be replaced. Otherwise, a large portion of several thousand premises in our suburb might as well stay with 4G wireless and make do with speeds between 1 and 10 Mbps.


----------



## Junior

We have Optus 4G wireless and download speeds are generally around 10Mbps.

I'm wondering how quick 5G wireless will be?  NBN infrastructure may well end up being a monumental waste of $$$ if wireless continues to become quicker and quicker.

http://www.news.com.au/technology/g...g/news-story/f0d7227b7cbc95630c768bee8b17e854


----------



## pixel

Junior said:


> We have Optus 4G wireless and download speeds are generally around 10Mbps.
> 
> I'm wondering how quick 5G wireless will be?  NBN infrastructure may well end up being a monumental waste of $$$ if wireless continues to become quicker and quicker.
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/technology/g...g/news-story/f0d7227b7cbc95630c768bee8b17e854



No doubt about that.
FTTH was the best solution at the time it was conceived. It needed to be rolled out at speed, so the Nation could reap the benefits within a reasonably short time.
Projected transmission speeds would well have been sufficient for a great many users for years to come, but users who wanted more could upgrade to 5G and any other technology yet to be invented.
In technology, the next step up is always just around the corner; but I would argue that FTTH might well have encouraged companies to increase speeds on fibre - if only it had been made available within a reasonable time frame. The politicking and bickering have turned a great initial concept into a soon-to-be monumental White Elephant and waste of $Billions, regardless of final mode of implementation.


----------



## Junior

It's a sad state of affairs.  Let's upgrade our internet connectivity using the latest and greatest technology!

.......but take 15 years to implement so it's outdated by the time everyone is online ;(


----------



## rb250660

My partners apartment in Japan has wireless broadband. It gets 50Mbit down and 5Mbit up for 3,500 yen a month unlimited. Australia is so fkn pathetic.


----------



## Tisme

Had friends from Cairns down for the long weekend. Rather despondently they let it be know how impressed they were with my 20meg ADSl connection compared to their $100/month NBN connection which slows down from walk to crawl at night as fellow neighbours settle into cyberspace. If only they had a choice of rollback.


----------



## Tisme

Oh I forgot to mention that boxes and conduits have appeared on the back of one of my industrial sheds. That's not to say NBN is available, but it's going past the premises and that's what counts.


----------



## Tisme

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco2/documents/Q3-FY17-external-results-presentation.pdf

Premises Declared RFS* refers to homes and businesses passed by the active network and ready for service, including premises activated *and those which can’t yet access a service* (i.e Service Class Zero or equivalent). NBN Co releases premises to our Retail Service Providers subject to premises passed and serviceability criteria.


----------



## drsmith

There may be fewer homes to connect than previously expected,


> NBN Co boss Bill Morrow has revealed fewer homes than expected might need to be connected to the National Broadband Network, with the reduction in the number of overall connections likely to have an impact on the company’s forecasts.
> 
> The company relies on geospatial databases to build its designs that allocate when and how the NBN is designed to a home or business. According to Mr Morrow, there’s a discernible difference in the number of homes that NBN Co expects to connect in any given area and how many there actually are.
> 
> “I think this is a database issue, in terms of the recordkeeping,” he said at a Senate Estimates Hearing on Thursday.
> 
> “We keep tweaking the numbers because it’s an estimate but it literally is hundreds of thousands less than what we had thought,” he said.
> 
> Mr Morrow said the lower number of premises could mean the cost of connecting homes to the copper-based fibre-to-the-node (FTTN) and fixed wireless footprints of the NBN edges up.
> 
> The cost of connecting a home to FTTN currently stands at around $2100.
> 
> The comments come as NBN Co puts the final touches on its next corporate plan, which is due in August.
> 
> NBN Co is currently expected to make 9.1 million homes and businesses ready to receive a NBN service by 2018, however, that number could likely be revised.
> 
> A NBN Co spokeswoman told _The Australian_ the company expects any impact on cost and size to be minimal.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...w/news-story/51f19fdbaac580446c5033a58a1c68d1


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

As the starter of this thread I should make a few comments.

I believe that Mr. Rudd and Senator Conroy to have been the two biggest dills ever involved in rolling out a communications platform to a nation, Australia, conceived, as many upper class nitwits, were on an Airline paper towel. I must admit to being a member of the mile high club.

Nonetheless we are still paying for it and Conroy and Rudd have moved on to greater things though I doubt if their contribution will ever appear kindly in the history books. 

As a mere citizen it seems impossible to me that all of Australia could not be served by satellite technology. It is clean, requires little digging and covers a large amount. 

Even if Rudd and Conroy, had the oomph to mile high, they could not have buggered up satellite technology. If they couldn't do it at a mile high, it would be well nigh impossible to do it in space.

So my question is.

Why don't we have it now. Digging trenches is so old world. 

gg


----------



## Tisme

Garpal Gumnut said:


> As the starter of this thread I should make a few comments.
> 
> I believe that Mr. Rudd and Senator Conroy to have been the two biggest dills ever involved in rolling out a communications platform to a nation, Australia, conceived, as many upper class nitwits, were on an Airline paper towel. I must admit to being a member of the mile high club.
> 
> Nonetheless we are still paying for it and Conroy and Rudd have moved on to greater things though I doubt if their contribution will ever appear kindly in the history books.
> 
> As a mere citizen it seems impossible to me that all of Australia could not be served by satellite technology. It is clean, requires little digging and covers a large amount.
> 
> Even if Rudd and Conroy, had the oomph to mile high, they could not have buggered up satellite technology. If they couldn't do it at a mile high, it would be well nigh impossible to do it in space.
> 
> So my question is.
> 
> Why don't we have it now. Digging trenches is so old world.
> 
> gg




Sky Muster maxes out at 25megs which is not going to be enough bandwidth for future applications


----------



## drsmith

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I believe that Mr. Rudd and Senator Conroy to have been the two biggest dills ever involved in rolling out a communications platform to a nation, Australia, conceived, as many upper class nitwits, were on an Airline paper towel. I must admit to being a member of the mile high club.
> 
> Nonetheless we are still paying for it and Conroy and Rudd have moved on to greater things though I doubt if their contribution will ever appear kindly in the history books.



It could have been worse.

Messrs Rudd and Conroy after looking out the aircraft windows could have decided to commence with pastoral properties by laying fibre across the desert.


----------



## sptrawler

I just think the funny thing about the NBN is:
A gas pipeline from NW of WA to connect to the Eastern States grid $9 billlion = too expensive.
A pipeline to move water fro the Kimberly down the West coast to Perth $4 billion = too expensive

An internet upgrade to replace something that is already there $80 billion= a brilliant brain fart.
We really do deserve what we get, if you ran your personal finances that way, you would be in deep manure.IMO


----------



## sptrawler

Tisme said:


> Sky Muster maxes out at 25megs which is not going to be enough bandwidth for future applications



Your spot on, not enough bandwidth to support the unemployed/underemployed, gaming 24/7.


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> Your spot on, not enough bandwidth to support the unemployed/underemployed, gaming 24/7.




When the PSTN gets shutdown and IP transition occurs the load is going to drag on the system. When the IP transition of free to "air" occurs it will further degrade the available band width. When satellite transition to hardwire and wireless occurs same problem.

Increased live streaming at medium to high def chews up more juice and puts more dollars in ISP's, pockets

25megs pfft.


----------



## drsmith

The rollout update to May 25 shows premises RFS has now passed 5 million.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam...lout-metrics/nbn-rollout-metrics-25052017.pdf

The rollout current as at the above date by type compared to forecasts to June 30 2017 from the 2016 Corporate Plan are as follows (current/forecast),

Brownfields: 3737k/4180k.
Greenfields: 377k/370k.
Fixed Wireless: 504k/480k.
Satellite: 417k/412k.
Total: 5035k/5442k.

To reach the 5442k target in the remaining 5 weeks and one day to June 30, a further 407k premises need to be passed at an average of about 79k per week. The remaining brownfields specific target is a little higher as other elements above have already reached or passed June 30 2017 targets. That's 443k at an average of about 86k per week.

Finder is no longer a useful advance guide as to premises RFS as its rollout region list doesn't appear to have updated with areas where the brownfields rollout has commenced after September 2016.


----------



## Tisme

NBN coming to my current home ....only FTTN available ..... wot's the point of even trying to compare the original idea with the current one. Old copper bell cable lines FFS .


----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> NBN coming to my current home ....only FTTN available ..... wot's the point of even trying to compare the original idea with the current one. Old copper bell cable lines FFS .



You're a bit late to that debate but there is over 200 pages in this thread  since it was started in 2011, many of which are dedicated to the relative merit between the current government's rollout and the former Labor government's rollout.


----------



## sptrawler

Tisme said:


> NBN coming to my current home ....only FTTN available ..... wot's the point of even trying to compare the original idea with the current one. Old copper bell cable lines FFS .




Well that's pretty good, I have finally talked a mate into connecting in Mandurah W.A, it was one of the first roll outs.
Well he was rather circumspect, because he had taken days off work in the early days to get a connection, it didn't happen.
Well he fell off his motorbike and broke his leg, so thought great opportunity to connect, what a hoot no signal at the node.
Before anyone jumps in, it is fibre to the house.
Absolute Labor FFF up0.IMO


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> Well that's pretty good, I have finally talked a mate into connecting in Mandurah W.A, it was one of the first roll outs.
> Well he was rather circumspect, because he had taken days off work in the early days to get a connection, it didn't happen.
> Well he fell off his motorbike and broke his leg, so thought great opportunity to connect, what a hoot no signal at the node.
> Before anyone jumps in, it is fibre to the house.
> Absolute Labor FFF up0.IMO




That's even worse ... forbidden fruit !!


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> Well that's pretty good, I have finally talked a mate into connecting in Mandurah W.A, it was one of the first roll outs.
> Well he was rather circumspect, because he had taken days off work in the early days to get a connection, it didn't happen.
> Well he fell off his motorbike and broke his leg, so thought great opportunity to connect, what a hoot no signal at the node.
> Before anyone jumps in, it is fibre to the house.
> Absolute Labor FFF up0.IMO




I'm wondering if your friend is in a similar situation as my sister in Perth. She has fibre at her home that was installed decades ago, but NBN won't use it....nothing directly to do with the Labor Party nor, I'm supposing, the LNP?

Meanwhile:  http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/archive/2021641


----------



## Indoril

Tisme said:


> Had friends from Cairns down for the long weekend. Rather despondently they let it be know how impressed they were with my 20meg ADSl connection compared to their $100/month NBN connection which slows down from walk to crawl at night as fellow neighbours settle into cyberspace. If only they had a choice of rollback.




Supposedly a lot of people have been experiencing this and I believe it's due to the accelerated rollout and the fact that NBN don't have the backhaul capacity to service all the customers at this time. A lot of people are concerned about lack of fibre to the home and having to settle with copper (to the node), but I'm more worried about their backhaul capacity. Sure it might be over subscribed now because of the accelerated rollout but when, if ever, will it be upgraded? Are they even obligated to do so?


----------



## overhang

So I have lost out on this incompetent Liberal government NBN lotto, ended up about 900m to the node which has resulted in a speed of 30mbs.  The worst part is this sham of a government will use me as part of their statistics that people don't want high speed internet when I drop down to the 25mb plan when the reality is I physically can't get high speed internet.  It really is a disgrace what they have done to this rollout, the country divided with such a huge array of speeds. There will be people who have access to 1gb download speeds and then people like me who are stuck with 30mbs for who only knows how long.

The speed test results. http://www.speedtest.net/result/6373136822.png


----------



## Tisme

overhang said:


> So I have lost out on this incompetent Liberal government NBN lotto, ended up about 900m to the node which has resulted in a speed of 30mbs.  The worst part is this sham of a government will use me as part of their statistics that people don't want high speed internet when I drop down to the 25mb plan when the reality is I physically can't get high speed internet.  It really is a disgrace what they have done to this rollout, the country divided with such a huge array of speeds. There will be people who have access to 1gb download speeds and then people like me who are stuck with 30mbs for who only knows how long.
> 
> The speed test results. http://www.speedtest.net/result/6373136822.png





Last mile connections are a disgrace and even worse the availability absence of exchange to premises light pipes.

Only welded on LNP tragics would approve and defend the Heath Robinson mess that has subsidised the Testra shares at the expense of an NBN.


----------



## drsmith

Premises RFS have increased dramatically in the past few weeks but this has been at the expense of an increased proportion of service class zero.

The rollout will pass the June 30 2017 target of 5,442k premises this week if the results past two weeks are replicated this week. It's a far cry from the disaster that Labor's rollout evolved into.


----------



## sptrawler

It is just an $80 billion idiotic tax payer expense, that will cost the tax payer more to access what they currently get for free, the ACCC should be checking out the Government for scamming the Australian public.IMO


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> Premises RFS have increased dramatically in the past few weeks but this has been at the expense of an increased proportion of service class zero.
> 
> The rollout will pass the June 30 2017 target of 5,442k premises this week if the results past two weeks are replicated this week. It's a far cry from the disaster that Labor's rollout evolved into.




I think it would be quiet naive to suggest that NBN co wouldn't have found extra efficiency in the rollout of Labors FTTP, it was still in the early stages when the coalition took over in 2013.  Reminding you that the Liberal party did promise us the FTTN mess would be complete by 2016, it is on track to be 4 years behind schedule on that one.  But it makes much more sense to spend the extra time and do it once than building this colossal disaster that the Liberal party are building.  FTTP had such an enormous scope for upgrades without the costly exercise of ripping up cables but it will be an enormous cost to increase FTTN beyond the 25mbps that some people have.

The coalition plan is like gutting a home but leaving the 60 year old rotting redgum stumps that are all out of level when they should have replaced them with new concrete stumps but that would have cost a little extra but lasted a lifetime.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> I think it would be quiet naive to suggest that NBN co wouldn't have found extra efficiency in the rollout of Labors FTTP, it was still in the early stages when the coalition took over in 2013.  Reminding you that the Liberal party did promise us the FTTN mess would be complete by 2016, it is on track to be 4 years behind schedule on that one.  But it makes much more sense to spend the extra time and do it once than building this colossal disaster that the Liberal party are building.  FTTP had such an enormous scope for upgrades without the costly exercise of ripping up cables but it will be an enormous cost to increase FTTN beyond the 25mbps that some people have.
> 
> The coalition plan is like gutting a home but leaving the 60 year old rotting redgum stumps that are all out of level when they should have replaced them with new concrete stumps but that would have cost a little extra but lasted a lifetime.



As a long time participant in this thread, there's lots I remember.


----------



## overhang

It seems NBN co are just having a lend of us now



> As the “Next-Generation” addition suggests, NG-PON2 is the latest version fibre technology standard that *nbn* could use to augment the current GPON protocol.
> 
> *nbn* recently conducted lab trials that indicate a potentially incredible future for FTTP tech.
> 
> These NG-PON2 tests on FTTP technology hit wholesale speeds of up to 10Gbps symmetrical (10Gbps download and upload). ^
> 
> That’s 10 times faster than the current top wholesale 1Gbps FTTP download speeds on GPON technology.



http://www.nbnco.com.au/blog/industry/gpon-vs-ng-pon2.html


Why do they continue to invest money into upgrades for a technology that only 25% of the country will have access to (and the 25% already on the fastest connection)?  It just further indicates how much the Liberal party screwed this project up.  Many of us are destined to have speeds up to a maximum of 100mps until the copper is ripped up and replaced with fibre as it should have been in the first place.  And yet the lucky 25% will be able to access speeds of 10gbps without the need to touch the optic fibre, talk about a digital divide.


----------



## Tisme

overhang said:


> It seems NBN co are just having a lend of us now
> 
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/blog/industry/gpon-vs-ng-pon2.html
> 
> 
> Why do they continue to invest money into upgrades for a technology that only 25% of the country will have access to (and the 25% already on the fastest connection)?  It just further indicates how much the Liberal party screwed this project up.  Many of us are destined to have speeds up to a maximum of 100mps until the copper is ripped up and replaced with fibre as it should have been in the first place.  And yet the lucky 25% will be able to access speeds of 10gbps without the need to touch the optic fibre, talk about a digital divide.



I can't see copper being a problem, can you. Comms in this country has always been first class with a monopoly in charge of the networks:


----------



## drsmith

NBN announces the first FTTC (FTTdp) rollout locations,


> The company is the first broadband wholesaler in the world to roll the FTTC technology out on a mass scale and today marked the beginning of a trial in Coburg outside of Melbourne. The trial is designed to evaluate the construction and installation of its deployment ahead of the nationwide build that will commence in the coming months.




It was revealed in senate estimates recently that FTTdp is to be expanded beyond the currently 1m planned premises footprint.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-i...t-new-world-leading-broadband-technology.html


----------



## Analizer

WARNING: This only MT4/MT5 Trading Platform !


Welcome all professional traders!

Suggest your project counterpart which the world simply does not exist.
This project is compared with the periodic table of chemical elements.
At the outset, I should like to draw your attention to the built-in MT4/MT5 Tester on tick history.
I was the tester questioned about his work because he works for the tick history, which is automatically downloaded when you press a button.
Determine the type of downloaded tick history does not seem to be trying, since all the action takes place automatically within the code of the trading terminal MT.
I suggest open source code that loads from the file history arrays recorded you, getting rid of temporary breaks and begins playing with her constantly virtually connected robot fingering while 20 variables to find the best profit.
Can say also that the broker "Dukas Copy" offers teak with floating spread history that is not valid for any normal tester.
My Tester uses own tick history with 5-n digits after the point and with a fixed spread, which the robot "Exporter.ex4" automatically writes to a file in Append mode in to end of file.
There are many such brokers, but I'll tell you what exactly the broker I have all turned out is "BMFN Trader".
After you create them an account, you can use the broker's trading signals for trading situation analysis and records tick history in special files (to replenish trading account in "BMFN" is not necessary).
The project runs fine under Windows'XP SP3 (this is because of the use of the arbitration relationship between two brokers).
All that is required is to create two trading account with 5-n digits after the point, one for trading on a real account, and the second to use trading signals for the analysis of the market situation with fixed spread and to write tick history in a special file in mode "add at the end of the file".
Do not forget to specify the correct path with fixed spread broker with 5-th signs: this is done in the "Receiver.mq4" at line 766, with compilation in the old trading terminal "gct4setup.exe" (attached)
It is also worth noting that it is allowed to trade on the floating spread with 5-SW (robot "Receiver.ex4"), provided that the other robot ("Exporter.ex4") will work on a fixed spread with 5-n digits after the point (4-x signs I personally haven't tested).
Just look my video made at home, in order to understand how to set up this tester.
After recording a video, in the tester (Tracer_GR_E.mq4) and robots (Receiver.mq4, Exporter.mq4), some changes have been made:


the link to download/view the video instruction: https://youtu.be/A9p9RxFYHOQ


changes in the tester:
added mode "MINIMAL LAG mode FOR STATIC GAP ="            - the minimum size of the lag as qualifying the gap
added mode "USE TRAILING STOP mode FIRST [0/1] ="         - now you can use an old Trailing without addon's and whistles
added mode "USE built-in PROFIT SEARCH PROGRAMM [0/1] ="  - now search profit is 30 minutes (previously 6:00 hours)
added mode "(MG) DOUBLE DEFENCE MODE [0/1] ="             - modify comments closed MG orders changes
changes in robots is not significant and do not deserve their detailed parsing.
in the tester appeared able to bind variables between the variables for their uniform periodicity.
How to do it:
you need to create the program switches (see video: "-555") and enter "INTERLACING" variable number of intersections (maximum 6).


To download the project use the link: https://www.sendspace.com/file/iu1xmn


Enjoy !


----------



## Tisme

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-...ctor-shortcuts-on-low-pay/8626012?pfmredir=sm



> Unions say contractors working for the National Broadband Network are taking shortcuts on in-home installations, blaming low pay and pressure on the workers to complete jobs quickly.








_
_


----------



## Tisme

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ain-about-service-survey-20170616-gwsnng.html



> National Broadband Network customers are five times more likely to complain about their service than a non-NBN user, as frustrations continue to surround the nation's biggest infrastructure project.
> 
> More than 13,406 complaints were made to the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman about NBN services in the last financial year, which accounted for 11.9 per cent of all complaints received by the TIO, an increase from 5.4 per cent the year before.


----------



## Tisme

> We have total blackouts about 50% time(no internet, no phone, no emails,) was bad when we were first conected but then good for about 3 months, now just keeps cutting out




http://aussieoutages.com/status/nbnco


----------



## drsmith

ACCC investigation into consumer speeds on NBN,

https://tenplay.com.au/news/nationa...-launched-after-consumers-misled-by-nbn-speed


----------



## sptrawler

Tisme said:


> I can't see copper being a problem, can you. Comms in this country has always been first class with a monopoly in charge of the networks:
> 
> View attachment 71561




Well a friend of mine in Mandurah ( I've used his experiences in the past), has finally had the NBN connected. HIP HIP HOORAY.

Well Mandurah (W.A), one of the early Labor Government roll outs, is fibre to the home.

Well after much encouragement by me, he has finally connected and got off wireless, what a laugh it is slower.
He isn't happy. I'm just saying "hey it is fibre to the house, it don't get better than that".

Biggest waste of money Australia has ever spent, down the track we will find out who got the "backhander", for it. IMO


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> Well a friend of mine in Mandurah ( I've used his experiences in the past), has finally had the NBN connected. HIP HIP HOORAY.
> 
> Well Mandurah (W.A), one of the early Labor Government roll outs, is fibre to the home.
> 
> Well after much encouragement by me, he has finally connected and got off wireless, what a laugh it is slower.
> He isn't happy. I'm just saying "hey it is fibre to the house, it don't get better than that".
> 
> Biggest waste of money Australia has ever spent, down the track we will find out who got the "backhander", for it. IMO





I think you are delighted that your friend has been sold a pup, because it justifies your adhesion to the Liberal Party. There is a lot more to the system than just the physical light pipe and I think you are bright enough to know that and wise enough to know your vitriol to prove a moot point is a waste of time.

The fact is that the trunk is capable of far in excess of 100megs, but if you are going to connect an LNP 4 pot screamer engine to a V8 transmission it isn't going to give you V8 performance. You know the truth and you aren't convincing anyone other than other blinkered party faithful.


----------



## sptrawler

What happened, he was connected to the NBN (fibre to the house), he paid for the minimum 12gb supply.
When the techie checked it it was, 3gb, later we did a speed test it was 8gb.
You can put whatever spin you like on it, but it is just the facts, it isn't $80billion dollars better.
Also it is fibre to the premise, but no doubt, you will blame TONY .lol
I don't have to make excuses, nobody's paying me.


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> What happened, he was connected to the NBN (fibre to the house), he paid for the minimum 12gb supply.
> When the techie checked it it was, 3gb, later we did a speed test it was 8gb.
> You can put whatever spin you like on it, but it is just the facts, it isn't $80billion dollars better.
> Also it is fibre to the premise, but no doubt, you will blame TONY .lol
> I don't have to make excuses, nobody's paying me.





What ISP is supplying only 12megs WTF!!!. And you're saying the fibre and adsl are being offered in the same suburb.... I'm interested when the ADSL will be switched off in his area, he should have been notified?

And yes I agree $80bn for a pup when we could have had an all fibre offering in the majority of places instead of stitching corroded copper onto fibre onto corroded copper onto, whatever piece of scrap Telstra can find.


----------



## overhang

sptrawler said:


> What happened, he was connected to the NBN (fibre to the house), he paid for the minimum 12gb supply.
> When the techie checked it it was, 3gb, later we did a speed test it was 8gb.
> You can put whatever spin you like on it, but it is just the facts, it isn't $80billion dollars better.
> Also it is fibre to the premise, but no doubt, you will blame TONY .lol
> I don't have to make excuses, nobody's paying me.




Of course it's possible there is a fault in the line somewhere by NBN co.  It's quite apparent by your confusion over gbps and mbps that you're not in a position of expertise to comment on the matter.  But from your comments your friend must have purchased a 12mbps plan which is the slowest plan available.  So I question if your friend has the latest firmware update for his modem which may be causing the issues, my FTTN speed doubled after applying the firmware update.  Unlikely as extreme as you mention but his ISP might be too congested because they haven't purchased enough CVC capacity, this isn't a fault of NBN.

FTTP isn't a lottery like FTTN, your friend should be able to access 100mbps if he wants so there is a problem somewhere there that can be fixed.  Me, well mine is running smoothly at 30mbps and the only way to access the 100mbps is to do what Labor planned in the first place and rip up the copper and replace it with fibre.  I'd much rather be in your friends position that has a fixable solution.


----------



## Tisme

overhang said:


> Of course it's possible there is a fault in the line somewhere by NBN co.  It's quite apparent by your confusion over gbps and mbps that you're not in a position of expertise to comment on the matter.  But from your comments your friend must have purchased a 12mbps plan which is the slowest plan available.  So I question if your friend has the latest firmware update for his modem which may be causing the issues, my FTTN speed doubled after applying the firmware update.  Unlikely as extreme as you mention but his ISP might be too congested because they haven't purchased enough CVC capacity, this isn't a fault of NBN.
> 
> FTTP isn't a lottery like FTTN, your friend should be able to access 100mbps if he wants so there is a problem somewhere there that can be fixed.  Me, well mine is running smoothly at 30mbps and the only way to access the 100mbps is to do what Labor planned in the first place and rip up the copper and replace it with fibre.  I'd much rather be in your friends position that has a fixable solution.




Yes it sounds like he believed the LNP's loud hailer at the last election that 25megs could handle five streamed movies simultaneously ...... more like five looped GIFS .....


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> The rollout update to May 25 shows premises RFS has now passed 5 million.
> 
> http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam...lout-metrics/nbn-rollout-metrics-25052017.pdf
> 
> The rollout current as at the above date by type compared to forecasts to June 30 2017 from the 2016 Corporate Plan are as follows (current/forecast),
> 
> Brownfields: 3737k/4180k.
> Greenfields: 377k/370k.
> Fixed Wireless: 504k/480k.
> Satellite: 417k/412k.
> Total: 5035k/5442k.




Rollout stats to June 15 2017 are as follows (current/forecast),

Brownfields: 4103k/4180k.
Greenfields: 384k/370k.
Fixed Wireless: 509k/480k.
Satellite: 417k/412k.
Total: 5414k/5442k.

With 2 weeks to go to June 30, just 28k is required to reach the 2016 corporate plan target of 5,442k premises passed.

The upward spike in service class 0 has however continued with close to 20% of brownfields premises passed in the week to June 15 in that category. By comparison with Labor's FTTP, this was running at just over 1/3rd of the total brownfields rollout at June 30 2013.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam...lout-metrics/nbn-rollout-metrics-15062017.pdf


----------



## sptrawler

overhang said:


> Of course it's possible there is a fault in the line somewhere by NBN co.  It's quite apparent by your confusion over gbps and mbps that you're not in a position of expertise to comment on the matter.  But from your comments your friend must have purchased a 12mbps plan which is the slowest plan available.  So I question if your friend has the latest firmware update for his modem which may be causing the issues, my FTTN speed doubled after applying the firmware update.  Unlikely as extreme as you mention but his ISP might be too congested because they haven't purchased enough CVC capacity, this isn't a fault of NBN.
> 
> FTTP isn't a lottery like FTTN, your friend should be able to access 100mbps if he wants so there is a problem somewhere there that can be fixed.  Me, well mine is running smoothly at 30mbps and the only way to access the 100mbps is to do what Labor planned in the first place and rip up the copper and replace it with fibre.  I'd much rather be in your friends position that has a fixable solution.




Thanks for the info overhang, I will pass it on. The modem was supplied with the install, so you may well be right.
The gb/s as opposed to mb/s was my mistake, thanks for the correction, will try and post before the sunset red has set in.


----------



## PZ99

sptrawler said:


> Thanks for the info overhang, I will pass it on. The modem was supplied with the install, so you may well be right.
> The gb/s as opposed to mb/s was my mistake, thanks for the correction, will try and post before the sunset red has set in.



It might be worth posting the speed test on here for comparison? 
Interested in the ping reading 

Mine is Download - 23.77 Mbps
Upload speed - 4.77 Mbps
Ping 2ms


----------



## Tisme

PZ99 said:


> It might be worth posting the speed test on here for comparison?
> Interested in the ping reading
> 
> Mine is Download - 23.77 Mbps
> Upload speed - 4.77 Mbps
> Ping 2ms





Not knowing anything about the internet and technology, I should also point out that if you are using a dog computer your speeds will also be woof woof. e.g.if you are running XP don't expect win10 speeds and if you are running a 1.6 dual processor don't expect quad speeds. Ram is a major consideration


----------



## PZ99

I agree although I wouldn't expect the above to affect an online speed test.
My vista computer is 11 years old and has enough RAM to let me disable the paging file thingy.
This is important to me because it takes usage away from the HDD.

The Ping is the important thing. If the latency is too high it slows down everything.


----------



## nulla nulla

I connect through Telstra Cable, hopefully nbn will never come to my street.


----------



## Tisme

PZ99 said:


> I agree although I wouldn't expect the above to affect an online speed test.
> My vista computer is 11 years old and has enough RAM to let me disable the paging file thingy.
> This is important to me because it takes usage away from the HDD.
> 
> The Ping is the important thing. If the latency is too high it slows down everything.




Yeah well we could debate ping tests, but when it all boils down it's the download speed test that means an enjoyable experience.

From the previous various posts it is easily observable that many people have NFI how the net works, let alone how to quantify and qualify their ignorance of the topic. 

This of course is what Tony Abbott played on ..... the bogeyman ALP polly with a cockney accent trying to sell us a state of the art system that would cost taxpayers $23bn as it's commitment to a PPP rollout. Same as he hood winked the party faithful by decrying the ALP's "big black hole" that his policies have doubled in three+ short years.

No wonder LNP hacks are spitting personal venom at anything that moves .....  coming to terms the betrayal of their conscience must be unbearable, like telling all your friends how good a P76 is and buying one only to become the laughing stock of the community.


----------



## PZ99

Funny you should add a P76 into a discussion about ping. 
With a 9:1 compression ratio they ping like crazy on todays fuel. LOL


----------



## Tisme

PZ99 said:


> Funny you should add a P76 into a discussion about ping.
> With a 9:1 compression ratio they ping like crazy on todays fuel. LOL




Shameless segue comparison to the NBN:

1. But a simple cam profile change should take care of the effective compression ratio and some hardened exhaust valve seats = sorted, whereas with the NBN not having a fibre available in proximity of the premises means there is not opportunity for flexibility

2. Actually being a motor head myself, and one who wholesale modifies car engines in his spare time I must correct you on a technicality...... the real word is "pink" ........ a highly undesirable situation. the worst case being incipient knock

......whereas the NBN is a  "pig"... a highly undesirable situation of  bespoked, cobbled together use of redundant wiring that was the root cause of the need for a national network after decades in the hands of an LNP crony infiltrated delinquent telecoms monopoly, that deserve a big overt knock.


----------



## Tisme

nulla nulla said:


> I connect through Telstra Cable, hopefully nbn will never come to my street.
> 
> View attachment 71592




We used to delight in using speedtest on 4G phones which produced astronomical speeds far in excess of transmission tower capability. We used it to prove there is no weapon quite so powerful as a good statistic, as much as a lie that it is.


----------



## PZ99

So if I run a set of mallorys between my donk computer and my webers modem it should mitigate the pink ping and go faster? 

I have noticed my NBN speeds are faster at night when the air is crisp


----------



## Tisme

PZ99 said:


> So if I run a set of mallorys between my donk computer and my webers modem it should mitigate the pink ping and go faster?
> 
> I have noticed my NBN speeds are faster at night when the air is crisp





You are refreshingly wiser beyond your years and certainly wiser than dementia masquerading as a valid point of view.

Yes denser air is the reason for sure, not with standing of course the absence of the vacuous Mbps of the daytime McGyvers and Heath Robinsons running the NBN.


----------



## SirRumpole

I have noticed that my wireless broadband is slower most of the time.


----------



## sptrawler

I suppose what has to be asked is, will higher internet speeds, bring about the promised new age of technology based growth.
I doubt it, but it was a great way to blow $80billion, that we now have to pay for.
I hope time proves me wrong.
But I would have thought Dams in the North, pipelines heading South and Inter State gas pipelines, would have been a better spend.
With the left over lolly, you could have put in the high speed train, from Sydney to Melbourne.
Maybe had enough left over to connect Brisbane and update Port facilities around Australia.


----------



## PZ99

The NBN is off budget. We don't have to pay for it.


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> I suppose what has to be asked is, will higher internet speeds, bring about the promised new age of technology based growth.




I think that is already underway and being held back by lack of infrastructure.


----------



## sptrawler

Tisme said:


> I think that is already underway and being held back by lack of infrastructure.



Gosh, I can't wait to see it manifest itself, having said that they are putting in a new self serve at Riverton Forum Big W.


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> Gosh, I can't wait to see it manifest itself, having said that they are putting in a new self serve at Riverton Forum Big W.




Well of course her is always going to be things that are individual no interest functions.

But I can tell you when speaking at international symposiums about the future of telemetry, microcontroller automation systems, open protocols, wide area networks, etc back in the 80's there were a lot of oracles who could see no value nor future for such things.... all that time I wasted learning about how to design and build industrial computer, programming and networks was a waste of time LOL


----------



## sptrawler

Tisme said:


> Well of course her is always going to be things that are individual no interest functions.
> 
> But I can tell you when speaking at international symposiums about the future of telemetry, microcontroller automation systems, open protocols, wide area networks, etc back in the 80's there were a lot of oracles who could see no value nor future for such things.... all that time I wasted learning about how to design and build industrial computer, programming and networks was a waste of time LOL



You should go on the Melbourne comedy festival, maybe Rumpole could sit on your knee.lol


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> You should go on the Melbourne comedy festival, maybe Rumpole could sit on your knee.lol




 Like I say you come across as consumed by jealousy and hate, which is a little too late for a man who's what,  55 years old and chronologically expected to have a more affable maturity.


----------



## Tisme

For those who give a toss about your tax payer dollars being wasted for political advantage.

I wonder who's giving the oversight on this project; remembering Federal member Peter Garrett got the rounds for state govt licensed shonky contractors putting house insulation.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/CrappyNBN/?fref=mentions


----------



## Tisme

Yeah for our political masters playing politics with our future.

Surprisingly this online article is from the NewscorpLNP stable:

http://www.news.com.au/technology/o...s/news-story/dd8816e7f16799166dc2a7b89cc69528


----------



## drsmith

The NBN has passed over 5.6m premises as at June 29 2017. The June 30 2017 target from the  corporate plan published in H2 2015 was 5,442k premises. This puts to bed once and for all that the leaked information from early last year indicating delays related to more aggressive internal targets rather than the publically published targets.


----------



## Tisme

Get involved so we get to the truth of what we got.

https://www.choice.com.au/broadband


----------



## Tisme

And to put it in perspective of how quality versus quantity, some examples of NBN installs:


1. Kinked conduit:







2. Under House





3. External






4. WTF






5. Peno


----------



## Tisme

So the West Australians don't feel left out here's some examples of quality installs in Victoria Park:


----------



## Tisme

https://www.lifehacker.com.au/2017/...-seven-states-and-capital-cities-infographic/

The company behind the National Broadband Network (NBN) wants you to know that the project has finally reached the half-way point, with approximately 50 per cent of Australians now able to connect. If you're still waiting for the NBN in your area, you probably want to know how this percentage breaks down in each state and capital city. This infographic provides some (but not all) of the answers.

These infographics are part of NBN's latest public relations rollout - which has a much faster and better organised delivery schedule than the network itself. (Maybe they should put the marketers in charge?) Needless to say, the facts and figures contained in these graphics must be taken with a huge grain of salt: after all, they were specifically created to cast the NBN's construction in the best light possible.

Nevertheless, they still make for interesting reading - especially when it comes to what's missing. Apparently, people outside of the below states and cities don't need to worry about the status of the NBN, as no additional graphics were released. Meanwhile, independent analysis by the Centre for Research Excellence in the Social Determinants of Health Equity has discovered that areas of greatest socio-economic disadvantage overlap with regions typically receiving NBN infrastructure of poorer quality.


Read more at https://www.lifehacker.com.au/2017/...pital-cities-infographic/#iOPuVRoxIlwL48Wg.99


----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> These infographics are part of NBN's latest public relations rollout - which has a much faster and better organised delivery schedule than the network itself. (Maybe they should put the marketers in charge?) Needless to say, the facts and figures contained in these graphics must be taken with a huge grain of salt: after all, they were specifically created to cast the NBN's construction in the best light possible.



What evidence is there to support the above claim that the rollout figures have been falsified ?


----------



## sptrawler

It is still just a white elephant, dreamed up on the back of a napkin, that we will pay for add infinitum. IMO


----------



## drsmith

sptrawler said:


> It is still just a white elephant, dreamed up on the back of a napkin, that we will pay for add infinitum. IMO



The only saving grace is that it's gone from a beast with 3 broken legs to a beast with 1 broken leg.


----------



## Tisme

Halfway there with lemons is not the same as half way there with oranges, but heh the rusted ons will be happy with their heroes selling a second rate system as a halo event


----------



## CanOz

Tisme, we were destined to get a second rate network.....but can you tell me why?


----------



## CanOz

Here's a hint minion....



> *New Brunswick leads Canada in providing high-speed Internet access*
> 08 May 2016
> FREDERICTON (GNB) – Access to high-speed Internet and providing reliable cell coverage are helping to make New Brunswick a leader in connectivity and to develop the information and communications technology and cybersecurity sectors of the economy.
> 
> The Canadian Internet Registration Authority recently found that the province has the best internet access in the country, with average download speeds of around 27 megabytes per second.
> 
> “Being leaders in connectivity will spur economic growth in New Brunswick and help our businesses innovate,” said Premier Brian Gallant, who is also minister responsible for innovation.
> 
> Gallant referred to a Queen’s University study that found the deployment of broadband promotes employment growth in rural regions, which helps businesses overcome geographic barriers. He said this fits well with the provincial government’s top priority of job creation.
> 
> Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fisheries Minister Rick Doucet, who is also minister responsible for Opportunities NB, agreed that connectivity is crucial in today’s economic climate.
> 
> “We are committed to improving connectivity in New Brunswick,” said Doucet. “We are pleased to see that, by working with our private-sector partners, we have improved connectivity in the province to the point where we are the national leaders.”
> 
> Since 2003, the provincial government has worked with the private sector to increase connectivity for all New Brunswickers by investing in broadband and cellular improvements, including:
> 
> 
> $18 million with Xplornet Communications, to provide broadband to about 43,000 rural homes and businesses; and
> 
> $12.7 million with Bell Canada to improve urban and rural broadband.
> The provincial government is investing $8 million over the next two years for the construction of 10 new radio towers that can be used by the private sector to locate cellular and wireless broadband services.
> 
> Private-sector telecommunications companies have also invested in New Brunswick. Rogers has invested $500 million over the last three decades and the Fredericton-based F6 Networks invested $8 million in fibre-optic infrastructure in 2013-14. In addition, Bell Canada has invested $60 million to build its fibre-optic network in the province, and Xplornet Communications spent $26 million in its efforts to provide broadband service in rural areas.




http://www2.gnb.ca/content/gnb/en/news/news_release.2016.05.0372.html


----------



## sptrawler

drsmith said:


> The only saving grace is that it's gone from a beast with 3 broken legs to a beast with 1 broken leg.




It is still a hell of a lot of money, that could have been used, to create a lot of ongoing value added infrastructure


----------



## Tisme

CanOz said:


> Tisme, we were destined to get a second rate network.....but can you tell me why?




Yes I can, but much of it is self evident and is starting to manifest itself by the number of complaints being recorded by organisations like Choice in collaboration with various university bodies.

I could waffle on with metatalk, but at the end of the day the choice of delivery, the method of delivery and build quality are just not there.  The argument is not whether the original concept was financially sound, but whether building an Austin A40 to compete with a Commodore/Falcon was a sound decison, given the imperative of Abbott to make the ALP seen as stink.

Media is already taking vast amounts of bandwidth and we only have a few players here ATM. When free to air moves entirely to broadband, when home automation, smart appliances, VOIP, high bit strength computing, etc hit and hit hard the 25 megs that newbs are happy with now will struggle and be like 1200 bps modems compared to 14.4k bps models, that lasted all of a twelve months as technology takeup accelerated.

OK if you are old and crusty I'm sure none of it compares to the gramophone, Astor wireless and Robert Menzies, but really the new gens are already gaming, while streaming, while social posting, while doing their education course, while binge watching Netflix and Stan and there comes a limit when the 32 GB memory is no longer keeping latency in check.


----------



## drsmith

sptrawler said:


> It is still a hell of a lot of money, that could have been used, to create a lot of ongoing value added infrastructure



There's no doubt that the political process from which this project was conceived has resulted in the waste of vast sums of money.

The rollout under the current government's model hasn't been perfect but it has proceeded much more smoothly than the disaster Labor's FTTP rollout had become by the 2013 election. Those who wish to pretend Labor's already burnt magic pudding would have somehow risen had they won the 2013 election can continue to do so but the history as detailed in this thread and in reality won't change.


----------



## Tisme




----------



## Tisme

"ready for service" farce:

https://www.itnews.com.au/news/nbn-co-finally-reveals-extent-of-micronode-problem-467943


----------



## Tisme

Even their own propaganda damns them:

check out the 598ms ping LOL  .... waiting, waiting, make cup of tea, waiting .... need to ask the lump of coal minister what it means 

https://www.kotaku.com.au/2017/07/whos-keen-for-600-ping-on-the-nbn/


----------



## Tisme

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/te...-premises-are-misleading-20170711-gx9dti.html

A much more appropriate comparison would be with cities like Auckland, Lisbon or Stockholm, all of which have similar population densities to Sydney and Melbourne. Importantly, the citizens of Auckland, Lisbon and Stockholm enjoy access to state-of-the art FTTP broadband.

*Rollout cost*
NBN Co has been insisting for 4 years that the cost of rolling out FTTP in Australia remains constant at $4400 per premises. But many FTTP operators around the world have reduced the cost of FTTP by as much as 50 per cent by incorporating improved construction techniques. For example, in New Zealand, Chorus has reduced the costs of FTTP deployment by 44 per cent over the past few years, using a variety of approaches.


----------



## Tisme

http://www2.nbnco.com.au/blog/the-nbn-project/the-realities-of-deploying-fttp-in-australia.html

admitting we hAve second rate:

"The world’s first FTTP networks were deployed in cities like Tokyo, Seoul and Hong Kong, where almost everybody lives in big apartment buildings in very high density areas – that means that if an operator deploys 1km of fibre down a street it can connect thousands of premises and do it at very low cost."


----------



## drsmith

Premises passed to June 30 2017 from the update to the week ending July 6 are as follows (June 30 2017/2016 corporate plan forecast),

Brownfields: 4381k/4180k.
Greenfields: 396k/370k.
Fixed Wireless: 518k/480k.
Satellite: 418k/412k.
Total: 5713k/5442k.

The total exceeded the 2016 corporate plan target of 5,442k by 271k and brownfields by 201k.

Service class 0 continues to climb but at a slower rate weekly rate the two weeks to July 6 when compared to previous weeks. That's at 265k as at July 6.

The past 3 weeks has also seen the rate of premise activation rise to over 40k per week.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam...lout-metrics/nbn-rollout-metrics-06072017.pdf


----------



## Tisme

Prophetic?


> Tony Abbott has ordered Malcolm Turnbull to "demolish" the Government's National Broadband Network (NBN) as he today brought him back to the Coalition frontbench to head up its communications portfolio.
> 
> Mr Turnbull makes his high-profile return to the shadow ministry nine months after he was dumped as Liberal leader and replaced by Mr Abbott.
> 
> Declaring the NBN would be the "absolute focus" of the political battle of the next 18 months, Mr Abbott said he could think of no better person to "ferociously" hold the Government to account on the issue.
> 
> "The Government is going to invest $43 billion worth of hard-earned money in what I believe is going to turn out to be a white elephant on a massive scale," Mr Abbott said.
> 
> "*I've already described it as school halls on steroids, and we can be certain the NBN will be to this term of government what pink batts and school halls were to the last term of government."*




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-09-14/abbott-orders-turnbull-to-demolish-nbn/2260320


----------



## Tisme

The whole truth and nothing ....

LOL



> Days after taking to YouTube with an ad marking the halfway point of the national broadband network rollout, and not long after we cheekily pointed out the speedtest result in the ad, NBN Co has pulled their own ad.
> 
> Earlier this week we noted that the ad had a closeup shot of what most Australians would consider a rather unspectacular speedtest result: a ping of 598ms, and a fairly unspectacular download/upload speed to match. There was an explanation: the customer was serviced by the Sky Muster satellite service, and the ping and download speeds are fairly standard for that service.





Read more at https://www.kotaku.com.au/2017/07/nbn-pulled-their-own-ad-from-youtube/#gjJwJllliZEoo0Ue.99

https://www.kotaku.com.au/2017/07/nbn-pulled-their-own-ad-from-youtube/


----------



## drsmith

Noosa Property owner complains about NBN hardware installed on verge in front of her investment property,







https://www.noosanews.com.au/news/cute-cottage-turned-ugly-by-nbn-box/3199967/


----------



## Tisme

drsmith said:


> Noosa Property owner complains about NBN hardware installed on verge in front of her investment property,
> 
> View attachment 71845
> 
> 
> https://www.noosanews.com.au/news/cute-cottage-turned-ugly-by-nbn-box/3199967/





LOL double whammy: a copper wire PSTN pillar and an NBN Node pillar.  Someone should drop a pad mount transformer in between to finish of a hat trick


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> Noosa Property owner complains about NBN hardware installed on verge in front of her investment property,
> 
> View attachment 71845
> 
> 
> https://www.noosanews.com.au/news/cute-cottage-turned-ugly-by-nbn-box/3199967/




That is quite ugly, can't believe its right on the boundary line.  But it's quite laughable for the article to describe it as a "cute cottage" when it looks to be ex-public housing, the eye sore is the stumps fully on display, that sub-floor needs to be boarded off.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> That is quite ugly, can't believe its right on the boundary line.



It lines up with the nearby pillar so perhaps it's directly over the pre-existing duct.

A more savvy property owner might have asked how much to run fibre from the node to the house.


----------



## drsmith

The following was in today's Australian,



> NBN Co’s chief network deployment officer Kathrine Dyer has vowed that no premises will be left unconnected to the National Broadband Network by the time the rollout is completed in 2020.
> 
> Ms Dyer’s comments come after _The Australian _revealed last week that up to 200,000 premises faced lengthy delays connecting to the network — even after the NBN has been rolled out in their neighbourhoods.
> 
> These “service class 0” premises, which make up close to 5 per cent of the 5 million or so premises ready to receive a NBN service, have been put in the too-hard basket by NBN Co as it looks to hit its rollout targets.
> 
> Ms Dyer, who is in charge of completing the rollout of the NBN, conceded that some premises had been left in limbo and that NBN Co was working to ensure they would not fall further behind as the rollout gather pace.
> 
> “This year is the year we look at these premises and start making them serviceable,” she told _The Weekend Australian_, adding that no home would be left behind by 2020. “All of these premises will be made serviceable and it will be a key focus for us as we enter what is going to be our largest construction year.”
> 
> According to Ms Dyer, the decision to leave some premises behind was dictated by several factors, not just the access technology. “We had some examples where we would get to multi-dwelling units (apartments) and the body corporate would tell us to come back in 12 months,” she said.
> 
> As NBN Co looks to improve the engagement process, the company’s critics maintain the decision to bypass homes has more to do with meeting aggressive rollout targets and keeping costs down.
> 
> An industry source told _The Weekend Australian _the “service class 0” premises were usually difficult to connect, adding to the rollout time and costs.
> 
> There are continued concerns that these shortcuts will come home to roost. “These premises are going to eventually push up the total cost per premises for NBN Co,” the source said.
> 
> With the NBN rollout entering the metro areas, the next 12 months will be critical for NBN Co. Connecting metro suburbs will require significant civil works and better co-ordination between NBN Co and the retail service providers. “There will be a lot of night works, additional traffic management and higher level of consultation with council on land access,” she said
> 
> The hand-off between NBN Co and the telcos continues to pose headaches for residents and _The Weekend Australian _understands there are considerable problems in identifying the status of activation on premises, with the multi-technology approach often leading to multiple visits to premises.
> 
> However, Ms Dyer said the biggest source of pain for consumers was a lack of clarity about on where NBN Co’s responsibility ended and the retail service providers took over. “We are all on a journey here and there’s a learning curve here for providers and residents,” she said.
> 
> Ms Dyer, who moved from Telstra to NBN Co in 2010, started her tenure at the company rolling out fibre to greenfield sites.
> 
> While the majority of the NBN rollout has moved to the copper-reliant fibre-to-the-node technology there’s still some fibre being rolled out to new estates.
> 
> “The fibre technology is still in our kit. In limited instances we will be rolling out fibre where it makes sense. It’s part of our technology choice program and in most cases it’s being rolled out in greenfields estates,” Ms Dyer said.
> 
> She said full fibre deployment in brownfields area continued to be the most expensive option for NBN Co.
> 
> FTTP connections in Australia cost $4404 per premises, compared with $NZ2800 ($2677) in New Zealand and $US1719 ($2259) in the US.
> 
> “When you start thinking about distance, the workforce we have and the existing infrastructure in place, all of this influences the cost of rolling out the technology.”
> 
> That argument is not accepted by NBN Co’s critics, with Rod Tucker, a telecommunications expert and professor at the University of Melbourne, recently pointing out that NBN Co’s justifications don’t add up.
> 
> According to Mr Tucker, NBN Co not only ignores the recent improvements made in deploying full fibre but also that full fibre connection costs were falling across the world.
> 
> With half of the NBN now rolled out, a return to a full fibre deployment is out if the question; however, there remains an opportunity for NBN Co to expand the use of the fibre to the curb (FTTC) technology to complete the rollout. The technology, which requires taking fibre closer to premises than the nodes, is being trialled in Melbourne. “We are trialling in Coburg at the moment and we are excited to add that to our technology mix,” Ms Dyer said.
> 
> NBN Co has allocated one million homes to the FTTC footprint and Ms Dyer said that number was unlikely to change in the short term. “It’s an upgrade path for us and we could rethink it in the future but we will need to rethink how we would pay for that.”




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...r/news-story/9fed600af12f62df3e797438f833192e


----------



## drsmith

Some more in the Fairfax press,


> Inner-city apartment residents have the option to bulk purchase higher-speed connections from NBN Co under the government-owned company's plan to add nearly 4 million premises to its network this year.
> 
> The NBN at present is planning to service the majority of remaining premises by using existing copper telephone lines and cabling from the homes to connect to nodes which are then part of its fibre network.
> 
> It is winding down the more expensive fibre-to-the-premises (FTTP) roll-out to just a few hundred a month.
> 
> Direct FTTP connections currently offer faster speeds, although NBN Co argues some overseas Fibre-to-the-node (FTTN) networks offer speeds of 300 megabits per second (Mbps).
> 
> As the NBN begins to focus on more densely populated areas it is offering bulk buyers – such as apartment building body corporates – the ability to buy a fibre connection all the way to their units for an additional fee.
> 
> NBN Co's chief network deployment officer, Kathrine Dyer, confirmed at least two properties have already used the Technology Switch option to upgrade from fibre-to-the-node to FTTP, although costs will vary for each property.
> 
> One Queensland commercial property owner paid just $6000 to upgrade a FTTN connection limited to 25 Mbps to a FTTP connection, which can deliver up to 1 gigabyte per second (Gbps).
> 
> And a residential block of flats in Darlinghurst in Sydney got together and paid to have the entire block fitted with FTTP while the rest of the suburb was connected through FTTN.
> 
> Costs depend on the building's complexity, cabling, age, proximity to infrastructure and the underlying network, Ms Dyer explained.
> 
> "You can't just naturally plug in one technology to another ... It is not an easy thing to just give a universal price," Ms Dyer said.
> 
> "We do have a team that can talk to them and come out and potentially visit them if a body corporate is interested ... We don't do a street on a street by street basis, [but] we will do individual premises. Although by definition the whole street could apply."
> 
> NBN Co currently charges a blind quote fee of $660, according to its website. Costs decline depending on how many premises want an upgrade, but it will only consider upgrades after the planned installations to the nearest node are complete.
> 
> Ms Dyer has been at NBN Co for six years and recently became the chief network deployment officer. She is in charge of network planning, design and construction. She was previously the executive general manager for regional deployment.
> 
> "I have now stepped up to take on the deployment of all NBN technologies. Including HFC, all of fibre-to-the-curb as well. This year for me, it will be the largest construction year that NBN has," she told Fairfax Media.
> 
> "By definition it will be our largest construction year compared to any other year in our plan."
> 
> NBN Co plans to declare 3.7 million premises ready for service this financial year, taking the total number of ready premises to over 8 million. It recently declared it was half-way through the total build, although this was due to a reduction in total premises from 11.9 million to 11.2 million.
> 
> By July 2018 about 4.5 million premises are expected to be actively using the NBN. It has an internal goal of 8 million active users by 2020.
> 
> Planning documents seen by Fairfax Media show the bulk of construction in 2017-18 will focus on upgrading infrastructure already installed around the country, a much faster process than (FTTP). In the busiest months hundreds of thousands of premises will be upgraded from existing copper-based ADSL internet to FTTN or HFC where available. But the number of premises getting FTTP installations ranges from just 300 to 5210.
> 
> From March 2018 NBN Co will start connecting tens of thousands of premises every month using fibre-to-the-curb (FTTC) technology, which brings fibre closer to a premises, but uses the last few metres of the existing copper connection. FTTN uses up to 450 metres of copper wire, which is slower and has less capacity than fibre.
> 
> To date the focus has been on regional towns and outer suburban areas. Ms Dyer said building in inner-city areas brings a new level of complexity because it is more crowded, there are more heritage issues, and construction crews have reported being hassled by people leaving nightclubs and pubs.




http://www.smh.com.au/business/do-y...at-nbns-apartment-upsell-20170714-gxbil6.html


----------



## Tisme

Was only a matter of time before another sub titled version surfaced on mainstream facebook:

Caution: course  language


----------



## drsmith

Present speed problems are related to wholesale (NBN) connectivity virtual circuit (CVC) pricing. This has been reduced recently by NBN with the pricing structure from June 1 in the link below.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam...otice_effective_1_June_2017_2016_20170227.pdf

From what I've seen in the press, RSP's are purchasing the 1 mbps per user tier. This as I understand it from the table in the document above is $14.25 per mbps per user per month after the discount is applied.

While the price per mbps is reduced from earlier versions, the CVC pricing structure above remains contrary to the higher speeds the NBN is intended to achieve.


----------



## Tisme

Be interesting to see if this is truth once the investigation by the govt agencies start. My guess is that the poor performance is understated, merely giving a dog a bone.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...s/news-story/df1973733137816675fab58b9e156756



> Telstra has moved to clear the air for its NBN customers, admitting up to 10,000 of its customers were not receiving the speeds they had signed up for.
> 
> According to Telstra, about 1 per cent of its overall NBN customer base of more than a million customers have not enjoyed the appropriate speeds.
> 
> The telco will contact affected customers and look to move them to a more suitable speed tier, and also reimburse those who may have paid for a speed boost they did not get.


----------



## sptrawler

Well my mate, who has fibre to the home has found out what the problem is, it bogs down at high usage times.
He can't find out why, because he only bought the low 12mb/s offer.
Will keep you updated, as I find out more info.


----------



## Tisme

T


sptrawler said:


> Well my mate, who has fibre to the home has found out what the problem is, it bogs down at high usage times.
> He can't find out why, because he only bought the low 12mb/s offer.
> Will keep you updated, as I find out more info.





This is your cobber in Pinjarra/Mandurah?


----------



## Tisme

BTW if anyone has problems with their connections, a legit complaint call to the TIO (Ombudsman) results in a fee cost to the provider, which they hate and don't want to repeat because the penalty eventually escalates to bill refunds.


----------



## Tisme

Quality of installs getting better (can only imagine how the school halls and pink batts would have looked if they had insisted on the same quality control):


----------



## sptrawler

Tisme said:


> T
> 
> 
> 
> This is your cobber in Pinjarra/Mandurah?



Yes, he says that some times he gets 11mb/s other times 3mb/s.


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> Yes, he says that some times he gets 11mb/s other times 3mb/s.





Real problem's with the backhaul link in that region and it doesn't matter which ISP you use, the link is consistently under capacity.


----------



## drsmith

sptrawler said:


> Well my mate, who has fibre to the home has found out what the problem is, it bogs down at high usage times.
> He can't find out why, because he only bought the low 12mb/s offer.
> Will keep you updated, as I find out more info.



Likely a consequence of the CVC pricing model as outlined above.


----------



## Tisme

Pinjarra/Mandurah has been suffering backhaul (wholesale to retailer service and quality) problems for approx two years.

arguments about lipstick on pig still doesn't change the fact the pig is still a pig.

e.g.  http://advisories.internode.on.net/item/15371/


----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> arguments about lipstick on pig still doesn't change the fact the pig is still a pig.



If that's a reference to FTTP vs MTM, I refer you back to the above,


sptrawler said:


> Well my mate, who has *fibre to the home* has found out what the problem is, it bogs down at high usage times.
> He can't find out why, because he only bought the low 12mb/s offer.
> Will keep you updated, as I find out more info.




My bolds.


----------



## sptrawler

Tisme said:


> Pinjarra/Mandurah has been suffering backhaul (wholesale to retailer service and quality) problems for approx two years.
> 
> arguments about lipstick on pig still doesn't change the fact the pig is still a pig.
> 
> e.g.  http://advisories.internode.on.net/item/15371/




The thing is, Mandurah was rolled out in the very early phase, so the issue isn't party specific.

There are obvious problems and it is fibre to the house, so IMO, it is a $80billion joke.

Which actually isn't funny when you see the Government debt.
It becomes more and more apparent, that the NBN was a vote chasing excercise, at the taxpayers expense.IMO


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> The thing is, Mandurah was rolled out in the very early phase, so the issue isn't party specific.
> 
> There are obvious problems and it is fibre to the house, so IMO, it is a $80billion joke.
> 
> Which actually isn't funny when you see the Government debt.
> It becomes more and more apparent, that the NBN was a vote chasing excercise, at the taxpayers expense.IMO





You need to familiarise yourself with how the basic system works to understand what fibre means and it doesn't mean it bypasses the wholesaler or retailer.

But yes considering the whole thing is being paid for with bond issues, one would have thought the money would have been spent more wisely. It certainly was an election bait, but people are starting to wake up to the ruse.


----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> You need to familiarise yourself with how the basic system works to understand what fibre means and it doesn't mean it bypasses the wholesaler or retailer.



??

He's simply confirming the residence in question is FTTP.


----------



## sptrawler

The fact is, it is a really big spend, for very little return. IMO

When you consider, a gas pipeline from the NW of W.A, to connect to the Eastern States could have been installed.
A water pipeline from the NW of W.A, that could supply irrigation throughout the Pilbara, could have been installed.
Dams and irrigation throughout North Queensland, and a high speed train connecting Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne.
For less money, than the NBN, which really isn't supplying something we didn't have, it's just replacing it.
It is really a National disgrace, and shows how politicians are more interested in egos, than Nation building.IMO


----------



## drsmith

sptrawler said:


> The fact is, it is a really big spend, for very little return. IMO



That is the case and the problem NBN is attempting to overcome with its CVC pricing model.

THE RSP's I suspect are skimping on the CVC capacity they are purchasing as they know NBN and the government of the day will be held most responsible for speeds on the network. NBN has been shifting with revised CVC discount models and that process is continuing,


> NBN Co is looking to reduce CVC costs, so telcos can provide higher speeds at peak times, and increasing AVC, monthly connection costs.
> 
> However, this approach poses problems because consumers could be forced to pay more for internet connections than they were before the NBN, creating potential headaches for the federal government which promised prices for basic connections would not rise under the NBN.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...s/news-story/6699c4a288dc2a402efda86cf93153d2

Whether due to reliability or cost (or both), there will be an impact on the proportion that retain a landline connection through NBN. Ultimately, the current or a future government is going to have to write down its investment in the NBN and that will be an ugly day for the budget.


----------



## Tisme

When the NBN was begun there were several considerations made:

1) the $27.5bn debt was fully funded by issuing bonds
2) the paydown was forecast 2034
3) the bond rate was ~4%
4) the ROI once operational 7%
5) Telstra backbenched, for fear of what has subsequently come to pass.


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> The fact is, it is a really big spend, for very little return. IMO
> 
> When you consider, a gas pipeline from the NW of W.A, to connect to the Eastern States could have been installed.
> A water pipeline from the NW of W.A, that could supply irrigation throughout the Pilbara, could have been installed.
> Dams and irrigation throughout North Queensland, and a high speed train connecting Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne.
> For less money, than the NBN, which really isn't supplying something we didn't have, it's just replacing it.
> It is really a National disgrace, and shows how politicians are more interested in egos, than Nation building.IMO




I think the NBN was an inevitability and reflected a need to put in place a future economy, free of being a mining pit of the world. I don't think any of us saw the end of the boom coming so soon, even the miners themselves.

As with any major project in Australia's history, the govts are the only organisation able to fund them, traditionally through borrowing. Labor has a strong track record of major industry and infrastructure spend and seems to like starting legacy projects while in office....NBN would have been one of those before political games made it a shadow of it's original form.

I think the real frustration that is fermenting in the nation is the realisation they may have been tricked into believing the govt's spiel and the weight of evidence does point to a poorly constructed network that has people without connection for weeks/months. They are twigging to the electioneering myths about speeds e.g. able to simultaneously stream 5 movies is just out and out lies.

It's not like we weren't all warned by the people who actually know about networks, technology, etc that changing it to a hybrid system would end up making it a bitsa pup....and more expensive pup at that.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

I believe Kevin Rudd and Stephen Conroy to be personally responsible for the atrocity that is the NBN, a complete and utter waste of taxpayers money.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-26/nbn-vows-to-end-blame-game-with-telcos/8746392

They should be made pay for this brainfart concocted on an RAAF plane using a pen and napkin. 

gg


----------



## Tisme

I'm wondering if school children shouldn't be made to attend a "factual" course on networks so the political spin could be filtered out of the conversation. A real course that is free of habitual ghosts of Abbott past, easy grab acronyms and sanctimonious twits.....something that agrees with my point of view.

*Tip* for those who want to get the fastest throughput inside their boundary when lumbered with a sh1tty old copper telephone cable = get your installer to parallel up the redundant wires to decrease the impedance.

What would this guy know about the NBN ... did he ask Abbott, Turnbull and any rusted on LNP voter first before making stuff up:
https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2017/07/...-would-be-just-as-cheap-as-fibre-to-the-curb/


----------



## Tisme

Not sure if he should have walked away. It's not like he couldn't just rake in the money and drink more to numb the conscience.


----------



## Tisme

Cancer cluster of the future?


----------



## Tisme

Hide and seek


----------



## Tisme

Posted yesterday on Whirlpool:



> Just a heads up for those with Telstra Velocity FTTP, after speaking with NBNCo and Telstra independently Telstra have told me that the network is now owned by NBN and that (at least in my area) as part of the transferral my connection will need to be transferred to FTTN.
> 
> As such if I currently want to switch to NBN I need to get a Telstra technician out to rip out my fibre, and a NBN technician to install the "superior" copper and do whatever switching is required out on the street.
> 
> At least in my area there is an 18 month handover period where the process needs to be completed, I recently signed up wtih iinet to try my luck to get NBN but after hearing this has cancelled and will just try and wait out the switch over as long as I can.
> 
> The Telstra representative I spoke to also advised that after switching over my 100mb/5mb connection to NBN I would only be able to get the first tier of NBN which I think is up to 20mbit, they could not offer any speed boosts until the infrastructure in the area is upgraded! I would also need to sign up for another 24 month contract!!!




https://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=2655231


----------



## Tisme

This has gotta hurt the LNP flag waivers, although it's probably Bill Shorten's fault, that and pink batts:

https://www.itnews.com.au/news/nbn-...dium=newsletter&utm_campaign=daily_newsletter



> NBN Co executives say they took a proposal to convert the fibre-to-the-node footprint to fibre-to-the-curb to the board and government but the plan was rejected because it ran counter to the statement of expectations.
> 
> CEO Bill Morrow told a parliamentary committee hearing this week that a “study” on flipping the four million premises in the FTTN footprint over to newer FTTC technology had been undertaken.......


----------



## Tisme

I think this guys is positioning himself to retain his job after Labor take office:

http://www.techradar.com/news/nbn-co-chief-thinks-12mbps-plan-was-a-mistake


----------



## Tisme

http://www.afr.com/technology/web/n...-on-300m-in-new-office-leases-20170803-gxoo7m


> The company building Australia's National Broadband Network is closing in on two new office headquarters in Sydney and Melbourne, which could cost the company as much as $300 million over the next 10 years.
> 
> While the government may have retreated from the "gold plated" broadband network promised under the previous Labor administration, NBN isn't scrimping on its new digs.
> 
> In Sydney NBN is set to go to Dexus' 100 Mount Street development, just one minute from the new Victoria Cross Metro rail station in North Sydney.
> 
> This would complement a similar sized hunt for space in Melbourne where it is understood to have signed on for around 20,000 square metres at the final tower in billionaire Lang Walker's Collins Square project.
> 
> 
> The Mount Street building comprises 41,500 square metres over 34 office levels with spectacular views over Sydney Harbour.
> 
> 
> It is likely that NBN would take half of the building with rents in the range of about $700- $750 per square metre per year.
> 
> That would have the NBN's paying a gross cost of about $15 million a year or $150 million over the duration of what would likely be a 10-year lease.
> 
> NBN declined to comment on its leasing plans when contacted by The Australian Financial Review.
> 
> The timing of the office hunt is awkward for NBN as it faces increased scrutiny and a new enquiry from The Australian Communications and Media Authority into failures of the broadband rollout.
> 
> 
> It is embroiled in an ongoing dispute with internet service providers over the high charges it levies from them for broadband capacity.
> 
> Slow internet speeds for many users of the NBN have been blamed on NBN's need to charge high prices in order to make a commercial return, whereas ISPs say they cannot afford to pay for enough.
> 
> When asked why it was not looking for office space in cheaper parts of Sydney, such as Paramatta or Olympic Park, where Commonwealth Bank of Australia is due to vacate by 2020, NBN again declined to comment.
> 
> Lang Walker's Collins Square project is well advanced and the last building, known as Tower 5, already has a commitment from Transurban for around 16,000 sq m.
> 
> 
> The NBN tenancy will virtually fill that final tower in the $2.5 billion mixed use project.
> 
> The NBN deal is expected to be struck at somewhere between $575 and $590 per sq m on a net face rent, according to industry sources.
> 
> An incentive, which is customary in most commercial leasing deals, could be worth around 25 per cent.
> 
> The tower is due to be completed some time around the end of next year. allowing NBN to move from the start of 2019.
> 
> 
> It is expected NBN will consolidate its existing tenancies out of GPT-owned Media House, where the broadband operator is on a sub-lease to Fairfax, just a short walk from Collins Square. It would also come out of 120 Spencer Street and Melbourne Central.


----------



## Tisme

Oh No! The Brits are heading down the wrong path !!!

http://www.innovationaus.com/2017/07/30b-NBN-blunder-More-bad-news/

worth a read without your political hats on.


----------



## Tisme

Whoops


----------



## Tisme

The minister in charge must have a different name to Peter Garret

https://au.news.yahoo.com/nsw/a/366...e-to-use-telstra-line-to-call-for-help/#page1


----------



## Tisme

Well here you go. It's not fizzer's fault but Bill Shorten's.

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/dodgy...ll-for-labors-flawed-nbn-20170809-gxsa5v.html


----------



## sptrawler

Tisme said:


> Well here you go. It's not fizzer's fault but Bill Shorten's.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/comment/dodgy...ll-for-labors-flawed-nbn-20170809-gxsa5v.html




Are you Bill? You always sound like you're trying to justify Bill.


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> Are you Bill? You always sound like you're trying to justify Bill.




I don't like Bill and I don't like his nuance social agenda, but I dislike more:- deliberately or ignorantly blaming someone other than the real culprit of the failure. 

Peter Martin trashes what's left of his journalistic integrity when he patently and persistently shows his inability to shake off party political bias which no doubt was inculcated into him from birth.

I am equally skeptical of Labor hacks who purport to be journalists. Both camps are an insult to thinking people.


----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> I don't like Bill and I don't like his nuance social agenda, but I dislike more:- deliberately or ignorantly blaming someone other than the real culprit of the failure.
> 
> Peter Martin trashes what's left of his journalistic integrity when he patently and persistently shows his inability to shake off party political bias which no doubt was inculcated into him from birth.
> 
> I am equally skeptical of Labor hacks who purport to be journalists. Both camps are an insult to thinking people.



Sheeit!

I've woken up this morning in a parallel universe.


----------



## drsmith

Some interesting numbers in the above Fairfax article regarding take-up.


> Dodgy assumptions in its 2010 corporate plan helped. It assumed that no more than 16.4 per cent of customers would abandon fixed lines. It's achieving only a 75 per cent take-up, suggesting the real figure is closer to 25 per cent. It assumed the number of households would grow at a compound annual rate of 1.6 per cent per year. Between the last two censuses it's grown by much less.




The basis I can only assume is for those areas where the 18-month transition period has elapsed as that's the only meaningful reference for determining take-up.


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> Some interesting numbers in the above Fairfax article regarding take-up.
> 
> 
> The basis I can only assume is for those areas where the 18-month transition period has elapsed as that's the only meaningful reference for determining take-up.




Would like to know that too.  Maybe some people have decided that they're mobile data plans are enough for their needs atm.


----------



## Tisme

drsmith said:


> Sheeit!
> 
> I've woken up this morning in a parallel universe.




  Must be nice to discover a clue after a prolonged drought of cognizance.


----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> Must be nice to discover a clue after a prolonged drought of cognizance.



Something strange going on here.

I'm sure when I read and quoted your comment yesterday that you were praising Peter Martin.


----------



## drsmith

The alternative is that I'm ready for the knackery.


----------



## Tisme

http://www.zdnet.com/article/6-percent-of-fttn-nbn-connections-cannot-hit-25mbps/


----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> http://www.zdnet.com/article/6-percent-of-fttn-nbn-connections-cannot-hit-25mbps/



The detail within that article is very interesting.

94%/65% of FTTN users able to get 25+/50+Mbps respectively during the 18-month coexistence period with legacy copper services is a pretty good result and clearly demonstrates the extent to which the CVC pricing model is impacting speed over and above the hardware by which the service is delivered.

With regard to your criticism of Peter Martin's article above, I note you only attacked his character without offering any commentary on any specific point within the article itself. It must have struck a very raw nerve.


----------



## Tisme

This is worth watching.

Perhaps Peter Martin and his adoring fans who also don't have a clue might be able start understanding some basic flaws driving their arrogance and ignorance.


----------



## Tisme

Ooh nooo. This is an absolute no no with light pipes and copper


----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> This is worth watching.
> 
> Perhaps Peter Martin and his adoring fans who also don't have a clue might be able start understanding some basic flaws driving their arrogance and ignorance.



You've done it again. Along with a further unsubstantiated character bagging of Peter Martin, you've picked another example of an NBN connection that's FTTP.


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> The detail within that article is very interesting.
> 
> 94%/65% of FTTN users able to get 25+/50+Mbps respectively during the 18-month coexistence period with legacy copper services is a pretty good result and clearly demonstrates the extent to which the CVC pricing model is impacting speed over and above the hardware by which the service is delivered.
> 
> With regard to your criticism of Peter Martin's article above, I note you only attacked his character without offering any commentary on any specific point within the article itself. It must have struck a very raw nerve.





It's also an indictment on the coalition NBN that $50 billion only gets 1/3rd of FTTN users 2-3 times maximum adsl2 speeds with no upgrade path that doesn't require ripping copper up.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> It's also an indictment on the coalition NBN that $50 billion only gets 1/3rd of FTTN users 2-3 times maximum adsl2 speeds with no upgrade path that doesn't require ripping copper up.



When you look ad data as to the level of service being ordered, ~80% with an FTTP connection are ordering either a 12 or 25Mbps service.

https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/NBN Wholesale Market Indicators Report 30 June 2017.pdf

When compared to the table at the 7-minute mark of the first of the two video links above, this hasn't materially changed over the past two years.

What this illustrates is that the vast majority of those connecting don't wish to pay for the difference between an FTTN and FTTP service. Of interest with the rest is that ~4% are ordering 50Mbps and ~16% 100Mbps. It would be interesting to know more about the demographics of the 16% to understand where the best economic case lies for FTTP (or other techs that have the potential to offer 100Mbps+).


----------



## Tisme

http://www.zdnet.com/article/over-three-quarters-of-australians-dont-know-their-internet-speed-nbn/


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> When you look ad data as to the level of service being ordered, ~80% with an FTTP connection are ordering either a 12 or 25Mbps service.
> 
> https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/NBN Wholesale Market Indicators Report 30 June 2017.pdf
> 
> When compared to the table at the 7-minute mark of the first of the two video links above, this hasn't materially changed over the past two years.
> 
> What this illustrates is that the vast majority of those connecting don't wish to pay for the difference between an FTTN and FTTP service. Of interest with the rest is that ~4% are ordering 50Mbps and ~16% 100Mbps. It would be interesting to know more about the demographics of the 16% to understand where the best economic case lies for FTTP (or other techs that have the potential to offer 100Mbps+).



Thanks for the data, some quite revealing figures there and the high take up of the lowest tier does surprise me.  But at some stage down the track there will be a need for people to increase their speeds, unfortunately for some on FTTN that won't be possible.


----------



## crackajack

Tisme said:


> Quality of installs getting better (can only imagine how the school halls and pink batts would have looked if they had insisted on the same quality control):
> 
> View attachment 71989



garden hoes is useful lol


----------



## crackajack

In an event of fire please use garden hose to extinguish flames


----------



## crackajack

Tisme said:


> Was only a matter of time before another sub titled version surfaced on mainstream facebook:
> 
> Caution: course  language




cool lol


----------



## drsmith

NBN have published a full year results presentation for 2016/17.

http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco2/documents/nbn-FY17-full-year-results-presentation.pdf

Cost per premise is updated and take-up is 75% after the 18-month migration period.


----------



## Tisme

https://www.arnnet.com.au/article/626019/flat-top-tier-uptake-throws-nbn-returns-into-question/

remember the NBN is compulsory if you want landline connection (ADSL is turned off once NBN activated)


----------



## Tisme

I think the polly knew more than the people running the show:


----------



## Tisme

I bet this is how Australians thought the NBN would be installed, rather an appalled at the real work and system quality


----------



## SuperGlue

"FTTP connections cost about $4500 a premise, FTTN about $2200 and the latest modification, fibre to the kerb, $2800.
In *New Zealand* at the time, the FTTP cost was $NZ2700."

http://www.afr.com/opinion/columnists/why-new-zealand-outplayed-australia-on-the-nbn-20170803-gxos77


----------



## SuperGlue

"New Zealand’s Internet Speeds Will Soon Be Way Faster Than Australia"

https://www.vice.com/en_au/article/...speeds-will-soon-be-way-faster-than-australia


----------



## Tisme

Doesn't get much easier to understand than this:


----------



## Tisme

A word of caution when swinging over to NBN, There are fees the ISP will try to hit you up for if you don't get them negated prior:

e.g
hardware install, even if they send the modem to you to install
connection fee
advanced payment 

all ontop of your first monthly agreed recurring payment


----------



## drsmith

In a refinement to the rollout strategy for greenfields, alternative options to FTTP are being considered in some instances.

http://www.abc.net.au/radio/program...n-delays-for-residential-developments/8841194

The above is a clear example where the existing HFC network is the better alternative.


----------



## SirRumpole

A good discussion on the NBN disaster.

http://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/nightlife/peter-martin-nbn/8858472


----------



## Tisme

Hindsight is usually very satisfying, but everyone in the industry knew Fizzer was out of his depth, playing to Liberal Party fanboys and making up stuff.

Howse that 1gig download and 100meg upload going for you guys?


I give you March 2015...dahdah


----------



## Junior

We just connected with these guys:  Uniti Wireless

So far getting consistently close to 50Mbps/7Mbps.  No requirement to switch to NBN either.  Only some areas are under their coverage, they gave me free installation and free 30 day trial.  Worth a look!


----------



## Tisme

Now here's the answer:



> Faced with increasing costs, a politically impotent leader and a country full of Australians demanding they do a better job, NBNCo thinks its finally onto a winner.
> 
> You have heard of Fibre To The Premises, of FTTP as the original logical choice for national infrastructure program at this scale.
> 
> The Turnbull Govt then bungled that down to FTTN, costing more, running slower and playing right into the corporate strategies of Rupert Murdock’s Fox Group. It was the technology equivalent of farting in your little brothers lunch bag then tricking him into taking a whiff.
> 
> NBNCo announced the latest way to solve the problem.  Fibre To The Exchange.
> 
> Bill Morrow, CEO of NBNCo explained.  “Fibre to the Exchange is the future for Australia.  We already have most of the technology in place.  We could reach all of Australia with 3-5 years.”
> 
> The new plans call for a fibre cable to connect each suburban exchange to each other, and homes and businesses would be connected to those exchanges by a high tech metallic strand nearly 4km long.  It would deliver speeds of nearly 1.5Mbits.  Fast enough to provide a futuristic 90’s style internet experience, and expected to stay leading edge until at least 2006.
> 
> Critics of the plan say its what we had in the 1930s, and that it fails to deliver the speeds needed to propel Australia into the future. but Morrow says they are missing the point.  “NBNCo  has had a gigabit service available for nearly 5 years.  If you lived within 40 meters of a gigabit enabled rack inside an exchange and had a typical shielded cat6 cable to your home, we can provide gig connections, but we just aren’t seeing any demand from consumers.”
> 
> Asked for a quote, Malcolm Turnbull’s office responded with “NBNCo will provide access to world leading broadband speeds to those who need it.”
> 
> When asked how we can access those high speeds when there are only available to very limited properties, he added “Just have your Communications Minister install an exchange in your basement.  Thats what I did.  Its a simple scalable solution for all Australians.”
> 
> “Better still, get your entertainment from Foxtel, or watch TV….”
> 
> Shares in Telstra and Foxtel both jumped nearly 60% on the news.





http://nottnews.com/2017/02/18/nbnco-reveals-latest-tech-ftte/


----------



## Tisme

Just  reminder of not so long ago:


----------



## Tisme

https://www.itwire.com/open-sauce/8...rt-will-gather-dust-on-a-shelf-somewhere.html

No wonder Malcolm looked at ease sitting at the footy


----------



## Tisme

Saw this last night :

http://www.abc.net.au/news/programs/the-business/2017-10-02/in-the-studio-with-matt-jones/9008928


----------



## Tisme




----------



## Tisme

I finding it fascinating how the ABC are only now running a 4 Corners episode on the NBN, when all us people actually working in and understanding the industry where comms is a key player have been trying to make the situation clear for years. 

This is a classic example of political bias getting in the way of a national good. It also exposes the stupendous political use of humans tools who were like acronym sponges, with no actual experience, but all too quick to defend a halfwit's idea of broadband.


----------



## Tisme

https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/922351612441407488


----------



## Wysiwyg

Future option ...

"The carrier [Telstra] has previously stated it aims to conduct full trials of 5G at the 2018 Commonwealth Games on the Gold Coast. Actual deployment of 5G networks is not expected to occur until 2020."

Regarding the contractor bodge jobs.

The NBN contractor bodge jobs are typical of contractors on a per installation, house build, roof insulation, shutdown, product run etc. fee. It is typical of a contract employee. Reason is they won't be in the area when their bodge jobs are discovered, the tradies aren't vetted and it is all about quantity rather than quality.


----------



## Tisme




----------



## Tisme

Wysiwyg said:


> Future option ...
> 
> "The carrier [Telstra] has previously stated it aims to conduct full trials of 5G at the 2018 Commonwealth Games on the Gold Coast. Actual deployment of 5G networks is not expected to occur until 2020."
> 
> Regarding the contractor bodge jobs.
> 
> The NBN contractor bodge jobs are typical of contractors on a per installation, house build, roof insulation, shutdown, product run etc. fee. It is typical of a contract employee. Reason is they won't be in the area when their bodge jobs are discovered, the tradies aren't vetted and it is all about quantity rather than quality.





They aren't usually tradies, but 6 week wonders. One bloke I met was literally a butcher LOL


----------



## Tisme




----------



## overhang

4 Corners really went into what the experts have warned for years was inevitable with the Liberal version of an NBN.  The great digital divide they've created, the fact people will pay for speeds they can't possibly achieve because they're too far from the node.  This really is the Liberal pink batts scheme, pushing to meet the ambitious targets the government has set NBN co has meant dodgy under-trained contractors are being used that are paid on a per job basis.  Last night they showed fibre that had been laid a couple of feet under ground that was fully exposed to the elements because the contractor didn't run it through any type of pipe/duct.

And no Turnbull you own this mess not Labor, you've been responsible for 4 years now and took ownership the moment you decided to create this MTN mess that we'll be paying for many years to come.


----------



## Tisme

overhang said:


> 4 Corners really went into what the experts have warned for years was inevitable with the Liberal version of an NBN.  The great digital divide they've created, the fact people will pay for speeds they can't possibly achieve because they're too far from the node.  This really is the Liberal pink batts scheme, pushing to meet the ambitious targets the government has set NBN co has meant dodgy under-trained contractors are being used that are paid on a per job basis.  Last night they showed fibre that had been laid a couple of feet under ground that was fully exposed to the elements because the contractor didn't run it through any type of pipe/duct.
> 
> And no Turnbull you own this mess not Labor, you've been responsible for 4 years now and took ownership the moment you decided to create this MTN mess that we'll be paying for many years to come.





As I recall the NBN was originally setup to be sold off  (around about now?) as a going concern and the govt getting a handsome ROI in return for the bonds it issued to build it, in concert with private enterprise investment..... an infrastructure PPP.

Instead, riding a **** horse into govt, Abbott decided he had to break all the other kid's toys, including the NBN and then ask Malcolm to put it together again with Clag glue.

It's been a great laugh for many and most people just shrugged their shoulders, but now we are at the pointy end and the lazy people who relied on the LNP to carry the truth and justice stick are starting to realise they were sold a pup (slow learners). Can only get worse as the fails increase and the reality bites.


----------



## sptrawler

Tisme said:


> As I recall the NBN was originally setup to be sold off  (around about now?) as a going concern and the govt getting a handsome ROI in return for the bonds it issued to build it, in concert with private enterprise investment..... an infrastructure PPP.
> 
> Instead, riding a **** horse into govt, Abbott decided he had to break all the other kid's toys, including the NBN and then ask Malcolm to put it together again with Clag glue.
> 
> It's been a great laugh for many and most people just shrugged their shoulders, but now we are at the pointy end and the lazy people who relied on the LNP to carry the truth and justice stick are starting to realise they were sold a pup (slow learners). Can only get worse as the fails increase and the reality bites.




To start the roll out in low socio-economic residential areas, set the whole model up to fail, it was dumb.
If it had to be done they should have started in CBD's where it was really needed, and then at least they would have got some R.O.E.
This then could have mitigated some of the losses, which were bound to happen in less densely populated areas, typical social agenda rather than sensible business approach.
Unfortunately poor planning and implementation protocols, undermined most of labor's projects.


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> To start the roll out in low socio-economic residential areas, set the whole model up to fail, it was dumb.
> If it had to be done they should have started in CBD's where it was really needed, and then at least they would have got some R.O.E.
> This then could have mitigated some of the losses, which were bound to happen in less densely populated areas, typical social agenda rather than sensible business approach.
> Unfortunately poor planning and implementation protocols, undermined most of labor's projects.




The first rollout was July 2010 How was that rollout changed by the LNP in Sept 2013? It's four years later and it's still Labor's fault? As you know I'm hardly a supporter of Labor, but really?

Karl's hard hitting style LOL :

http://www.9news.com.au/national/20...inister-blasted-over-network-today-stefanovic


----------



## SirRumpole

sptrawler said:


> Unfortunately poor planning and implementation protocols, undermined most of labor's projects.




But the Liberal Party changed the plan from FTTP to FTTN, so the plan and the problem is now of their making.

I'd have to say the the 4C report was a bit unfair comparing Australia to NZ, a country with a third the population of Australia and less spread out making NZ's installation easier.


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> But the Liberal Party changed the plan from FTTP to FTTN, so the plan and the problem is now of their making.
> 
> I'd have to say the the 4C report was a bit unfair comparing Australia to NZ, a country with a third the population of Australia and less spread out making NZ's installation easier.




14 minutes in:


----------



## sptrawler

Tisme said:


> The first rollout was July 2010 How was that rollout changed by the LNP in Sept 2013? It's four years later and it's still Labor's fault? As you know I'm hardly a supporter of Labor, but really?
> 
> Karl's hard hitting style LOL :
> 
> http://www.9news.com.au/national/20...inister-blasted-over-network-today-stefanovic




It's Labors fault simply because they started the whole mess on a poor footing, it was always going to be a ridiculously expensive project. 
But to not start it in CBD's, where business would have jumped on high speed data transfer and paid top dollar for it, was dumb beyond comprehension.
At least then, when the residential roll out commenced, it could have been ramped up or slowed down dependent on take up.
As usual, Labor tried to use it as a vote catcher rather than a business plan, they unfortunately always seem to take this approach and it always ends up the same way.
The biggest problem is yet to face the project, as people want more and more mobile access, while not require bling speed access in the home. The roll out of more mobile bandwidth and 5G speed, will make the NBN even less useful to the general populace.
It is obvious by all the finger pointing, that the penny is dropping and it will end up a big white elephant. 
It will be useful for mass secure data transfer, but the individual is going to want more and more mobility, it is just the way the world is going. As costs of living go up and up, people won't want to pay for a land connection and a mobile connection, one will suffer and the writing is on the wall which one.


----------



## SirRumpole

Tisme said:


> 14 minutes in:





Haha, brilliant, especially Malcolm and the node.


----------



## sptrawler

SirRumpole said:


> But the Liberal Party changed the plan from FTTP to FTTN, so the plan and the problem is now of their making.
> .




Cutting the costs, was probably the most sensible decision yet with the project.
As per usual, the whole debate has been taken over by ideological nonsense, as with the energy debate.
Unfortunately everything becomes party driven by political agenda, no bipartisan approach to to come up with the most sensible cost effective result, for the Australian people.
No, it is F%#&K what it costs, it is our way or the highway, meanwhile the general public just watch as their costs go up and up.
The NBN is a disaster because it was designed on a political and social agenda, rather than an economic rationale, or public requirement.  The East coast electricity system is a disaster because it is being decided on a political ideology, rather than an engineering and business model.
Hey but who cares as long as it isn't "my" political party, wearing it, is the call of the day.
Really it is about time it got back to a Government for the people, not for the politicians, but as can be seen by debate on here we support their poor behaviour by constantly excusing it.


----------



## SirRumpole

sptrawler said:


> Cutting the costs, was probably the most sensible decision yet with the project.




A internet setup is only as good as its weakest link.

What is the effing point of putting fibre to a node and then copper wire for the next bit. You will only get a speed that copper wire will transmit. Why would people buy it if its little better than what they have now ?

That's where cost cutting stuffs the whole project. It's a lemon because of the LNP's bastardised plan.

With FTTP it would cost more but you would have a product to sell. 

Now we just have a gigantic white elephant.


----------



## PZ99

SirRumpole said:


> With FTTP it would cost more but you would have a product to sell.




And that was the whole point of the project. To build infrastructure that could then provide a continual income stream for the Govt and/or be privatised to retire debt. Just like Telstra.


----------



## Junior

It seems like the best option now would almost be to pull the pin on NBN entirely (or at least map out an exit strategy) and allow the free market to take over.....there seems to be healthy competition and NBN is only stifling that by forcing many off their adequate ADSL plans, and discouraging rapid expansion of 4G and 5G networks - which will probably supersede fibre connections anyway.


----------



## sptrawler

SirRumpole said:


> A internet setup is only as good as its weakest link.
> 
> What is the effing point of putting fibre to a node and then copper wire for the next bit. You will only get a speed that copper wire will transmit. Why would people buy it if its little better than what they have now ?
> 
> That's where cost cutting stuffs the whole project. It's a lemon because of the LNP's bastardised plan.
> 
> With FTTP it would cost more but you would have a product to sell.
> 
> Now we just have a gigantic white elephant.




Well if you research it a bit, people aren't going for the highest speed, they are going for the slowest cheapest speed.


----------



## sptrawler

Junior said:


> It seems like the best option now would almost be to pull the pin on NBN entirely (or at least map out an exit strategy) and allow the free market to take over.....there seems to be healthy competition and NBN is only stifling that by forcing many off their adequate ADSL plans, and discouraging rapid expansion of 4G and 5G networks - which will probably supersede fibre connections anyway.




That would definitely be the best idea, it is going to be an ongoing cost, that will eventually be completely replaced by technology. Organisations may continue with it for security reasons, but as people become more transient and busy, some form of wireless/ satellite hybrid will be the preference for people.IMO
It is just a dumb, dumb idea, even in Mandurah, where it is fibre to the house, speeds are limited by supplier throttling. It doesn't matter though because netflix, Stan etc stream o.k


----------



## boofhead

What short memories some people have. When ADSL was rolled out by Telstra most avoided the 1536/256 plan because of cost. Over time things changed, people moved up plans, Telstra uncapped speeds to allow full sync then ADSL2 became common.

FTTP has a lower operational cost so a greater proportion of money goes towards capex which has advantages. Labor favoured the laser printer model for printing lots of documents. Coalition changed it to the lower cost inket printer with more money going towards ink.

Labor FTTP allowed multiple voice providers and multiple data providers. Coalition changes with FTTN allows 1 voice provider if you don't have a data provider. It also only allows 1 data provider.

FTTP has far better capacity to scale to the future. Seems short sighted to change infrastructure investment for only the here and now and ignoring future growth. Malcolm still spouting old figures for FTTP deployment costs yet happy to use newer/adjusted FTTN deployment costs.

As for satellite - too latent for many uses and high cost. Mobile phone network has too many limitations - spectrum limitations and retail cost of data is far too high to replace much fixed line use.


----------



## PZ99

^  Precisely. Do it once. Do it right. And do it with the good sheet


----------



## Junior

boofhead said:


> What short memories some people have. When ADSL was rolled out by Telstra most avoided the 1536/256 plan because of cost. Over time things changed, people moved up plans, Telstra uncapped speeds to allow full sync then ADSL2 became common.
> 
> FTTP has a lower operational cost so a greater proportion of money goes towards capex which has advantages. Labor favoured the laser printer model for printing lots of documents. Coalition changed it to the lower cost inket printer with more money going towards ink.
> 
> Labor FTTP allowed multiple voice providers and multiple data providers. Coalition changes with FTTN allows 1 voice provider if you don't have a data provider. It also only allows 1 data provider.
> 
> FTTP has far better capacity to scale to the future. Seems short sighted to change infrastructure investment for only the here and now and ignoring future growth. Malcolm still spouting old figures for FTTP deployment costs yet happy to use newer/adjusted FTTN deployment costs.
> 
> As for satellite - too latent for many uses and high cost. Mobile phone network has too many limitations - spectrum limitations and retail cost of data is far too high to replace much fixed line use.




ADSL used the existing copper network.  NBN is costing a f*cking fortune and may or may be completely superseded by other technology by the time it's installed.


----------



## sptrawler

Junior said:


> ADSL used the existing copper network.  NBN is costing a f*cking fortune and may or may be completely superseded by other technology by the time it's installed.




I agree with you Junior, stupid price for something that 1% of people actually need, the problem is you are arguing against a dream that has been sold.
As though we need the debt for this, when the Government can't even afford, the day to day running costs of the Country. 
The place has gone mad, peoples debt binge has flowed over into an underlying belief that just because we want something, we should have it. 
Whether we can afford it doesn't matter, just put it on the tick mentality. 
Everyone believes that gold plating of the power system was a disaster, which has caused the massive price hikes in electricity, but in the same breath they want to gold plate a bloody telephone system, weird $hit.


----------



## SirRumpole

sptrawler said:


> Everyone believes that gold plating of the power system was a disaster, which has caused the massive price hikes in electricity, but in the same breath they want to gold plate a bloody telephone system, weird $hit




Well you have to blame both major parties don't you ?

Turnbull didn't say it shouldn't be done he just said it shouldn't be done Labor's way.

Hypocrisy all round.


----------



## sptrawler

SirRumpole said:


> Well you have to blame both major parties don't you ?
> 
> Turnbull didn't say it shouldn't be done he just said it shouldn't be done Labor's way.
> 
> Hypocrisy all round.




I agree, there is much more pressing infrastructure required IMO.
Like I said roll it out to CBD's, there is an argument for the efficiency gains, then roll it out to suburbia as it starts making money. All greenfield sites should be equiped with fibre, but replacing existing should have been started last, again just my opinion.
Turnbull should have put the brakes on and re set the roll out, rather than reconfigure the equipment, but as I said earlier that can't be done because neither side can get over themselves. 
Why they can't put us first, rather than their pettiness is the root cause of 90% of our problems.IMO


----------



## drsmith

Just when Labor was hoping 4 years may have softened the public memory of the NBN they were attempting to roll out, someone's popped up to help.


----------



## SirRumpole

drsmith said:


> Just when Labor was hoping 4 years may have softened the public memory of the NBN they were attempting to roll out, someone's popped up to help.




Well, he's right. Turnbull sold us a pup. It's all on the LNP's head now.


----------



## drsmith

SirRumpole said:


> Well, he's right. Turnbull sold us a pup. It's all on the LNP's head now.



You've missed the point.

Labor wouldn't be happy with Kevin Rudd's intervention as it focuses public attention back to his tenure as PM and the lack of progress of the NBN during Labor's time in office.


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> Well if you research it a bit, people aren't going for the highest speed, they are going for the slowest cheapest speed.





I don't know why. I negotiated 100megs down, 40megs up and a 4/5g wireless backup for way less than $100/month ..Telstra


----------



## sptrawler

Tisme said:


> I don't know why. I negotiated 100megs down, 40megs up and a 4/5g wireless backup for way less than $100/month ..Telstra




Obviously not everyone has your money, 80% who have signed up, have gone for 20meg or less


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> ............., 80% who have signed up, have gone for 20meg or less




That kinda defeats the purpose, yes? Apparently there is currently a huge demand for 4k TVs .... won't they get a shock when Netflix starts streaming Ultra HD here = minimum 25megs and even then there is some stutter and that's with other devices on the home network off


----------



## sptrawler

Tisme said:


> That kinda defeats the purpose, yes? Apparently there is currently a huge demand for 4k TVs .... won't they get a shock when Netflix starts streaming Ultra HD here = minimum 25megs and even then there is some stutter and that's with other devices on the home network off




You are spot on with that analogy, the only problem is, do we really need 4K t.v more than road, rail, airport, wharf's etc?
I suppose it gives people something to do, when they're unemployed.


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> You are spot on with that analogy, the only problem is, do we really need 4K t.v more than road, rail, airport, wharf's etc?
> I suppose it gives people something to do, when they're unemployed.




Yes I chose the lowest common denominator, but I guess it does open opportunities for upsell and value add for the NBN as a consequence.

I remember back in the 80's the big thing was multi function polis'. We were going to ride the wave of innovative technology into prosperity. Here we are 30 years later and we are playing catchup on many fronts due to failure to launch.


----------



## overhang

Do people forget that Labor actually took the FTTN rollout to the 2007 election.  But not one of the companies that submitted a tender met the met the requirements.  It was also made apparent that we would have to buy back the ducts from Telstra (thanks Howard) and then require Telstra to maintain these ducts which didn't seem sensible for a retail service provider to have that type of control over a wholesale network (again thanks Howard for not splitting Telstra into separate wholesale and retail divisions before the sell off).   The ACCC also provided the expert panel with advice that 70% of the costs to build a FTTN would be stranded costs in any subsequent upgrade to FTTP.  The panel of experts recommended to the government that FTTN provided an inefficient upgrade path.

It always amazes me the backlash people have to spend $50 billion on a public infrastructure project that will eventually pay for itself and provide many economic benefits along the way.  But no one gives a stuff if we spend $50 billion on 12 submarines, in a climate where biggest enemies don't have a navy and use gorilla warfare.  Where our greatest defense is being a close ally of the US and having China so heavily invested in our country they can just buy us out instead of invading.

Murdoch ran a campaign opposed to the NBN from day one because it presented competition to his cable network, sadly many people couldn't see the conflict of interests he had and that he doesn't represent the national interest.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> Do people forget that Labor actually took the FTTN rollout to the 2007 election.  But not one of the companies that submitted a tender met the met the requirements.  It was also made apparent that we would have to buy back the ducts from Telstra (thanks Howard) and then require Telstra to maintain these ducts which didn't seem sensible for a retail service provider to have that type of control over a wholesale network (again thanks Howard for not splitting Telstra into separate wholesale and retail divisions before the sell off).   The ACCC also provided the expert panel with advice that 70% of the costs to build a FTTN would be stranded costs in any subsequent upgrade to FTTP.  The panel of experts recommended to the government that FTTN provided an inefficient upgrade path.



Rather than mandating 100% of the fixed line rollout as FTTP as Labor did, a minimum level of service (a speed of say 25 mbps as the social objective) should have been the criteria to be delivered by the most economical choice of technology on a location by location basis and not subject to the political time constraints that both sides have inflicted on the project with their respective rollouts. This would have been a true technology agnostic approach and may have resulted in a greater penetration of FTTP but obviously not 100% of the fixed line footprint. This would have also improved the economics of the project thereby allowing lower wholesale charges and perhaps avoided the CVC pricing component which has plagued speed across the fixed line footprint.

With Bill Morrow's commentary this week on taxing competing mobile services, we've come a big step closer to the inevitable multi-billion dollar writedown of the government's investment which was essentially set in stone at the time Labor's model was conceived. The Howard government should have structurally separated Telstra's wholesale and retail businesses before prior to privatisation but that doesn't excuse Labor from the disastrous publically owned NBN fantasy journey they started us on.

I note that further refinement is being considered to the current NBN wholesale pricing model.


----------



## boofhead

I don't understand how a technology agnostic approach with minimum 25 megabits/s would improve anything, especially for the long term.


----------



## drsmith

boofhead said:


> I don't understand how a technology agnostic approach with minimum 25 megabits/s would improve anything, especially for the long term.



That's the social objective which could have applied to provide a minimum level of service with rollout technology then decided by economics on a location by location basis.

That's basically what the current government has done at least with the minimum service level but like its Labor predecessor, it mandated a rollout timeframe that was too short.


----------



## PZ99

The Govt would be better off with a 5G roll out than a Fibre to the Telephone Box style NBN delivering just 25 megabits/s.


----------



## boofhead

Wishy washy stuff. Can you explain it in more concrete ways that show long term benefits instead of short term headlines? What model(s) do you use for economics? Do you include operational costs? Direct revenue? Indirect via taxation etc? Do you include potential for economic growth? Do you factor in the brakes that are applied if the choices are too limited?


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> Rather than mandating 100% of the fixed line rollout as FTTP as Labor did, a minimum level of service (a speed of say 25 mbps as the social objective) should have been the criteria to be delivered by the most economical choice of technology on a location by location basis and not subject to the political time constraints that both sides have inflicted on the project with their respective rollouts. This would have been a true technology agnostic approach and may have resulted in a greater penetration of FTTP but obviously not 100% of the fixed line footprint. This would have also improved the economics of the project thereby allowing lower wholesale charges and perhaps avoided the CVC pricing component which has plagued speed across the fixed line footprint.
> 
> With Bill Morrow's commentary this week on taxing competing mobile services, we've come a big step closer to the inevitable multi-billion dollar writedown of the government's investment which was essentially set in stone at the time Labor's model was conceived. The Howard government should have structurally separated Telstra's wholesale and retail businesses before prior to privatisation but that doesn't excuse Labor from the disastrous publically owned NBN fantasy journey they started us on.
> 
> I note that further refinement is being considered to the current NBN wholesale pricing model.




The original Labor model was to provide at least 12mbps to 98% of the country.  During the tender process numerous issues were raised, it was noted that a recurring theme was that companies were finding it difficult developing and financing their proposal given the flexible nature of the governments approach.  Labor failed to consider the compensation that Telstra would require for access to it's customer access network and as a result it became quite apparent that the $4.7 billion cost wasn't achievable.

The economics are never going to stack up to provide regional areas FTTN or FTTP, if they did then the private sector would have done this themselves.  I respect you have a different opinion here but imo it's the role of the government to fill that void.  The expert advice given to the government was that FTTN was a stepping stone to FTTP where most the costs would not be retrieved.  This was a great opportunity imo for the government to roll out a network to the majority of Australians with the same technology and upgrade path, this makes future upgrades and maintenance simplistic and more efficient.  

Given both Labor and Liberal policies have seen substantial cost and time blowouts one can appreciate how complex this issue is.  Telstra had an original plan that they discussed with the Howard government to role out FTTN.  It was later revealed Telstra's cost estimates were way off in the tune of billions. 

There are many things Labor could have handled better but the fundamentals for FTTP are sound.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> The expert advice given to the government was that FTTN was a stepping stone to FTTP where most the costs would not be retrieved.



Whether or not the fundamentals for FTTP is sound relative to the alternatives is dependant on more than the above. The more interesting question now is where rather than as a whole.


----------



## SirRumpole

So what is this stuff about the telephone service being disconnected and we are forced to use NBN ?

I live in the back blocks (although only 3 km from a small town), I'm on pair gain phone lines and the NBN is not going to reach me anytime soon, so are they going to disconnect my telephone service or what ?


----------



## boofhead

What will be rolled out to you? If it is fixed wireless or satellite then you can keep your legacy copper service. Those that are in the FTTP, FTTN, HFC, FTTB, FTTc are those that need to make the change.


----------



## overhang

drsmith said:


> Whether or not the fundamentals for FTTP is sound relative to the alternatives is dependant on more than the above. The more interesting question now is where rather than as a whole.




This would depend on the metrics used.  You don't come across as the socialist so I don't think there is any metric that would appease you because the economics would never stack up to provide most regional areas with FTTN or FTTP.  IMO with what we know now the Labor party would have rolled out FTTC to regional areas, it seems to provide the best of both worlds.


----------



## SirRumpole

boofhead said:


> What will be rolled out to you? If it is fixed wireless or satellite then you can keep your legacy copper service. Those that are in the FTTP, FTTN, HFC, FTTB, FTTc are those that need to make the change.




Most likely fixed wireless. I'm not sure of the benefits of that over my current 4G mobile broadband or even whether I can get it at all.


----------



## boofhead

Check the pricing of mobile data vs fixed wireless services provided by NBN resellers and once you start getting in to >50 GB you'll notice the difference.


----------



## drsmith

overhang said:


> This would depend on the metrics used.  You don't come across as the socialist so I don't think there is any metric that would appease you because the economics would never stack up to provide most regional areas with FTTN or FTTP.  IMO with what we know now the Labor party would have rolled out FTTC to regional areas, it seems to provide the best of both worlds.



The funny thing about the social argument for FTTP nationwide is that under it, there was (and still is) a 12mb/s for those that can't afford more under the pricing structure and even that's not achievable at times under the CVC pricing model. I note that Labor have only recently softened their view on rollout technology.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...e-option-for-nbn-rollout-20170721-gxg3zm.html

A less ambitious rollout schedule may have led to greater penetration of FTTC which I agree would have been a good thing.


----------



## Tisme

drsmith said:


> The funny thing about the social argument for FTTP nationwide is that under it, there was (and still is) a 12mb/s for those that can't afford more under the pricing structure and even that's not achievable at times under the CVC pricing model. I note that Labor have only recently softened their view on rollout technology.
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...e-option-for-nbn-rollout-20170721-gxg3zm.html
> 
> A less ambitious rollout schedule may have led to greater penetration of FTTC which I agree would have been a good thing.




With the NBN versus ADSL, the frequency is much higher on the former, which means it is comparatively more susceptible to degradation of signal, thus increased error checking, etc. 

So that 12megs (mbps) might not actually be the 1.5 MB/s useful when you look at the binary pair, and the overhead bits (error check bit and parity bit), especially on a degraded line like small gauge copper cable.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

SirRumpole said:


> Well you have to blame both major parties don't you ?
> 
> Turnbull didn't say it shouldn't be done he just said it shouldn't be done Labor's way.
> 
> Hypocrisy all round.




Early on, Mal clearly said it wasn't costed properly.

Rudd is to blame, imo.  Residential users who can't cope using ADSL should buy themselves a city office.

Should only ever have been city to city fibre.


----------



## SirRumpole

Gringotts Bank said:


> Rudd is to blame, imo. Residential users who can't cope using ADSL should buy themselves a city office.




Slightly impractical. But I think that like roads, the car numbers increase to fill the available road space, ie if the bandwidth capacity is available then people will find ways to use it up regardless of "need". Interactive gaming, netflix etc will become the biggest users rather than productive uses like business, health or education.

I wonder if anyone has done a study on what sort of bandwidth requirements a a family of four needs for essentials; education, family contacts etc discounting entertainment. That should be the target for residential users, extra bandwidth costs more.


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> Slightly impractical. But I think that like roads, the car numbers increase to fill the available road space, ie if the bandwidth capacity is available then people will find ways to use it up regardless of "need". Interactive gaming, netflix etc will become the biggest users rather than productive uses like business, health or education.
> 
> I wonder if anyone has done a study on what sort of bandwidth requirements a a family of four needs for essentials; education, family contacts etc discounting entertainment. That should be the target for residential users, extra bandwidth costs more.





It was about future utility and for some inexplicable reason getting first rollout technology to the very electorates who perpetually vote anti Labor. 

City fibre was already in train, but really really expensive....= Telstra and oligopoly industry.

The internet has to be resilient, robust and survivable. The number of data and retrievable devices coming online in the foreseeable future are touted to in their hundreds of billions.


----------



## boofhead

First 3 areas have voted between Liberal and Labor a lot. You're saying random stuff Tisme. Maybe check AEC or Wikipedia for reality.


----------



## Tisme

boofhead said:


> First 3 areas have voted between Liberal and Labor a lot. You're saying random stuff Tisme. Maybe check AEC or Wikipedia for reality.




Oh boy, there's  always one isn't there.

If you are so educated how about you just post the facts based on, I don't know, perhaps providing us a an unbiased history.

My argument is that recidivistly non Labor seats were included in the initial rollout. How about you refute that with facts.

Does 67 Labor electorates, 61 Coalition electorates and 6 cross-bench electorates ring a bell? Turnbull's electorate was a winner, but Conroy's and Shorten's weren't


----------



## boofhead

First 3 locations were in Tasmania, held by Labor at the time. Midway Point was the first southern area. It is in the electorate of Lyons which was held by Dick Adams 1993 to 2013. In the NW it was in Smithton which is Braddon held by Sid Sidebottom at the time. Scottsdale in the NE also held by Labor (division of Bass.) You clearly made a statement about areas that vote anti-labor.


----------



## Tisme

boofhead said:


> You clearly made a statement about areas that vote anti-labor.




Yes this is what I wrote (explicitly) "It was about future utility and for some inexplicable reason getting first rollout technology to the very electorates who perpetually vote anti Labor."

to which you responded with binary LNP bias: "First 3 areas have voted between Liberal and Labor a lot. You're saying random stuff Tisme. Maybe check AEC or Wikipedia for reality."

I produced the first rollout plan and you respond with the three locale nonsense. Either way just one LNP electorate is enough to make my statement true ...... and before you get on your high horse I don't care if you vote LNP or Labor, really, truely I just don't care, we are all entitled to our own mistakes. 

The real sad part about this site is the time between now and then and the end game Mac Gyver network it represents:  https://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-information/media-centre/media-releases.2009.html


----------



## boofhead

All three were Labor at the time. Labor now. Tasmania has generally been more inclined to vote Labor. History is contrary to your statement. I know you find it hard to admit you make mistakes.


----------



## Tisme

boofhead said:


> All three were Labor at the time. Labor now. Tasmania has generally been more inclined to vote Labor. History is contrary to your statement. I know you find it hard to admit you make mistakes.


----------



## Tisme

Here you go. If someone is arguing the toss about copper:

http://nbnmtm.australiaeast.cloudapp.azure.com/img/FTTN_Speed_Graph.png


----------



## Wysiwyg

Anyone got a ping less than 10 milliseconds in the Capital cities?


----------



## So_Cynical

SirRumpole said:


> So what is this stuff about the telephone service being disconnected and we are forced to use NBN ?
> 
> I live in the back blocks (although only 3 km from a small town), I'm on pair gain phone lines and the NBN is not going to reach me anytime soon, so are they going to disconnect my telephone service or what ?




The NBN will reach you soon, it just wont be Fibre, your phone will be switched over to NBN, wireless or whatever.


----------



## So_Cynical

Wysiwyg said:


> Anyone got a ping less than 10 milliseconds in the Capital cities?




I ping 2 to my ISP's same city Capital server, Fibre to the home.


----------



## Wysiwyg

So_Cynical said:


> I ping 2 to my ISP's same city Capital server, Fibre to the home.



Yes I thought that would be so. I am several hundred km  from Brisbane and ping 10ms with FTTP on a 30Gbps download speed.


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

Wysiwyg said:


> Yes I thought that would be so. I am several hundred km from Brisbane and ping 10ms with FTTP on a 30Gbps download speed.



Here are my results for a FTTH (Fibre to the Home) connection. I'm paying $NZ129 for a 200/100Mbps service, but could upgrade to ~1000/500Mbps if I buy my own router capable of this throughput. FTTH is the only way to go. These results were from Tauranga (NZ) to Sydney (AU) which is around 2300kms via international fibre, while simultaneously connected to a VPN to Wellington for work purposes:
http://broadbandcompare.speedtestcustom.com/result/4bbe6870-bdcb-11e7-ab8d-b1806c7816f0


----------



## Wysiwyg

100 Mbps maximum in Australia. NZ has 1000Mbps download speed?


----------



## sptrawler

One would assume FTTP will be available, but will probably be at the consumers cost, then it would at least be on a needs basis. Not everyone wants or indeed needs 100MB, and from an actual physical perspective, running the last 100m to the premise would be the most difficult and costly.
Pulling cable down a 100mm conduit is a lot easier, than pulling cable down a 25mm conduit that has been broken 100 times by gardeners and tree roots.


----------



## boofhead

Where would the last 100m be connected to? Many are further away from nodes. Also the nodes don't have suitable hardware for FTTP nor space for it.


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

Wysiwyg said:


> 100 Mbps maximum in Australia. NZ has 1000Mbps download speed?



We had gigabit towns over 12 months ago!
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/83342569/Top-internet-speeds-to-get-five-times-faster


----------



## Wysiwyg

zzaaxxss3401 said:


> We had gigabit towns over 12 months ago!



Okay. With 30Gbps download speed I get almost instant depending on the size of data transfered. Can't imagine what 1000Gbps download speed would be like but I suppose the infrastructure (i.e. all fibre, part copper) between server and client would determine achieving near 1 gig. and I assume instant download.


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

Wysiwyg said:


> Okay. With 30Gbps download speed I get almost instant depending on the size of data transfered.



I assume you mean 30Mbps... Very few sites support streaming of data up to 1000Mbps, but even on a 200/100Mbps service I actually get what I pay for 24*7. I've never encountered a slowdown at (say) 7pm weeknights or any buffering. This is even while we have Netflix HD streaming, and I'm working via a VPN while keeping an eye on the News online (streaming HD). Luckily our house was wired with Cat5e cabling when it was built and I have a Gigabit switch connected to the fibre modem. If I was to upgrade to 1000Mbps, the ISP supplied Huawei modem (HG253S) is actually limited to about 300Mbps, so it would become the bottleneck before the FTTH network would. Which is one of the main reasons I haven't upgraded to a gigabit service - I'd need to purchase a new modem.


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

sptrawler said:


> One would assume FTTP will be available, but will probably be at the consumers cost, then it would at least be on a needs basis. Not everyone wants or indeed needs 100MB, and from an actual physical perspective, running the last 100m to the premise would be the most difficult and costly.



Installation for us here in NZ for FTTH was free - including the ETP (External Termination Point) and the internal termination point. The Government picked up the tab (thank you National). Rolled out by UltraFast Fibre (www.ultrafastfibre.co.nz) - via Chorus technicians.

Not everyone needs 100Mbps is just like saying no one will ever need to travel faster than 16km/h - the speed of the first automobile. Not everyone needs to drive at 110km/h on duplicated freeways, but they can! Time is money and when you work from home (l consider myself extremely lucky) having an extremely fast network connection is a must! I have actually accessed client networks quicker via an external VPN connection, than users on the internal network - due to a lack of congestion compared with the internal routers / switches. I also have a better work-life balance, pay next to nothing in vehicle running costs, don't get stressed "getting" to work and have the flexibility of working out of normal business hours.

Fibre theoretically doesn't have a bandwidth, if you start to send multi-colored light down the same fibre optic tube. Why the Australian Government is spending $50+billion on a white-elephant with 3 legs and no trunk, I'll never understand! At that price, it could have just about built it's own Government owned network and paid for it over time from the ISP rentals.


----------



## sptrawler

Like I said, I assume that fibre to the node will be upgradable to FTTP, who wears the cost of the change of the copper to fibre is anyones guess.


----------



## Wysiwyg

zzaaxxss3401 said:


> I assume you mean 30Mbps...



Yes M not G sorry.


> If I was to upgrade to 1000Mbps, the ISP supplied Huawei modem (HG253S) is actually limited to about 300Mbps, so it would become the bottleneck before the FTTH network would. Which is one of the main reasons I haven't upgraded to a gigabit service - I'd need to purchase a new modem.



I have the Modem capable and bought it about 4 years ago with speed, wireless hub and VOIP in mind. VOIP to eliminate the Telstra connection fees and charges but have since struck a great bundle deal with Telstra so VOIP not ventured into. Netcomm NF3ADV ...

KEY FEATURES

1 x 10/100/1000 Gigabit WAN port
3 x 10/100/1000 Gigabit LAN ports
High speed dual band Wireless N access point 900Mbps
ADSL2+ modem built in
2.4GHz and 5GHz wireless frequency allows for cleanest possible wireless signal
3 x transmitting and 3 x receiving WiFi antennas
1 x FXS port for connection to a VoIP service – landline replacement
1 x FXO port for landline backup
DECT CAT-iQ 2.0 base station with DECT association button
2 x USB host ports supporting 3G/4G USB and mass storage file sharing
WPS button for simple setup of your wireless network
Multiple power saving features – time of day LED dimming, WiFi power save features, green/power down functions


----------



## sptrawler

zzaaxxss3401 said:


> Installation for us here in NZ for FTTH was free - including the ETP (External Termination Point) and the internal termination point. The Government picked up the tab (thank you National). Rolled out by UltraFast Fibre (www.ultrafastfibre.co.nz) - via Chorus technicians.
> 
> Not everyone needs 100Mbps is just like saying no one will ever need to travel faster than 16km/h - the speed of the first automobile. Not everyone needs to drive at 110km/h on duplicated freeways, but they can! Time is money and when you work from home (l consider myself extremely lucky) having an extremely fast network connection is a must! I have actually accessed client networks quicker via an external VPN connection, than users on the internal network - due to a lack of congestion compared with the internal routers / switches. I also have a better work-life balance, pay next to nothing in vehicle running costs, don't get stressed "getting" to work and have the flexibility of working out of normal business hours.
> 
> Fibre theoretically doesn't have a bandwidth, if you start to send multi-colored light down the same fibre optic tube. Why the Australian Government is spending $50+billion on a white-elephant with 3 legs and no trunk, I'll never understand! At that price, it could have just about built it's own Government owned network and paid for it over time from the ISP rentals.




We would probably all have FTTP, if everyone in Australia, lived between Brisbane and Sydney.


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

Wysiwyg said:


> Netcomm NF3ADV



Couldn't find the "throughput" specified anywhere. This is the critical specification: WAN-LAN throughput. 

This is the potential bottleneck between the PC and the Fibre connection. For example, the Netgear Nighthawk X8 R8500 (worth about $NZ550), can do 1000Mbps on 2.4GHz + 4330Mbps on 5GHz, however, it's WAN-LAN performance is limited to only 761Mbps. So it would max out the fibre connection at 761Mbps. Doh! The Linksys WRT1200AC (worth about $NZ150), can only do 400Mbps on 2.4GHz + 867Mbps on 5GHz, but it's WAN-LAN performance is rated at 945Mbps.

So it's difficult to find a router with 1) good range, 2) good WAN-LAN performance, 3) good WiFi performance, 4) good price... which is why I'm sticking with my 200/100Mbps service for the time being.


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

sptrawler said:


> We would probably all have FTTP, if everyone in Australia, lived between Brisbane and Sydney.



Which is probably why fibre should have been rolled out state wide, rather than country wide! Do it once... do it properly. The FTTN is rubbish because: 1) you're still using copper between the Node and the Home, but 2) you have congestion directly at the Node. FTTP/FTTH has fibre all the way to the exchange and no congestion, until it gets to the ISP - which could be one of 100's.

What will it cost Australia to finally separate itself from the monopoly of Telstra (copper) and finally go FTTP / FTTH? Another $50billion? They should be doing it NOW, while interest rates are so low, rather than wasting money on WiFi / Satellite / FTTN rubbish.

Oh how the "lucky country" is no longer looking so "lucky".


----------



## sptrawler

zzaaxxss3401 said:


> Which is probably why fibre should have been rolled out state wide, rather than country wide! Do it once... do it properly. The FTTN is rubbish because: 1) you're still using copper between the Node and the Home, but 2) you have congestion directly at the Node. FTTP/FTTH has fibre all the way to the exchange and no congestion, until it gets to the ISP - which could be one of 100's.
> 
> What will it cost Australia to finally separate itself from the monopoly of Telstra (copper) and finally go FTTP / FTTH? Another $50billion? They should be doing it NOW, while interest rates are so low, rather than wasting money on WiFi / Satellite / FTTN rubbish.
> 
> Oh how the "lucky country" is no longer looking so "lucky".




Like I said, I would be suprised if the node isn't configured in such a way, that the copper to the house can be upgraded to fibre. 
This could be done on an as required( due to copper degradation) or as the end user reaches the limitations of the copper speed and the want faster speeds.


----------



## Tisme

Report from ACCC:

https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Communications Sector Market Study Draft Report.pdf


----------



## boofhead

The nodes use hardware that are copper specific. The fibre that connects to the node is different to the fibre that FTTP uses for the final connection. It needs different, specific hardware.


----------



## Tisme

zzaaxxss3401 said:


> .... until it gets to the ISP - which could be one of 100's.




You might like to bone up on the architecture of the network.


----------



## overhang

sptrawler said:


> Like I said, I would be suprised if the node isn't configured in such a way, that the copper to the house can be upgraded to fibre.
> This could be done on an as required( due to copper degradation) or as the end user reaches the limitations of the copper speed and the want faster speeds.




It can be upgraded to FTTP in the sense that the fibre is closer to the home and the fibre to the node can be utilised but the cabinet will most likely have to be gutted.  The active power to the node, backup batteries, cooling, copper line cards become useless.  The (in some cases) newly built pillars would again be useless.  The worst part of all this is that even though the coalition are spending $49 billion on their MTM network the most expensive component of the NBN hasn't been touched (fibre from the pit to the home).  Hence why the audit into the NBN found that 70% of the FTTN costs will not be recouped in an upgrade to FTTP.

One has to wonder how much further the gap has closed between the FTTN to FTTP cost given that in 2014 the estimated power consumption to run the FTTN cabinets was $75 million to $90 million annually, we know power prices have risen considerably since 2014.  FTTP runs by optics and doesn't require active power.


----------



## sptrawler

boofhead said:


> The nodes use hardware that are copper specific. The fibre that connects to the node is different to the fibre that FTTP uses for the final connection. It needs different, specific hardware.




It can still be upgraded, on an as required basis, all this ramping of the death of fibre to the house, is nonsense and just hysteria as usual.


----------



## sptrawler

zzaaxxss3401 said:


> *Not everyone needs 100Mbps is just like saying no one will ever need to travel faster than 16km/h - the speed of the first automobile. Not everyone needs to drive at 110km/h on duplicated freeways, but they can!* Time is money and when you work from home (l consider myself extremely lucky) having an extremely fast network connection is a must! I have actually accessed client networks quicker via an external VPN connection, than users on the internal network - due to a lack of congestion compared with the internal routers / switches. I also have a better work-life balance, pay next to nothing in vehicle running costs, don't get stressed "getting" to work and have the flexibility of working out of normal business hours.
> 
> Fibre theoretically doesn't have a bandwidth, if you start to send multi-colored light down the same fibre optic tube. Why the Australian Government is spending $50+billion on a white-elephant with 3 legs and no trunk, I'll never understand! At that price, it could have just about built it's own Government owned network and paid for it over time from the ISP rentals.




A more apt analogy may be, people can legally drive their cars at 110km/hr, why give everyone a car that can do 250km/hr?
Maybe in years to come, when autonomous driving cars are fully functioning and systems are in place to ensure 0 accidents, cars may be able to do 250km/hr safely.
Then no doubt the speed limits and cars to achieve the speed will be normal, but at the moment they aren't, so why would you give everyone one?
Another way of looking at it is, when computers first came out they cost $1500 for a green screen 16kb extended memory, that was 1981.
Now computers are relatively cheap and much bigger, but that doesn't mean everyone needs one, with the capability and speed of the ATO's computer.


----------



## boofhead

How would only that segment be upgraded? FTTP and FTTN use a different design to get from distribution points to the cabinets. Seems many mistake an upgrade FTTN to FTTP as only doing stuff from the cabinet to the premises. It isn't. That is why FTTN is a poor middle step. Large cost and even nbnco has stepped back a little bit by saying it such upgrades would happen in the future where economical. It gives them a way to do nothing.


----------



## sptrawler

boofhead said:


> How would only that segment be upgraded? FTTP and FTTN use a different design to get from distribution points to the cabinets. Seems many mistake an upgrade FTTN to FTTP as only doing stuff from the cabinet to the premises. It isn't. That is why FTTN is a poor middle step. Large cost and even nbnco has stepped back a little bit by saying it such upgrades would happen in the future where economical. It gives them a way to do nothing.




Well I was talking to a tech working on the nbn at the moment, and he said it can be upgraded with minimal fuss, that was yesterday. 
He actually said, it may be possible in the future to install small transmitters and aerials on the boxes, thereby giving much greater mobile carrying capacity.
But hey, why burst the hysteria bubble?


----------



## overhang

sptrawler said:


> It can still be upgraded, on an as required basis, all this ramping of the death of fibre to the house, is nonsense and just hysteria as usual.




A VF commodore can also be upgraded to a VF GTS, it would just be economically foolish to do so.


----------



## sptrawler

overhang said:


> A VF commodore can also be upgraded to a VF GTS, it would just be economically foolish to do so.




What so now you're saying, everyone should get a VF GTS rather than most just getting a 6 cylinder?
But your analogy is correct, it is like giving everyone a GTS when most only need a standard V6, it would be stupid.IMO


----------



## sptrawler

The other issue is of course, if the techie is right and mobile equipment is fitted at a later date, probably when autonomous cars become a reality and they can't afford blackspots and require heaps more mobile data handling.
Then everyone will be saying, how great it was to have all the boxes installed.


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

Tisme said:


> You might like to bone up on the architecture of the network.



How so? FTTP is a direct connection to the exchange. Period. There's no "box" converting from electrical pulses to light pulses like there is with FTTN. Sure there's a mux of sorts at the exchange, but no doubt plenty of capacity. Unless the architects have failed do cater for sufficient capacity there's no issue.


----------



## Tisme

zzaaxxss3401 said:


> How so? FTTP is a direct connection to the exchange. Period. There's no "box" converting from electrical pulses to light pulses like there is with FTTN. Sure there's a mux of sorts at the exchange, but no doubt plenty of capacity. Unless the architects have failed do cater for sufficient capacity there's no issue.





The ISPs aren't serial connection to the end user. They deploy at the NBN level


----------



## Tisme

Wysiwyg said:


> Yes M not G sorry.
> I have the Modem capable and bought it about 4 years ago with speed, wireless hub and VOIP in mind. VOIP to eliminate the Telstra connection fees and charges but have since struck a great bundle deal with Telstra so VOIP not ventured into. Netcomm NF3ADV ...
> 
> KEY FEATURES
> 
> 1 x 10/100/1000 Gigabit WAN port
> 3 x 10/100/1000 Gigabit LAN ports
> High speed dual band Wireless N access point 900Mbps
> ADSL2+ modem built in
> 2.4GHz and 5GHz wireless frequency allows for cleanest possible wireless signal
> 3 x transmitting and 3 x receiving WiFi antennas
> 1 x FXS port for connection to a VoIP service – landline replacement
> 1 x FXO port for landline backup
> DECT CAT-iQ 2.0 base station with DECT association button
> 2 x USB host ports supporting 3G/4G USB and mass storage file sharing
> WPS button for simple setup of your wireless network
> Multiple power saving features – time of day LED dimming, WiFi power save features, green/power down functions
> 
> View attachment 73235





Most switches and routers have 10/100/1000 speeds

Telstra have moved away the Cisco Router/Modem to the Netgear 7610-1TLAUS which has 5g wireless backup.


----------



## PZ99

sptrawler said:


> What so now you're saying, everyone should get a VF GTS rather than most just getting a 6 cylinder?



We already ordered and paid for the GTS. But prior to collecting the vehicle we downgraded to the V6 that couldn't pull the head off a beer because we also bought that bigger boat to tow around. 

Maybe we could enable the hurricane pipe lining. LOL


----------



## overhang

sptrawler said:


> What so now you're saying, everyone should get a VF GTS rather than most just getting a 6 cylinder?
> But your analogy is correct, it is like giving everyone a GTS when most only need a standard V6, it would be stupid.IMO



 I'm saying we should pay for the GTS now instead of the 6 cylinder that will need to be upgraded to a GTS in the future.  Purchasing the 6 cylinder knowing that it will need to be upgraded and most the parts binned is stupid IMO.


----------



## Tisme

PZ99 said:


> We already ordered and paid for the GTS. But prior to collecting the vehicle we downgraded to the V6 that couldn't pull the head off a beer because we also bought that bigger boat to tow around.
> 
> Maybe we could enable the hurricane pipe lining. LOL




I would expand that to "we ordered a GTS Coupe, had a Belmont Ute delivered and worse it was made on a Monday!" and it cost 25% more !!!!


----------



## sptrawler

overhang said:


> I'm saying we should pay for the GTS now instead of the 6 cylinder that will need to be upgraded to a GTS in the future.  Purchasing the 6 cylinder knowing that it will need to be upgraded and most the parts binned is stupid IMO.



What if the 6 cylinder lasts for 20 years and does everything required, then when you need to replace it, electric cars are the norm?
What you are saying is like, every bridge made in Australia, should be built twice the size it needs to be, because in 30 years time there is a good chance it will be at capacity.

Why the hell does everybody in Australia require, the capability of optical right now? 
As though everyone is going to be a tech guru and need it to develop their at home online international business.FFS

Everyone has as usual, got all emotional and bent out of shape, over the ideology. Just like Australia rushing headlong, to save the World, from climate change. Yes it needs to be done, but we don't need to whip ourselves to death, to prove something to the World.
The S.A blackouts, probably made the Uganda News comic strip.
We really do have a weird outlook.


----------



## sptrawler

Tisme said:


> I would expand that to "we ordered a GTS Coupe, had a Belmont Ute delivered and worse it was made on a Monday!" and it cost 25% more !!!!




25% more than what? 
FTTP labour content, would have blown out astronomically, as you well know.


----------



## sptrawler

PZ99 said:


> We already ordered and paid for the GTS. But prior to collecting the vehicle we downgraded to the V6 that couldn't pull the head off a beer because we also bought that bigger boat to tow around.
> 
> Maybe we could enable the hurricane pipe lining. LOL




That is incorrect, we ordered the GTS, but we didn't have a fixed price. Be honest.
The other incorrect statement is, we haven't bought a bigger boat, what we have can be pulled by what we've bought.
What you are saying really is lets buy the Toyota V8 Landcruiser, just in case we can afford a big boat.


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> 25% more than what?
> FTTP labour content, would have blown out astronomically, as you well know.




The difference between the original order value and the actual bill. I'm not talking about crystal balling, just facts.


----------



## sptrawler

Tisme said:


> The difference between the original order value and the actual bill. I'm not talking about crystal balling, just facts.




You're not really, your comparing the fact of what it is costing, to the dreamed up cost of what they thought it would cost. If it came in on time and on budget.
Comparing reality and a dream, really isn't technical analysis, I'm sure you've had enough experience to know the difference, without me telling you.


----------



## overhang

sptrawler said:


> What if the 6 cylinder lasts for 20 years and does everything required, then when you need to replace it, electric cars are the norm?
> What you are saying is like, every bridge made in Australia, should be built twice the size it needs to be, because in 30 years time there is a good chance it will be at capacity.
> 
> Why the hell does everybody in Australia require, the capability of optical right now?
> As though everyone is going to be a tech guru and need it to develop their at home online international business.FFS
> 
> Everyone has as usual, got all emotional and bent out of shape, over the ideology. Just like Australia rushing headlong, to save the World, from climate change. Yes it needs to be done, but we don't need to whip ourselves to death, to prove something to the World.
> The S.A blackouts, probably made the Uganda News comic strip.
> We really do have a weird outlook.





Because the 6 cylinder isn't brand new, it uses 60 year old spark plugs, for some people all 6 fire, for others only 2 fire.  It always has a lot more ongoing maintenance costs, it will break down at some point.  We pay 50k for the 6 cylinder that we can upgrade to the GTS in the future for a further 35k or we can spend 65k and get the GTS now.  The GTS can be upgraded to be some futuristic car without even altering any significant parts.


No one is saying everyone needs it right now but we will need it in the future, spending this type of outlay to get a half assed network we're results are just the luck of the draw.  The only people who have made their decision on emotion and ideology are the "fiscal conservatives" from the liberal party and those that support the MTM rollout.  I don't begrudge anyone for thinking we shouldn't have built any type of network but it's so nonsensical to spend this much money and end up with a network with ongoing maintenance costs, we're results vary greatly from user to user, will require to be upgraded in the future for a huge outlay.  But it's ok, NBN co have stated we won't need to upgrade to FTTP for at least 5 years after the build


----------



## sptrawler

overhang said:


> No one is saying everyone needs it right now but we will need it in the future, spending this type of outlay to get a half assed network we're results are just the luck of the draw.  The only people who have made their decision on emotion and ideology are the "fiscal conservatives" from the liberal party and those that support the MTM rollout.  I don't begrudge anyone for thinking we shouldn't have built any type of network but it's so nonsensical to spend this much money and end up with a network with ongoing maintenance costs, we're results vary greatly from user to user, will require to be upgraded in the future for a huge outlay.  But it's ok, NBN co have stated we won't need to upgrade to FTTP for at least 5 years after the build




That is a huge assumption, it may be correct or it may be incorrect, time will tell.

The same issues could be said for the electrical distribution network, 30- 40 years ago people were saying all houses should have 3 phase to them, as household electrical demand kept increasing more and more. 
Then 3 phase wiring would have to be retrofitted, to upgrade current capacity, after all 3 phase runs down every street it wouldn't have cost much to upgrade.

Now 40 years later on most houses still only have single phase, mainly due to technological improvements, which have reduced actual demand while supplying more appliances.

Like I've said, people need to get over the hysteria, it usually ends up being storm in a tea cup.


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> You're not really, your comparing the fact of what it is costing, to the dreamed up cost of what they thought it would cost. If it came in on time and on budget.
> Comparing reality and a dream, really isn't technical analysis, I'm sure you've had enough experience to know the difference, without me telling you.





Well I'm not, but if it makes you feel better then go with it. I could revert back to the mid 20's figure that was going to be the Govt's contribution, the rest a PPP and that would double the cost over the  original order value.

I'm not  really all that fussed about the semantics, just the low grade install that we ended up with...and I'm definitely not Robinson Crusoe there, although in the early days I certainly felt like it. Ten years for people to educate themselves on something they effectively voted for on the basis of the say so an ignorant future PM is an indictment on our education and sheeple level in this country.

In the end it's the same old situation where someone buys a lemon and they are too proud to admit it's a lemon until too late.


----------



## overhang

sptrawler said:


> Like I've said, people need to get over the hysteria, it usually ends up being storm in a tea cup.




It was the hysteria from 2010-2013 that got us in this mess, go and read the start of the thread and you'll see the storm in the tea cup you refer to.


----------



## sptrawler

overhang said:


> It was the hysteria from 2010-2013 that got us in this mess, go and read the start of the thread and you'll see the storm in the tea cup you refer to.




Yes, I remember it well, good old NBNMyths I wonder what happened to him?


----------



## overhang

sptrawler said:


> Yes, I remember it well, good old NBNMyths I wonder what happened to him?



I'm not sure but it's nice of you to recognise his efforts to calm the hysteria we were seeing from other members of the forum.


----------



## sptrawler

overhang said:


> I'm not sure but it's nice of you to recognise his efforts to calm the hysteria we were seeing from other members of the forum.




He was certainly ahead of the curve, when it came to NBN knowledge.


----------



## Tisme

I must admit San Fran's internet was woeful for me last visit, however did they not consider consulting with the inventor of the internet before going down this path:

https://www.wired.com/story/san-francisco-municipal-fiber/



> Last week, San Francisco became the first major city in America to pledge to connect all of its homes and businesses to a fiber optic network.
> 
> I urge you to read that sentence again. It’s a ray of light. In an era of short-term, deeply partisan do-nothing-ism, the city's straightforward, deeply practical determination shines. Americans, it turns out, are capable of great things—even if only at the city level these days....................................


----------



## zzaaxxss3401

Doesn't look like there's much hope for consumers. A refund isn't a solution - what's the alternative?
http://www.theage.com.au/business/c...sation-rather-than-speed-20171108-gzh6di.html


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> When you look ad data as to the level of service being ordered, ~80% with an FTTP connection are ordering either a 12 or 25Mbps service.
> 
> https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/NBN Wholesale Market Indicators Report 30 June 2017.pdf
> 
> When compared to the table at the 7-minute mark of the first of the two video links above, this hasn't materially changed over the past two years.
> 
> What this illustrates is that the vast majority of those connecting don't wish to pay for the difference between an FTTN and FTTP service. Of interest with the rest is that ~4% are ordering 50Mbps and ~16% 100Mbps. It would be interesting to know more about the demographics of the 16% to understand where the best economic case lies for FTTP (or other techs that have the potential to offer 100Mbps+).



NBN Wholesale Market Indicators to Sept 30 has been published by the ACCC.

https://www.accc.gov.au/regulated-i...bn-wholesale-market-indicators-report/reports

Penetration of 50+mbps active services on the FTTP network is still around 20% of active services (19.6% compared to 19.3% at June 30). Also of interest, penetration of 50+mbps active services on the HFC network is 23.5% at Sept 30 compared to 26.4% at June 30.

On CVC capacity purchased by the RSP's,



> ACCC Chair Rod Sims latched onto the report showing the average National Broadband Network (NBN) CVC bought by retailers per users increasing from 1.09Mbps to 1.11Mbps.




http://www.zdnet.com/article/accc-sees-nbn-hope-in-tiny-cvc-increase/


----------



## Tisme

zzaaxxss3401 said:


> Doesn't look like there's much hope for consumers. A refund isn't a solution - what's the alternative?
> http://www.theage.com.au/business/c...sation-rather-than-speed-20171108-gzh6di.html




There is talk that the NBN will start a retro rollout of light pipes to the curb where premises neighbourhoods are unable to get fast speeds because the copper can't handle the higher frequencies of the VDSL network versus adsl. Time frame = who knows


----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> There is talk that the NBN will start a retro rollout of light pipes to the curb where premises neighbourhoods are unable to get fast speeds because the copper can't handle the higher frequencies of the VDSL network versus adsl. Time frame = who knows



Legacy copper services such as ADSL will be switched off after an 18-month migration window. This is covered in a link you posted back in August.



Tisme said:


> http://www.zdnet.com/article/6-percent-of-fttn-nbn-connections-cannot-hit-25mbps/


----------



## Tisme

drsmith said:


> Legacy copper services such as ADSL will be switched off after an 18-month migration window. This is covered in a link you posted back in August.





It's not initial rollout, but going back to install fibre to the curb instead of to the node.


----------



## Tisme

Interesting admonishment from a poster who presumes to be an ISP rep:


----------



## Smurf1976

I didn't bother connecting to the NBN when the ADSL was turned off a few months ago.

Simply tethering my existing mobile phone to the PC is providing a faster service than I ever had with ADSL, faster than others seem to be getting with the NBN too, and it has added just $30 a month to the cost of the mobile data. Make that $10 once I change the plan shortly.

That approach wouldn't be suitable if I wanted to stream movies but I don't so it's working just fine for me. I know others who have done or are considering the same thing.

Now I've just got to fix the mess NBN made of the concrete path at the front of the house when they put the fibre in. Logic says I should insist they pay to fix it properly, it's a tripping hazard at the moment, but no doubt that'll end up costing me more time than just doing it myself.

I wonder how much money the contractors made out of replacing plastic pits with identical plastic pits in my street? They didn't bother with mine because it's under a tree but did the easy ones. If it wasn't for things like that the project would be considerably cheaper I'm sure.


----------



## sptrawler

Smurf1976 said:


> I didn't bother connecting to the NBN when the ADSL was turned off a few months ago.
> 
> Simply tethering my existing mobile phone to the PC is providing a faster service than I ever had with ADSL, faster than others seem to be getting with the NBN too, and it has added just $30 a month to the cost of the mobile data. Make that $10 once I change the plan shortly.
> .




But that isn't meant to happen, you're supposed to be gagging for 100mb/s, like everyone else.Apparently. lol
It is the biggest waste of taxpayers money, in living memory.IMO


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> But that isn't meant to happen, you're supposed to be gagging for 100mb/s, like everyone else.Apparently. lol
> It is the biggest waste of taxpayers money, in living memory.IMO




You guys sound like crusty old men complaining about disc brakes, power steering, cruise control and air conditioning.


----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> It's not initial rollout, but going back to install fibre to the curb instead of to the node.



Just to be clear, are you talking about where FTTN has already been rolled out or where FTTN has been planned but will be FTTC instead?


----------



## drsmith

Smurf1976 said:


> I didn't bother connecting to the NBN when the ADSL was turned off a few months ago.



FTTN is presently being rolled out where I am. The node box that I expect to be connected to was installed last week. The service is expected to go live early next year.

My present inclination is to stay with ADSL as long as I can as I presently get 12/1 and it offers better value for money than 12/1 on NBN through the same ISP. A secondary consideration will be CVC capacity/user the ISP purchases under the present NBN wholesale pricing model. I expect to be contacted by the ISP once the NBN service is active and out of curiosity will be asking a few questions when that occurs.

A mobile only service is something I'll consider towards the end of the ADSL migration period but that will depend on the monthly quota I'm using (essentially cost relative to NBN).


----------



## Tisme

drsmith said:


> Just to be clear, are you talking about where FTTN has already been rolled out or where FTTN has been planned but will be FTTC instead?





Retrofitting NBN


----------



## sptrawler

drsmith said:


> Just to be clear, are you talking about where FTTN has already been rolled out or where FTTN has been planned but will be FTTC instead?




The tech I was talking to said, FTTC requires a 12v supply from the house, he thinks it will be doubtful it will be taken up.
If it does require a 12v supply and the copper pair can't be used, they may as well run fibre to the house.IMO


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> The tech I was talking to said, FTTC requires a 12v supply from the house, he thinks it will be doubtful it will be taken up.
> If it does require a 12v supply and the copper pair can't be used, they may as well run fibre to the house.IMO





Yes the NBN calls it "reverse-powered" DPUs.


----------



## Tisme




----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> Retrofitting NBN



I can't imagine this being done at scale with only 6% of FTTN services between 12 and 25mbps during the coexistence period. Other alternatives also exist where there's overlap with fixed wireless or even the sat service which is presently 20% utilised.

Probably more a future upgrade path beyond the current rollout.


----------



## Tisme

drsmith said:


> I can't imagine this being done at scale with only 6% of FTTN services between 12 and 25mbps during the coexistence period. Other alternatives also exist where there's overlap with fixed wireless or even the sat service which is presently 20% utilised.
> 
> Probably more a future upgrade path beyond the current rollout.





Supposedly only those areas with obvious fail status.


----------



## drsmith

sptrawler said:


> The tech I was talking to said, FTTC requires a 12v supply from the house, he thinks it will be doubtful it will be taken up.
> If it does require a 12v supply and the copper pair can't be used, they may as well run fibre to the house.IMO



There was a potential issue earlier in the year regarding premises being electricity suppliers.

https://www.itnews.com.au/news/nbn-co-reveals-reverse-power-draw-for-fttdp-451943

The choice for those getting FTTC looks relatively simple for those reluctant about the power requirements.


----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> Supposedly only those areas with obvious fail status.



How many ?


----------



## Tisme

drsmith said:


> How many ?





Don't know yet. Still in discussion secret squirrels.


----------



## Tisme

http://thenewdaily.com.au/life/tech/2017/11/13/nbn-mike-quigley-ambitious-fibre/



> Former NBN boss Mike Quigley has slammed the Coalition’s copper-based network as a “colossal mistake” after a senior German executive gave a sponsored speech backing the technology.
> 
> Deutsche Telekom chief technology officer Bruno Jacobfeuerborn, in Sydney for a conference partly funded by NBN Co, said his company initially thought the Australian Labor Party’s plan to rollout full fibre-to-the-premises (FTTP) was a “great idea” but soon switched to a Coalition-style multi-technology mix because full FTTP was “very ambitious” and inefficient.
> 
> Mr Quigley, NBN Co’s first CEO from 2009 to 2013, retorted by saying Germany’s copper-based network was very different to Australia’s.
> 
> “The world’s going fibre,” he told _The New Daily_....................


----------



## drsmith

On a walk today, I got to see some of the activity associated with the FTTN rollout. There was a recently installed micronode case on one street.

Of interest on another street, a rock breaker was jackhammering a trench on the street verge. I was advised by an onsite worker this is to lay fibre in a new duct to service the nodes. The Telstra duct was unsuitable for this section due to the proximity of other existing services. The days and weeks ahead may show how widespread the instillation of new duct is in the area more broadly.


----------



## Tisme

It's like a contagion:

https://www.lightningbroadband.com.au/news/australia-png-internet-cable-lb2310/


----------



## Tisme

Oh I forgot to tell everyone...my NBN has gone down after only two weeks and they can't find the reason why.

And although I pay for wireless backup the accounts dept can't figure out how to ring tech dept and get it up and running.

So I'm hot spotting off my mobile


----------



## Tisme

NBN technician works to be subbied Telstra in new year. That can't be good for all those 3 day cert 2 people out there who were led to believe they had work for several years.


----------



## Tisme




----------



## drsmith

Today's announced delay with the HFC rollout will have a significant impact on the rollout target to June 30 2018.

https://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-...ia-releases/improved-customer-experience.html

Reduced from 9.1m RFS to 8.7m in the 2018 corporate plan (200k of which was due to a reduction in premises to be passed), I anticipate that figure will be revised down to around 8.0m.

This is a major setback on the scale of those that plagued Labor's FTTP rollout timeframe. The June 30 2019 target of 11.2m (97%) will I expect also be revised down. 11.6m (100%) by June 30 2020 may still be achievable given the rollout was forecast to be only 400k short of completion at June 30 2019.

There were 5.7m premises passed at June 30 2017 compared to the 2016 corporate plan target of 5.4m to June 30 2017.


----------



## drsmith

From NBN's statement above,


> To help ensure the best possible experience for its customers (the internet service providers) and their end users, *NBN Co* will temporarily pause all new orders over its HFC access network. This pause will be in effect until incremental field work is undertaken to raise the quality of service for end users.
> 
> There will be a delay of the current rollout timing of new HFC areas while the company undertakes this work in both the existing footprint and areas not previously declared ready for service. The company confirmed, even with these changes, it remains on target to connect eight million active end users and deliver a fully connected continent by the year 2020.



The above suggests the pause is in orders to connect rather than the physical rollout of HFC itself. 800k were RFS on the HFC network at ay June 30 2017 and this is forecast to rise to 1.9m by June 30 2018. At 80k per month, one would expect RFS will reach ~1.2m when the pause on new orders takes effect in December.

With 7-months to June 30 2018, one would imagine construction work is already under way or contracted on the vast majority of the remaining 700k. A flow-on to new construction would probably materialise in 2018/19 but is difficult at the present time to quantify.


----------



## Tisme

https://www.cnet.com/au/news/nbn-halts-hfc-rollout-delaying-service-by-6-to-9-months/



> *NBN halts all new HFC connections, warns of 9-month delays*
> Roughly 2.5 million Australians waiting to get the NBN over HFC now have even longer to wait as NBN addresses drop-out issues.
> 
> 
> 
> BY
> CLAIRE REILLY
> 27 NOVEMBER 2017 1:23 PM AEDT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't expect an NBN connection anytime soon if you're in an HFC area.
> 
> NBN Co
> If you're one of the roughly 2.5 million Australians still yet to connect to the NBN via HFC, then we have bad news: Your service is going to be delayed another six to nine months.
> 
> NBN has confirmed it is "pausing" further orders of NBN service over HFC technology, effective immediately. The company plans to get through the current backlog of orders and will still take orders for service from ISPs over the next two weeks, but customers waiting for service after that will have their access to the national broadband network delayed.
> 
> In a press briefing on Monday, NBN CEO Bill Morrow said the steps were being taken to ensure a strong "customer experience."
> 
> Hybrid Fibre Coaxial is the same cable technology used to bring Foxtel to houses around Australia, and is just one of the access technologies used to deliver the NBN under the federal government's multi-technology mix (alongside fibre to the premises, satellite for remote communities and the much-debated fibre to the node).
> 
> NBN took ownership of Australia's legacy HFC networks from Telstra and Optus in 2014. But in 2016 NBN ditched Optus' network, thanks to "up-to-date learnings" about how difficult it was to get premises onto the network using that technology.
> 
> Now, HFC is causing even more grief.
> 
> "The reality is this is someone else's network," Morrow said on Monday, adding that the company doesn't believe the move to pull HFC connections was a "stuff up."
> 
> *MORE NBN NEWS*
> 
> NBN Co takes over legacy HFC networks from Telstra and Optus
> Telstra to refund 42,000 NBN customers over poor speeds
> NBN faces inquiry after 'concerning' increase in complaints
> NBN says roughly 3 million Australians will eventually be brought onto the national broadband network via HFC technology. Currently, 1.2 million of those premises are ready for service and, of those, "nearly 1 million" are ready to connect. But within that number, only 370,000 premises are connected and running on HFC, leaving millions of Australians with no set details on when they'll be able to connect.
> 
> Morrow said the problems around HFC were not speed related, adding that the technology is "capable of delivering gigabit speeds." Rather, a "minority" of customers were experiencing drop-outs due to the frequency band NBN uses on the HFC network, but these issues were only known when customers were connected to the network.
> 
> "We are not going to sacrifice customer experience just for the pace of the rollout," Morrow said, when explaining the decision to halt HFC activations.
> 
> The move does not effect customers currently up and running on the HFC network, though Morrow advised those Australians already on HFC to get in touch with their Internet Service Provider if they've experienced issues.
> 
> But it's bad news for the roughly 2.5 million Australians who have been waiting for the NBN to come to their area, or for those who are classified as "ready to connect" but who haven't put in an order. NBN says these premises will continue to be able to access (non-NBN) ADSL while they wait.
> 
> NBN says the delay will taper down from the current additional expected wait time of six to nine months. Morrow was also at pains to reiterate that the problem would not cause NBN to miss its target of completing the network by 2020.
> 
> *Rebooting the Reef**:* CNET dives deep into how tech can help save Australia's Great Barrier Reef.
> 
> *iHate*: CNET looks at how intolerance is taking over the internet.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

What to do when those who are supposed to do the NBN connection just never turn up?  They say they will, then they don't.  Multiple times over several weeks.

Suggestions?


----------



## sptrawler

Gringotts Bank said:


> What to do when those who are supposed to do the NBN connection just never turn up?  They say they will, then they don't.  Multiple times over several weeks.
> 
> Suggestions?




This happened to a friend of mine, luckily he broke his leg and was stuck at home for several weeks, they ended up getting there to do the job.

It is a bit of a radical suggestion, but it was successful. lol


----------



## Wysiwyg

Break a leg -- The expression reflects a theatrical superstition in which wishing a person "good luck" is considered bad luck.

Don't do it Gringo. There isn't anything you can do but focus on something else. Then they will turn up.


----------



## Tisme

Gringotts Bank said:


> What to do when those who are supposed to do the NBN connection just never turn up?  They say they will, then they don't.  Multiple times over several weeks.
> 
> Suggestions?




What really happens is the sub contractor sees the job and if there isn't enough money in it to make a profit he declines the work order.

So if you or you property appear to be too difficult you have a long time at the end of a queue.

Suggestions:

1) ask for a business install ...you get preferential treatment, better modems, etc 
2) if your last name sounds Indian, Jewish, Dutch or Straights Chinese use a different Welsh one like Jones, Edwards or Smith
3) if you put your occupation down as a Doctor, Lawyer or Accountant you did a bad thing too. Subbies hate these people because they traditionally refuse to pay the bill in other trades industries (see also 2) above).


----------



## Wysiwyg

> Roughly 2.5 million Australians waiting to get the NBN over HFC now have even longer to wait as NBN addresses drop-out issues.



To fix up the connection issues of those already uhh connected. Everyone is in a frantic rush to get things done nowadays. Bet there are some seriously botched NBN connections.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Tisme said:


> What really happens is the sub contractor sees the job and if there isn't enough money in it to make a profit he declines the work order.
> 
> So if you or you property appear to be too difficult you have a long time at the end of a queue.
> 
> Suggestions:
> 
> 1) ask for a business install ...you get preferential treatment, better modems, etc
> 2) if your last name sounds Indian, Jewish, Dutch or Straights Chinese use a different Welsh one like Jones, Edwards or Smith
> 3) if you put your occupation down as a Doctor, Lawyer or Accountant you did a bad thing too. Subbies hate these people because they traditionally refuse to pay the bill in other trades industries (see also 2) above).




Thanks.  Looks like mobile broadband then.  Maybe the ISP will offer a deal on this.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

As the first poster and originator of this thread.

I would remind the youth of my prognosis of the NBN.

It is not a communication program.

It is a political program.

The NBN has been modified by the ALP and Coalition that it ain't worth a small turd from a big ****. 

It is a complete piece of ****.

It will be scrapped.

gg




Garpal Gumnut said:


> I have it on good opinion from one of my Queensland ALP contacts , that the NBN is to be "modified".
> 
> This will free up money for the Flood and Cyclone Reconstruction.
> 
> The word "scrapped" will not be used.
> 
> "Modified" is the buzzword.
> 
> One can imagine a Dalek saying it...."Modified, modified, modified"
> 
> gg


----------



## Tisme

http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/national/2017/11/27/bennelong-byelection-nbn-delay/




> The Turnbull government’s campaign to defend Bennelong has been dealt a blow after NBN Co revealed it would delay the rollout of the main technology being used to connect homes and businesses in the electorate.
> 
> Most homes and businesses in Liberal MP John Alexander’s seat in Sydney’s north-west are slated to connect to the NBN via the Hybrid Fibre Coaxial (HFC) technology, which utilises existing pay TV cables.
> 
> Amid growing frustration about the rollout nationally, Labor’s candidate, former NSW premier Kristina Keneally, has sought to make the NBN a key campaign issue for the byelection to be held on December 16.
> 
> And in a case of bad timing for the government, NBN Co revealed on Monday the nationwide HFC rollout would be delayed, a setback that means tens of thousands voters in Bennelong will now have to wait up to nine months longer for the NBN.
> 
> Labor claims more than 48,000 premises in the Bennelong electorate are slated to use the technology, which critics have argued is prone to dropouts and slow internet speeds. That includes the suburbs of Ryde, Epping, Marsfield, Macquarie Park and Putney.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most of the Bennelong electorate will be connected using HFC.
> A group of more than 23,100 Bennelong homes and businesses were slated to be fit for service between January and March next year, before NBN Co chief executive Bill Morrow announced a halt to the HFC rollout on Monday.
> 
> Mr Morrow conceded the company had received more complaints from customers using HFC than other technologies, though he said the “specific number of dropouts is quite small”.
> 
> “This will result in a six- to nine-month average delay for those people that have yet to connect to the NBN network over HFC,” he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NBN CEO Bill Morrow revealed the delay on Monday. _Photo: AAP_
> Labor seized on the announcement on Monday, which was initially buried in a press release from the company.
> 
> “It’s a disgrace. This means that families and businesses in Bennelong will have to wait longer for a second rate broadband service they have to pay more for,” said Ms Keneally.
> 
> She said only one in 10 homes in Bennelong were connected to the NBN.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is growing frustration about the rollout of the NBN. _Photo: AAP_
> But the Coalition hit back, saying Labor “didn’t connect a single house in Bennelong to the NBN” while in office.
> 
> Nationally, almost three million premises are slated to access the NBN using the Hybrid Fibre Coaxial (HFC) connections.
> 
> NBN Co said on Monday nearly one million premises could now access the NBN via HFC and 370,000 were already connected.
> 
> Communication Minister Mitch Fifield and Mr Alexander did not respond to a request for comment.
> 
> The HFC technology was introduced in 2015 as part of the NBN’s multi-technology mix overhaul overseen by the then communications minister Malcolm Turnbull.
> 
> *An election issue*
> Mr Alexander holds Bennelong by nearly 10 per cent but recent polls have suggested the contest will be much closer.
> 
> West Ryde business owner Stefan Sojka told _The New Daily_ the NBN rollout was a point of frustration for many local businesses and he predicted it would be one factor for voters in Bennelong.
> 
> “We’re hearing a lot about it,” said Mr Sojka, a board member of the local chamber of commerce. “It’s just a general feeling that we’re lagging.”
> 
> Mr Sojka, who runs a recording studio, said the NBN was particularly crucial for small startups in the Macquarie Park business hub.
> 
> “One of my associates runs a media business and they’re constantly needing to upload and download very large files,” he said.
> 
> “They’re quite often staying back late and having to apologise to clients (due to poor internet).”


----------



## Tisme

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/ga...p-in-the-right-direction-20171127-gztk50.html



> Rather than continue the blame game and leave more Aussies trapped in broadband limbo, NBN has finally admitted that it's failing and needs to do better.
> 
> There's been an alarming lack of accountability across the board as systemic connection faults have dogged NBN's HFC cable rollout over the last year. Australians have been left without broadband or phone connections for months as NBN, internet retailers and the government have all passed the buck while refusing to concede they were at fault.........................


----------



## Logique

Gringotts Bank said:


> What to do when those who are supposed to do the NBN connection just never turn up?  They say they will, then they don't.  Multiple times over several weeks.
> Suggestions?



Snap, and no explanation either


----------



## Tisme




----------



## Gringotts Bank

Logique said:


> Snap, and no explanation either



Snap had the power.


----------



## Tisme

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/tech...repairs/ar-BBGho8u?li=AAavLaF&ocid=spartanntp



> NBN Co's announcement last week that it would cease selling services on its hybrid fibre-coaxial (HFC) network has revealed one of the biggest errors in judgment the company has made under a Turnbull-Abbott led government.
> 
> The government-owned NBN Co blamed "interference" — which was leading to dropouts and unacceptable broadband service on a minority of users' services — for the decision, which will result in an average delay of between six to nine months for millions of households looking to sign up.
> 
> But NBN Co first discovered that interference might become a problem down the track in mid-2016, Fairfax Media has learned, when the first HFC asset transfers occurred between Telstra and NBN Co.
> 
> At the time, NBN management made the risky judgment call that it would not be a huge an issue. While it suspected that interference would cause some headaches in the rollout, NBN management didn't fully realise the extent to which Telstra's HFC network was in need of repair, or in the words of NBN Co engineers and management, "optimisation".
> 
> Regardless, NBN ploughed through activating premises and dealing with issues later, until they became too large to ignore. NBN had originally envisioned doing network repairs once the network was in full operation and had been released for sale to service providers. To this point, the optimisation work had been part of its post-activation servicing rather than part of the construction schedule.
> 
> Of course this isn't what ended up happening, and now optimisation work — or repair — is having to be conducted in many areas before HFC services are released for sale.
> 
> 
> While NBN data showed that only 1 per cent of end users were reporting faults via their service provider, alarm bells began to ring after an internal NBN Co commissioned consumer satisfaction survey found up to 15 per cent of users were scoring their HFC service close to 0 out of 10, meaning that they were having the absolute worst time on HFC but that their provider wasn't necessarily reporting it as a fault to NBN Co.
> 
> Furthermore, some affected users were high-profile, inner city journalists who began making their voice heard on social media. Given this and the reputational damage it was starting to have on the NBN, and with the HFC fault rate increasing by the day as more users were activated, NBN Co decided late last month to finally act. It advised the Communications Minister the week prior to its announcement that it would imminently announce the delay.
> 
> A letter was sent to the minister on Wednesday November 22, one day before a senate estimates hearing where Labor was set to quiz management on the NBN and the issues it had faced to date. The matter didn't come up during the hearing. NBN then announced the delay the following Monday.
> 
> *What is causing the so-called 'interference'*
> The interference on the network is caused by three separate issues. The first is that the spectrum NBN acquired from Telstra (15-40MHz spectrum) is not, according to critics, designed to be used for super-fast broadband. This leads to the second issue, which is that the spectrum is far more prone to interference. While some Telstra HFC customers were having a great broadband experience prior to being switched over to NBN HFC, this became worse after the changeover, because of the new NBN spectrum they were placed on.
> 
> This interference occurs in the joints — or the "taps" as they are called by engineers — between the HFC cable in the street pit and the cable that goes to your house. Because of their age, some of these are deteriorating, causing so-called "leaks". And because HFC networks are a shared service, these leaks then spill over into your neighbours' connections as well, causing their internet to potentially drop out and speeds to deteriorate as well.
> 
> The third interference issue is the wall-plate in peoples' homes being damaged. The most common way this can occur is by household objects, most often vacuum cleaners, running into them and damaging them. This then causes the same issue as the first, leading to dropouts and slow speeds, sometimes for your entire neighbourhood given there are normally 400-550 people connected to a HFC node (they can handle up to 650).
> 
> Although the same HFC spectrum is used by other global operators, including cable TV players, they are able to use the spectrum successfully because they keep their networks tight and therefore keep interference to a minimum, the plan NBN is now moving to.
> 
> The main issue, it seems, was that NBN was activating HFC users faster than it could deliver the required network repairs to combat interference.
> 
> NBN Co recently examined an area with 100 users and found that in two thirds of cases, it could reduce the noise to a satisfactory level by just fixing the taps. For the other one third, or 30 cases, it is likely that it may need to enter the homes to fix wall-plates or replace the HFC cable between the street pit and house. Alternatively, it may choose to "isolate" users' connections by splitting them off a cable run to reduce noise on their neighbours' connections.
> 
> According to the financial modelling used by one of NBN's corporate plans, the impact such a delay would have on NBN peak funding is between $423 million to $790 million.
> 
> Meanwhile, Telstra cut its expected earnings for fiscal 2018 by $600 million as a direct result of the announcement. Despite this, Telstra chief executive officer Andrew Penn "applauded" the NBN's decision to delay, claiming that, while it affected Telstra financially, the implications would not be "long-term" and were in the interests of providing a better service for customers.
> 
> A critic would argue, however, that NBN Co is potentially now spending a lot of money repairing a network that wasn't fit for purpose in the first place.
> 
> Remember how NBN Co dumped the $800 million Optus HFC network due to it not being "fit for purpose"? While the reasons were different (it was becoming increasingly expensive to connect the network to the NBN points of interconnect, often in Telstra exchanges, while also being "oversubscribed" by Optus, meaning it would lead to congestion issues), the delay to HFC and inevitable cost blowout gives Labor further firepower to question whether re-using an ageing network in the first place was such a smart idea.
> 
> As independent telecommunications analyst Paul Budde said earlier last week in an email entitled _The next NBN debacle_, "the problem with the NBN multi technology mix (MtM) policy is that they are using old technologies. And if you are going to upgrade this you will come across lots of nasty surprises, as already has become clear in relation to the FTTN part of the project".
> 
> Budde continued: "Some parts of the cable infrastructure is even more than 50 years old. In relation to the HFC network, this dates back to the 1990s, so also old infrastructure."


----------



## Tisme

My guess only the Labor haters and Liberal rusted ons would believe this excuse...wasn't me miss, it was Billy:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-...r-to-blame-for-calamitous-train-wreck/9076324


----------



## sptrawler

Tisme said:


> My guess only the Labor haters and Liberal rusted ons would believe this excuse...wasn't me miss, it was Billy:
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-...r-to-blame-for-calamitous-train-wreck/9076324




Or those who thought it was all, the biggest waste of taxpayers money, in the history of this Country.
It doesn't really matter who or what thought of it, to get the taxpayers to fund it, was dumb.
The system that was in place, we already had all exchanges in Australia, interconnected by optical fibre.

Telstra was sold off and the ensuing debacle, caused Telstra shareholders via the ACCC, to be stripped of any assett advantage they had.

For the taxpayer to pick up the cost, to upgrade the system, they had already paid for was an absolute disgrace.
The taxpayer paid for the telephone system.
Then it was corporatized.
Then it was sold off to the taxpayer.
Then competition was given free reign to rape it.
Then as the ultimate spit in your face act, the Government makes the taxpayer upgrade it.
Why? so that the massive overseas companies, can sell a better service to you. WTF

Now what do we do, pizz all over ourselves, we are arguing that we could have spent more giving them a better system, that really they should be paying for. OMG
We are only talking from the exchange to the house, why couldn't they have paid for it?


----------



## sptrawler

Really Tisme, I find the "like"  a bit condescending, when all you go on about, is the failing of the system, that we shouldn't be paying for.
Then in the same breath, you say, we should have paid more for fibre to the house.
Maybe you're just an antagonist?


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> Really Tisme, I find the "like"  a bit condescending, when all you go on about, is the failing of the system, that we shouldn't be paying for.
> Then in the same breath, you say, we should have paid more for fibre to the house.
> Maybe you're just an antagonist?




I never said anything about we should be paying for any of it did I?  That's something you would have second guessed in one of those brain farts we  all (actually I don't) suffer from.

If a govt takes on a project it should deliver that project. The train wreck began when Tony Abbott politicised it for votes and Fizzer Turnbull accepted his role to make it an ALP designed lemon, once again to wring out as many votes for as long as feasible.

I gave you a like because I admired your passion. If you don't want likes I'm happy to oblige.... done


----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> If a govt takes on a project it should deliver that project. The train wreck began when Tony Abbott politicised it for votes and Fizzer Turnbull accepted his role to make it an ALP designed lemon, once again to wring out as many votes for as long as feasible.



Let's not rewrite history.

It was a train wreck from the outset.


----------



## Tisme

drsmith said:


> Let's not rewrite history.
> 
> It was a train wreck from the outset.




Only to a rusted on Liberal like yourself. You'd have to provide factual data to backup your bent, and I mean all the facts none of the emotional claptrap.

Mob rule already tags Fizzer as the architect of failure with the NBN,


----------



## sptrawler

Well Tisme, when Malcolm in the muddle, hands over the chalice to silly Billy we will see what transpires.

If it is anything like W.A, it won't be an improvement, despite your prayers.


----------



## Tisme

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-12-12/braue-the-inconvenient-truth-for-the-coalition-nbn/5152800



> ..............
> In other words, the expert and objective opinion of NBN Co - whose over 3,000 staff include some of Australia's most talented telecommunications engineers - was deemed to be so politically tainted that it did not merit presentation to the incoming minister. Turnbull, whether by design or by what we might infer, preferred to make his own truth about the NBN.
> 
> As you read through the NBN Strategic Review, it's important to also consider the advice that was given to Turnbull by NBN Co's experts as they sought to paint a realistic portrait of the challenges facing the Coalition in its construction of a mostly FttN NBN.
> 
> The NBN Co knew months ago that the Coalition was "unlikely" to make its 2016 deadline for delivering 25Mbps broadband to all Australian premises, and would struggle to meet its 2019 secondary deadline of boosting this to 50Mbps on 90 percent of fixed-line services.......................
> .


----------



## sptrawler

Tisme said:


> I never said anything about we should be paying for any of it did I?  That's something you would have second guessed in one of those brain farts we  all (actually I don't) suffer from.
> 
> If a govt takes on a project it should deliver that project. The train wreck began when Tony Abbott politicised it for votes and Fizzer Turnbull accepted his role to make it an ALP designed lemon, once again to wring out as many votes for as long as feasible.
> 
> I gave you a like because I admired your passion. If you don't want likes I'm happy to oblige.... done




Tisme, don't worry about giving me a like, the last thing I'm interested in is whether someone likes what I say.
I'm only interested in putting forward my point of view, which may or may not concur with other people's and I definitely don't think my point of view is necessarily correct.
I've lived long enough and seen enough, to know no one knows everything, but some think they do.
Best you just keep giving your likes to Sir Rumpy, and no doubt he will continue to return the favour.


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> Well Tisme, when Malcolm in the muddle, hands over the chalice to silly Billy we will see what transpires.
> 
> If it is anything like W.A, it won't be an improvement, despite your prayers.




Now you are just trolling SP. 

Separating hate from fact always takes courage and I have great faith in you, regardless of your impudence towards me..


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> Tisme, don't worry about giving me a like, the last thing I'm interested in is whether someone likes what I say.
> I'm only interested in putting forward my point of view, which may or may not concur with other people's and I definitely don't think my point of view is necessarily correct.
> I've lived long enough and seen enough, to know no one knows everything, but some think they do.
> Best you just keep giving your likes to Sir Rumpy, and no doubt he will continue to return the favour.




Hardly the last thing, you were out of the blocks pronto to make sure I didn't poison your pond. 

The rest of the diatribe reads like a jealousy pf a special relationship with Rumpole and myself... which does go back many years and if you looked carefully you would see we don't give each other many likes at all....Stalin versus Hitler bookends.


----------



## sptrawler

WOW, Tisme, you obviously have anger management issues. LOL


----------



## Tisme

sptrawler said:


> WOW, Tisme, you obviously have anger management issues. LOL





Now you are trying to deflect your own baggage onto me.  Honestly I don't have any anger disease and I don't get bent out of shape like you are obviously prone to. I suspect you have spent your life making sure your peers are welcome so long as they agree with your persistent gravitas?

You should try lightening up .... you might like it as will those around you ..."misery loves company" and all that.


----------



## Tisme

Here you are my dear friend Rumpole ... I love you baby


----------



## drsmith

Tisme said:


> Only to a rusted on Liberal like yourself. You'd have to provide factual data to backup your bent, and I mean all the facts none of the emotional claptrap.
> 
> Mob rule already tags Fizzer as the architect of failure with the NBN,



A personal attack on the basis of partisanship from someone who only a few posts later posts an image that's as partisan as it gets.

The history of the NBN and this thread dates from well before you joined this forum. That mob rule (as you put it) in 2013 was in part a judgment on the lack of progress with the rollout of FTTP under the then Labor government.


----------



## Smurf1976

drsmith said:


> Let's not rewrite history.
> 
> It was a train wreck from the outset.



Sure was.

A grubby deal to sell the people's asset, Telstra, with no obligation on the private owners to keep maintaining and upgrading infrastructure thus inevitably leaving future taxpayers to foot the bill one way or another.

Just like Pacific National did with the railways in Tasmania.

Just like various players have done with power supply in Vic and SA.

Privatisation of natural monopoly infrastructure has always been a case of privatising the profits and socialising the costs. Same debacle happens every time with only the details differing, private owners run it to the ground and fail to invest in new technology thus leaving taxpayers to foot the bill. The NBN is just another one to add to the list of such happenings.

We are now reaping the "benefits" of having sold Telstra's assets which were once government owned. Now the taxpayer gets to pay, again, to build a communications network. Someone's benefiting but it's not the average working taxpayer that's for sure.

As for fixing it, well that's a technical question not a political or financial one and like most such things is best done by keeping politicians as far away as possible. 

If it was up to me then I'd create a national backbone infrastructure between major points (eg between capital cities) and leave the states to roll out the rest of the network. It was already being built in Tas years before the NBN came along after all and the other states could presumably get it done too (and if they didn't the economic pain would force them pretty quickly).


----------



## SirRumpole

Tisme said:


> Here you are my dear friend Rumpole ... I love you baby
> 
> View attachment 85211




Thanks, I'm quite fond of you too. 

The NBN is the biggest infrastructure stuff up this country have ever seen. It's all down to that Abbott bastard who wanted to use it as a bat to bash Labor instead of getting behind the idea and making it work.

The worst politician this country has ever seen.


----------



## Logique

The NBN, like the NDIS, was Labor big-noting itself, but leaving a Coalition government to pick up the pieces and fund it.

Now Labor has the hide to attack the NBN!  It's politically motivated.

Labor's NBN, if it proceeded at all, would have delivered fibre-to-the-premises in metropolitan areas, and then gone belly-up before the regions got a thing.


----------



## Smurf1976

Coalition flogged off Telstra and presumably hoped they wouldn’t be in government when it came time to cough up the $ to fix the inevitable problems resulting from the way it was done.

Labor came up with the NBN but not the money to pay for it.

Both are duds in different ways.

Selling Telstra without a means to both economically enable and actually require the company to keep up with changing technology was the ultimate cause of the situation we have today.

Politically it was a Coalition government which made that blunder but it’s entirely plausible that given the right (wrong) circumstances Labor would have done the same thing. Only likely difference is that Labor probably wouldn’t have agreed to shut down a completely unrelated Sunday night radio program on commercial stations in order to get the legislation through but they could well have done something else equally as silly.

Both are duds, all that differs is in the detail and surrounding circumstances at the time.


----------



## SirRumpole

Smurf1976 said:


> Only likely difference is that Labor probably wouldn’t have agreed to shut down a completely unrelated Sunday night radio program on commercial stations in order to get the legislation through




Could you expand on that, I must have missed it ?


----------



## Smurf1976

SirRumpole said:


> Could you expand on that, I must have missed it ?



Back in the 1990’s there was a national talkback radio program on commercial FM stations on the subject of sex. People phoned up and it went into considerable detail on the subject. It aired from 10pm - midnight or thereabouts (Eastern states time).

Tasmanian Senator Brian Harradine wasn’t at all keen on that radio program but the Coalition needed his vote to get the Telstra sale through the Senate.

Personal contacts in the radio industry tell me that whilst not technically censored it was the old “resign first or be sacked” type of scenario at play and so it was scrapped.


----------



## drsmith

Smurf1976 said:


> Back in the 1990’s there was a national talkback radio program on commercial FM stations on the subject of sex. People phoned up and it went into considerable detail on the subject. It aired from 10pm - midnight or thereabouts (Eastern states time).



Was that the one where the host was referred to as Dr Feelgood?

I remember one disgruntled lady getting on air to complain about her boyfriend farting in bed while she was performing fellatio. She went on to describe how she could hear him laughing after she exited the bedroom and closed the door.

Back to the topic at hand, the Howard government should have structurally separated the wholesale and retail elements of Telstra and privatised the retail elements only. Once Labor was in office, that was done and from there, they should have never gone down the path of establishing a new government wholesale owned entity and certainly should never have mandated the entire fixed line build to be FTTP nor pretended it stacked up economically. As for the MTM rollout under the current government, it too has been rushed but it's made much greater progress than the Labor FTTP version.

To this day, it still doesn't stack up economically and the inevitable write-down is coming.


----------



## Tisme

Logique said:


> The NBN, like the NDIS, was Labor big-noting itself, but leaving a Coalition government to pick up the pieces and fund it.
> 
> Now Labor has the hide to attack the NBN!  It's politically motivated.
> 
> Labor's NBN, if it proceeded at all, would have delivered fibre-to-the-premises in metropolitan areas, and then gone belly-up before the regions got a thing.




You don't really believe that do you. Surely you're just baiting for the sake of being contrary?


----------



## Logique

The NBN - designed on the back of an envelope by Senator Conroy. You bet I believe it.


----------



## Tisme

Even rolling out Geminis instead of Commodores has gone way over the original MKII FTTP $43bn Labor promised and indicative of LNP poor fiscal management the doubling the LNP election promise of $29.5bn.

LNP have more than doubled the net national debt big black hole, doubled the dumbed down NBN cost and sent the average IQ in parliament into double digits.


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> Thanks, I'm quite fond of you too.
> 
> The NBN is the biggest infrastructure stuff up this country have ever seen. It's all down to that Abbott bastard who wanted to use it as a bat to bash Labor instead of getting behind the idea and making it work.
> 
> The worst politician this country has ever seen.




That's a bit harsh on Wilson Tuckey isn't it?


----------



## Smurf1976

Logique said:


> The NBN - designed on the back of an envelope by Senator Conroy. You bet I believe it.



A big part of the problem with the NBN is that money seems to not be a consideration.

Prior to the emergence of the NBN, here in Tasmania we were already rolling out a FTTP network servicing commercial and residential customers. 

This was an initiative of the power industry and from the very beginnings an absolute focus was that it had to be done reasonably cheaply. First reason was because it needed to compete with Telstra's existing copper network and ADSL services (the intent was that consumers would pay significantly less with FTTP than they were paying for ADSL) and secondly because there wasn't really any money available to built it with anyway.

So it was the same old scenario that has always been the case with electricity and now applied to communications. Don't have any money and need to charge consumers much for the service than any alternative otherwise they won't want it = need to find ways to do it cheaply but without compromising the engineering.

So we had Hydro Tasmania doing most of the network design and Aurora Energy building it (both companies being 100% owned by the Tas government). To sell the services there was a telecommunications retailer set up as a joint venture of Hydro Tasmania, Aurora Energy and AAPT (the latter being a private company).

Then along came the NBN and the Australian Government's request for proposals. Tasmania was the only state to put a proposal forward, no other state did so far as I'm aware, and that proposal was to spend $400 million and connect the majority (200,000) of Tasmanian homes and businesses to FTTP and use wireless or satellite services for the remainder and have it completely built within 5 years. This was in effect a continuation and acceleration of what was already being done - doing it more quickly being possible if money was available.

FTTN was always rejected as being both inferior and having the complexity and risk of dealing with existing infrastructure that was known to be in poor condition in many cases plus the asbestos problem was also well known long before it hit the news. So there was no use of that in the initial pre-NBN build and it wasn't proposed to use it for the $400 million NBN proposal either.

Long story short - NBN decided to do things their own way and have spent some pretty serious $ doing so which far exceeds what was proposed by the power industry which considered that the network needed to be technically robust, using FTTP not FTTN, but it had to be cheap enough that financing was practical and consumers would want to use it. There's no point providing communications that are too expensive for consumers to use just as there's no point generating power that's too expensive for industry exposed to international competition to be viable. Nothing new about that, that has always been the case.

So the proposal was ultimately rejected in favour of NBN's own model. The power industry down here has got some work out of it as a contractor doing the physical delivery but that's it.

Perhaps I'm biased but I just don't see how it all adds up. Looking at the cost of the network being built versus what can reasonably be charged for services it seems to expensive to me.


----------



## SirRumpole

Tisme said:


> That's a bit harsh on Wilson Tuckey isn't it?




Forgot about him, but he never got to PM.


----------



## greggles

I recently switched from ADSL2 to the NBN at the urging of my ISP (TPG). The speeds I am getting are no better than ADSL (11Mbps up, 1.2Mbps down) and the amount of downtime I have experienced since switching is both ridiculous and unacceptable.

In short, the NBN is both a disappointment and a rort IMO. I was better off with ADSL2.


----------



## sptrawler

We have ADSL2, but I see a node going in around the corner, so it obviously isn't far away.

I'm happy with ADSL2, our daughter lives with us and two grandkids, they run netflix I just browse and don't have a problem.
It will be interesting to see what transpires, with the "upgrade" I didn't want and we shouldn't be paying for.


----------



## Logique

In most areas they're switching off the telstra copper network after 18 months of NBN availability.

So there's no choice but to migrate sooner or later.

Areas receiving fixed wireless NBN will mostly retain the copper wire network for telephone.


----------



## Tisme

https://www.itnews.com.au/news/accc-abandons-plan-to-expose-nbn-rsps-cvc-buys-480205



> *ACCC abandons plan to expose NBN RSPs' CVC buys*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *But NBN Co itself must supply better data.*
> The ACCC has backed away from a plan to publicly reveal how much connectivity virtual circuit bandwidth is being bought by NBN retail service providers.


----------



## Tisme

https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/bu...olve-his-internet-crisis-20171231-h0btca.html



> *BN protester's problem solved by police called to remove him from Telstra store*
> 
> When Matt Dooley refused to leave a Telstra store after months of battling with the telco, the last people he might have expected to fix his problem were the police called to remove him from the store.
> 
> Having spent hours on the phone to Telstra trying to get his NBN connection properly installed, he had had enough and staged an impromptu sit-in at the Marrickville Metro store.
> 
> View image on Twitter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/mrkringerz/status/946613049061806081
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Matt Dooley@mrkringerz
> 
> After 4 mths and no help whatsoever, my gf and I staged a sit in to demand our case be looked into. The @Telstra shop called the police to have us removed and the police took our side and negotiated the bundle. Its all still barely working and the case manager refuses to call me.
> 
> "The cops kind of took our side," Mr Dooley said. "They understood. They used their excellent negotiating skills to negotiate what I hadn't been able to in the last four months.
> 
> "One was very technically minded and got it. He knew what we needed.
> 
> "This cop was running back and forth between us to negotiate so we didn't have to talk to each other, talking about cables and routers and modems."
> 
> Mr Dooley said he and his girlfriend sat by the front door as the police moved back and forth, negotiating between the two parties before eventually solving the issue.
> 
> 29 Dec
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Matt Dooley@mrkringerz
> After 4 mths and no help whatsoever, my gf and I staged a sit in to demand our case be looked into. The @Telstra shop called the police to have us removed and the police took our side and negotiated the bundle. Its all still barely working and the case manager refuses to call me. pic.twitter.com/Rjb6z6ZEv7
> 
> https://twitter.com/mrkringerz/status/946619679535013888
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Matt Dooley@mrkringerz
> 
> @nswpolice Using their excellent negotiation skills to get @telstra staff to actually resolve a basic broadband issue. A big win for community policing, a giant fail for Telstra's Terrible Teams!!!! @unabutorac
> 
> "Lo and behold the next day there was a Star Track Express delivered to our house with all the things we needed and just all sorted out," he said.
> 
> "As a result of police coming to the store we had internet that afternoon and cable the next day."
> 
> The successful negotiating of the police ended a months-long saga for Mr Dooley, who had been trying to get internet at his new house since September.
> 
> Working from home in the film and television industry, he needed good and reliable upload capacity so chose an NBN plan through Telstra.
> 
> "It was horribly mishandled," he said. "A handful of technicians came and didn't install it properly. Everyone just didn't know what they were doing."
> 
> He tried calling their support line, making over 80 calls to the telco in a bid to rectify the issue. He said he was often passed between four or five people who were all unable to help.
> 
> "The aim has got to be for Telstra to get rid of you. They just don't care. If you call and ask to speak to sales you'll get through to someone right away."
> 
> He took his complaints to the industry ombudsman but was found that he was just one of many putting in complaints about their telco provider.
> 
> "They were so overwhelmed by complaints they couldn't do anything effectively. They told me they were backlogged by a month of cases they can't get through."
> 
> "I was temporarily disabled at the time. I had broken my leg and I was losing thousands of dollars in money not being able to do work because had no internet from home.
> 
> "I'm convinced it affected my mental health. I got so angry and frustrated. It sounds really whingey but internet is so essential but also my lifeline for work and being laid up for months," he said.
> 
> "What really got frustrating and got me down was in the end there was no one accountable."
> 
> After $3000, 100 hours on the phone and a temporary ADSL connection, Mr Dooley had had enough.
> 
> With a still-healing leg, Mr Dooley went with his girlfriend to the Telstra Marrickville Metro store on Wednesday.
> 
> Although he had managed to get the NBN cable installed, he still needed a modem, router and cable.
> 
> "I said just give me that stuff at least and I'll run it out the window. They said they couldn't help and I said we're not leaving so they called security."
> 
> While he was lucky to have three cops step in to assist, Mr Dooley said that there were others not so fortunate.
> 
> "I think about people who don't know about tech who are elderly or don't speak the language properly. They would never be able to deal with this. What really got frustrating and got me down was in the end there was no one accountable.
> 
> "[While we were in the store], an elderly man came and congratulated us saying 'I think it's great what we're doing'," Mr Dooley said.
> 
> "A whole lot of people came up and told us their horror stories of telstra problems."
> 
> Telstra is investigating the incident.


----------



## Logique

Tisme said:


> https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/bu...olve-his-internet-crisis-20171231-h0btca.html



How funny was that  I hope this isn't going to become a thing now. But good on those Police officers for intervening constructively.

Personally, if I had an NBN problem to resolve, I'm not sure a retail store would be where I'd start. Something went seriously wrong with this person's installation. A failure to communicate somehow..


----------



## sptrawler

http://www.theage.com.au/business/i...-cost-of-the-nbn-telstra-20180104-p4yy8u.html


----------



## Tisme

http://www.theage.com.au/business/c...d-slower-than-kazakhstan-20180107-p4yyb1.html



> *Australia's broadband is slower than Kazakhstan's*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Jennifer Duke*
> 
> Australia’s fixed broadband is below Kazakhstan on a global ranking of internet speeds, with performance continuing to be below the global average.
> 
> The Ookla Speed Test Global Index ranked Australia as 55th in the world for fixed broadband in December, with an average download speed of 25.88 Mbps.
> 
> 
> *MORE NATIONAL NEWS VIDEOS*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *It will get better: NBN boss*
> The head of the NBN Bill Morrow has fronted a Senate hearing outlining when the company will turn a profit and how it will offer Internet users a better service.
> 
> Globally, the average download speed is 40.71 Mbps, pushing Australia behind countries including Austria, Slovenia, the Czech Republic and Russia.
> 
> Singapore had the fastest fixed broadband, with average downloads of 161.21 Mbps.
> 
> *RELATED ARTICLES*
> 
> *NBN debacle: Australia has slower internet than Kenya*
> For mobile speeds, Australia continues to buck the global trend by having faster mobile than fixed broadband.
> 
> The average download speed for mobile users was 48.47 Mbps, ranking seventh in the world despite dropping one place over the month.
> 
> 
> While Australia’s ranking fell for mobile and fixed broadband this was not due to slower internet over the month but rapid advances in speeds overseas.
> 
> 
> The speed test showed improvements in Australia, with December speeds for fixed broadband about 1.5 Mbps faster and mobile speeds up more than 4 Mbps.
> 
> 
> announced in December.
> 
> The new pricing should make 50 Mbps speeds a more attractive product. Mr Hanlon said he’d be “surprised if the average speed in Australia doesn't sit at about the global average of 40 Mbps by year's end”.
> 
> By 2020, when a target of 8 million homes are connected, overall fixed-broadband speeds are expected to “increase significantly” with 90 per cent able to access at least 50 Mbps, an NBN Co spokeswoman said.
> 
> About three million Australian premises are currently using the NBN.
> 
> “This means that the majority of data being captured by these kind of reports are being generated by the five million or so legacy services on slower ADSL services,” she said.
> 
> Data for the Ookla speed test is collected using thousands of unique user test results for fixed broadband and a minimum of 670 for mobile over the month.


----------



## Tisme

Good to see pollies keeping up the tradition of telling the truth:


----------



## Tisme

Here you go:

http://www.abc.net.au/res/sites/new.../pdf/80e7febd-da34-4b1f-8161-333e983ee475.pdf


----------



## DB008

l'm paying $58.50 a month for 50/20 100GB on Telecube and getting this.....


----------



## sptrawler

I want to keep my ADSL please.


----------



## drsmith

drsmith said:


> From NBN's statement above,
> 
> The above suggests the pause is in orders to connect rather than the physical rollout of HFC itself. 800k were RFS on the HFC network at ay June 30 2017 and this is forecast to rise to 1.9m by June 30 2018. At 80k per month, one would expect RFS will reach ~1.2m when the pause on new orders takes effect in December.
> 
> With 7-months to June 30 2018, one would imagine construction work is already under way or contracted on the vast majority of the remaining 700k. A flow-on to new construction would probably materialise in 2018/19 but is difficult at the present time to quantify.



An update on some HFC numbers in the half year report published this week,


> As at 31 December 2017, there were 1,358,295 premises ready for service and 408,293 end users activated with 1,194,288 premises currently in design or construction.




https://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco2/documents/nbn_Half_Year_Report_FY18.pdf

The balance of 950k between RFS and users activated are now listed as Not Yet Ready To Connect. There was a large increase in this group the same week the pause on new HFC orders took effect. With the NYRTC presently at ~1m, there are ~50k from in that group from other fixed line technologies suggesting this is now quiet stable and not rising as the rollout progresses.

The above also indicates the broader HFC rollout is continuing as anticipated. If HFC RFS remains at 1.35m at June 30 2018, this will be 550k short of the 1.9m target leaving RFS at 8.15m at that date assuming the other components progress to schedule. With RFS of ~7.3m as at Feb 8, this needs to progress at an average of ~43k per week to reach 8.15m at June 30.


----------



## DB008

NBN is a joke and within 5-10 years, they will be going back and upgrading everything and wasting more money...

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/whats-wrong-with-the-nbn/9077900


----------



## Tisme

Have Telstra here right now replacing the second modem with a third one. Not bad for 6 months or so.


----------



## Tisme

https://www.buzzfeed.com/joshtaylor...and-hes-on-the?utm_term=.aikxVbaGg#.dlq0oez5E



> *The Prime Minister's Mansion Has The NBN Now And He's On The Highest Speed Plan*
> He's on the 100Mbps high speed plan he reckoned no one would have a need for.
> 
> Posted on February 27, 2018, at 9:50 a.m.
> 
> 
> 
> Josh Taylor
> BuzzFeed Senior Reporter, Australia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mick Tsikas / AAPIMAGE
> 
> Prime minister Malcolm Turnbull's Point Piper mansion and the official Sydney residence of the PM in Kirribilli have both been connected to the National Broadband Network.
> 
> Officials in the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&C) revealed in Estimates on Monday night that the prime minister's palatial home in Point Piper had been connected to the NBN via the hybrid-fibre coaxial (HFC) cable technology on December 8.
> 
> NBN has been struggling with connection issues, which has resulted in a doubling of complaints to the telecommunications industry ombudsman in the last year, and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has been examining customer complaints around connection delays for the NBN.
> 
> However, Turnbull, who was the minister responsible for the government's current policy until he took over as prime minister in 2015, had no issue connecting to the NBN.
> 
> Paula Ganley, first assistant secretary in PM&C, told Estimates on Monday night that the connection happened quickly and smoothly in December.
> 
> "We were in negotiations just to ensure that by connecting the NBN.... to make sure there would be no interruption to any of the security facilities or anything else when it was connected," she said.
> 
> "The connection went ahead quite quickly after that and it was on the 8th of December that the connection actually took place."
> 
> The prime minister also escaped the up-to nine-month delay in new connections to the NBN on the cable network instituted late last year. Ganley revealed the prime minister asked the department to make sure his connection went ahead.
> 
> "We were already in discussions when we were here last time with NBN because the prime minister asked us to make sure it was connected to Point Piper but our office just had to make sure that everything proceeded smoothly," she said.
> 
> The department had one discussion with NBN Co, and it took just one appointment to get his connection set up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Moir / AAPIMAGE
> The waterfront family home of Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull
> 
> 
> Both the Point Piper residence and Kirribilli House are on the highest speed tier plan on the NBN, that is 100 megabits per second download speed, and 40Mbps upload speed.
> 
> Taxpayers are picking up the bill for each, at $120 per month for Point Piper, and $95 per month for Kirribilli House.
> 
> When Turnbull was the shadow communications minister and was arguing against a full fibre-to-the-home NBN, he would often state that people had no great need for 100Mbps speeds.
> 
> "But the question is do households need to have – will they value, will they have any use for very high speeds of 100 megabits per second and higher and it’s difficult to identify the applications that would need that," he said on ABC's _7.30_ program in 2013. "Remember, to stream a high definition video, a high definition video requires six megabits per second so you’ve got to have a lot of them going simultaneously to get to 100[Mbps]"
> 
> Opposition leader Bill Shorten told the Labor caucus that whole suburbs of Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane were having to make do with one quarter of this speed on the "second rate copper network".
> 
> "Mr Turnbull says that Australian businesses and families don't need a first rate NBN, but he's happy to use taxpayer money to look after his own suburb and make sure they do."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sky News Australia@SkyNewsAust
> Opposition Leader @billshortenmp: Kirribilli and Point Piper residences have 100 megabit fibre NBN, but there are w… https://t.co/Sj8VeM7OSm
> 
> 11:58 PM - 26 Feb 2018
> Reply Retweet Favorite
> 
> 
> The Lodge in Canberra has yet to be connected to the NBN, Ganley said, but it will happen sometime between July and September this year using a fibre-to-the-curb technology.
> 
> This technology offers higher speeds than fibre-to-the-node because it uses more fibre instead of copper lines in the connection. Labor has called on the government to use more of this technology type, but NBN so far has stated only around 1 million of 12 million homes and businesses around Australia will be connected this way.
> 
> Ganley said the Lodge would also likely get the 100Mbps speed plan.
> 
> "I don't have the speed but I would say we would be looking at the same premium package for the Lodge," she said.
> 
> It comes as the Department of Communications released a report on Tuesday examining Australia's broadband needs.
> 
> The report claims that the maximum bandwidth requirement for Australian households in 2026 will be 49Mbps, and only 2% of households will need download speeds of 50Mbps or more to meet their peak bandwidth requirements.
> 
> Greens senator Jordon Steele-John said that the report was "comical" and was not reliable.
> 
> "There is no historical data on Australia’s bandwidth requirements and therefore no real accurate predictions on what might be needed into the future; 24 hour trends are not reliable data sets for a decade-long prediction," he said in a statement.
> 
> “What the report fails to acknowledge, in basing its predictions on current uptake, is the extremely cost-prohibitive nature of the speed packages offered by the NBN and their ability to actually achieve those claimed speeds."


----------



## DB008

Tisme said:


> https://www.buzzfeed.com/joshtaylor...and-hes-on-the?utm_term=.aikxVbaGg#.dlq0oez5E




Would be interesting to see what plan everyone else in that suburb or street gets and do a comparison. In that part of Sydney, l would think (guess) everyone would be on the highest tier....


----------



## SirRumpole

DB008 said:


> Would be interesting to see what plan everyone else in that suburb or street gets and do a comparison. In that part of Sydney, l would think (guess) everyone would be on the highest tier....




Competition to the NBN is growing in cities.

https://theconversation.com/nbn-fac...itors-build-faster-cheaper-alternatives-92275


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> Competition to the NBN is growing in cities.
> 
> https://theconversation.com/nbn-fac...itors-build-faster-cheaper-alternatives-92275




5g is overhyped and degrades in bandwidth very quickly away for the tower. Of course more towers/repeaters would solve that and we all know how attractive they are.

Light pipes are the go and if NBN could be stripped of their monopoly for premises connections,  electrical contractors could make a decent dollar installing fibre to the premises while charging a competitive affordable one off rate to consumers.


----------



## Junior

SirRumpole said:


> Competition to the NBN is growing in cities.
> 
> https://theconversation.com/nbn-fac...itors-build-faster-cheaper-alternatives-92275




NBN is coming to our area in a few months.  We will not be switching.

We are connected with Uniti Wireless and consistently achieve download speeds of 50MBps and upload in excess of 10MBps.


----------



## SirRumpole

Junior said:


> NBN is coming to our area in a few months.  We will not be switching.
> 
> We are connected with Uniti Wireless and consistently achieve download speeds of 50MBps and upload in excess of 10MBps.




I'm on Telstra Wireless and got 30/11 last night. Only 30GB allowance but its better than the 9GB I got with my old plan.

NBN won't be available in my area for several years.


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> I'm on Telstra Wireless and got 30/11 last night. Only 30GB allowance but its better than the 9GB I got with my old plan.
> 
> NBN won't be available in my area for several years.




What frequency are they running on for that speed (e.g. 24ghz or 60 ghz)? That's not 4g speeds


----------



## SirRumpole

Tisme said:


> What frequency are they running on for that speed (e.g. 24ghz or 60 ghz)? That's not 4g speeds




It says the WiFi is 2.4 gHz, but I've got it Ethernet connected. Is that the answer you wanted ?


----------



## drsmith

The ACCC has published it's NBN Wholesale Market Indicators Report to Dec 31 2017

https://www.accc.gov.au/regulated-i...bn-wholesale-market-indicators-report/reports

The Dec report shows 20.38% of premises on FTTP are connecting to plans of 50Mbps or faster. This compares to 18.77% as at Sept 30.

NBN late last year modified its pricing model late last year to effectively price 50Mbp at the same level as 25Mbps in order to encourage more users onto the higher speed plan. Many RSP's have responded by removing 25Mbps plans from their product list and Telstra is migrating its customers on 25Mbps plans to 50Mbps plans according to the following Fairfax article,

https://www.smh.com.au/business/com...to-get-nbn-speed-upgrade-20180223-p4z1hi.html

The proportion of users on 50Mbps plans should therefore change dramatically over them months ahead however, the proportion on 100Mbps will remain relatively low due to the price difference.

At some point, NBN will probably reduce 25Mbps to the price of 12Mbps and remove 12Mbps altogether and hope those on 50Mbps don't go back.

FTTN is scheduled to be available in my local area in April. I currently get ~12/1Mbps on ADSL. I won't be changing to NBN as the ADSL plan I'm on offers better value for money than the corresponding 12/1Mbps NBN plan through the same ISP. This decision would be the same irrespective of fixed line technology. I'll essentially use the 18-month coexistence period to see how pricing evolves.


----------



## Smurf1976

Logique said:


> Personally, if I had an NBN problem to resolve, I'm not sure a retail store would be where I'd start.



Agreed although there's a problem these days as to how does one get in contact with these organisations?

Email or postal mail will probably be ignored.

Phone not an option as they won't answer, just playing music (been there, had that happen with an internet company and gave up after 20 minutes).

Generally no physical office or shopfront that you can go to.

So what do you do?


----------



## Smurf1976

Junior said:


> NBN is coming to our area in a few months.  We will not be switching.




I looked into it and had assumed I'd be using it but it turned out that even the cheapest plans were going to cost significantly more than just connecting my existing mobile phone to the PC and paying for the extra data.

So I haven't had fixed wired internet since the end of April 2017. Not once have I regretted that decision - it's no slower than the ADSL 2+ was and every single month has been cheaper than paying for NBN.

I'm not against the NBN by any means but my conclusion is that for home users it's essentially a pay TV service in practice. If you're not streaming video then wireless is perfectly adequate and considerably cheaper.

But then I can see the tower when I'm sitting at the computer so no issues there. Heck, I could walk up to it in 20 - 30 minutes.


----------



## Tisme




----------



## Tisme

Lucky buggers:

https://www.liquidtelecom.com/news-...k&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=organic-post



> Today at the annual Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Sudatel Telecom Group and leading pan-African telecoms group Liquid Telecom, a subsidiary of Econet Global, signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) to build new FTTH networks across Sudan.
> 
> The MoU was signed by Eng. Tarig Hamza Zain Alabdeen, CEO of Sudatel Telecom Group, and Nic Rudnick, Liquid Telecom Group CEO, in the presence of Dr Abdul Rahman Dirar, Chairman of the Board of Directors at Sudatel Telecom Group and Sudan’s State Minister at the Ministry of Finance and National Economy, Dr. Tahani Abdullah, Sudan’s Minister of Communications and Information Technology, Sam Nkusi, East Africa Chairman of Liquid Telecom, and David Eurin, Group Chief Strategy Officer of Liquid Telecom.


----------



## Tisme




----------



## SirRumpole

Malcolm's NBN looks worse every day.

*NBN boss dumps top speed of 100mbps for hundreds of thousands of fixed wireless customers*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-25/nbn-boss-dumps-top-speed-for-fixed-wireless-customers/9797772


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> Malcolm's NBN looks worse every day.
> 
> *NBN boss dumps top speed of 100mbps for hundreds of thousands of fixed wireless customers*
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-25/nbn-boss-dumps-top-speed-for-fixed-wireless-customers/9797772




So they have been hoodwinked into contracts using fairytales just like the hardwire connects.


----------



## DB008

As l have said before, such a massive infrastructure project should really have had consensus on both sides of politics before it began. It's turned into a typical politocal hot potato and a giant black hole where money keeps disappearing.....


----------



## Tisme

"
480 NBN staff earn over $200k a year & 120 earn more than $300K.

NBN CEO Bill Morrow is on $3.56 million and six NBN execs earn more than $1 million. New figures show record dissatisfaction with NBN, with 22,827 customers lodging official complaints."


----------



## sptrawler

It is and will be the biggest scam, brought upon the taxpayers of Australia, unfortunately those are becoming less and less.
It was always a joke, why the taxpayer had to fund it was a joke, now everyone expects it.
Just like Medicare, pre medicare the Governments wore the costs of those who couldn't pay, those who could afford private cover bought it.
Post medicare, everyone thinks they are entitled to it so everyone goes gung ho, what a shambles.
Now we have the brain fart of the NBN, why we need it is still obscure, but it is ordained by BIG KEV, so it will be done, now everyone expects it.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-...estion-upgrade-delay/9770802?section=business
I hope someone finds the plug, to stop the wanting, because those who pay for it are dying off.
When that happens, everyone will look around and say who the hell pays for it now. lol

My rant, as I haven't had one for a while.


----------



## sptrawler

Tisme said:


> "
> 480 NBN staff earn over $200k a year & 120 earn more than $300K.
> 
> NBN CEO Bill Morrow is on $3.56 million and six NBN execs earn more than $1 million. New figures show record dissatisfaction with NBN, with 22,827 customers lodging official complaints."




Just had to add this.

It was a dumb project, with dumb roll out priorities, why you would priorities low volume areas before CBD's was ridiculous.
Having said that the whole project was ridiculous, replacing copper from the exchange to the house, at the taxpayers expense was a political stunt at the taxpayers expense.
The carriers should have been directed to do the upgrade, on a usage developed plan, the whole roll out has taken the pizz out of the taxpayer.
We put in the infrastructure so the carriers can charge for higher speeds, that we  have funded, we really are a sad and sorry lot. IMO
Like I've said, it is all well and good, until you run out of people to pay for the brain farts.


----------



## Tisme

At Last the truth:

http://www.betootaadvocate.com/ente...et-may-be-the-leading-cause-of-slow-internet/


----------



## cynic

Tisme said:


> At Last the truth:
> 
> http://www.betootaadvocate.com/ente...et-may-be-the-leading-cause-of-slow-internet/



The problem with the infrastructure is that people actually want to put it to use!!!
Where did they discover such insightful "genius"?!!


----------



## bellenuit

Wasn't the purpose of the NBN to deliver medical, educational and needed social services right to our home. Wasn't that what was touted by Rudd and Co. when he originally spruiked the idea. Where are these apps. The main beneficiaries are Netflix and on-line game sites who are getting the infrastructure needed to drive their businesses basically at little cost to themselves.


----------



## sptrawler

As was said, when it was first announced, $50billion dollars is a lot of money. Just to enable high speed pr0n to be downloaded and play internet games.
It wouldn't be so bad if the ISP providers had to fund it, I'm sure Australian taxpayers would have been better served, if their money had been spent on high speed rail, gas pipeline from W.A to Cooper Basin, Snowy 2 battery.
They still would have had $30billion dollars left over, what a scam, what a bloody disgraceful waste of taxpayers money. IMO


----------



## SirRumpole

Smurf1976 said:


> I'm not against the NBN by any means but my conclusion is that for home users it's essentially a pay TV service in practice. If you're not streaming video then wireless is perfectly adequate and considerably cheaper.
> 
> But then I can see the tower when I'm sitting at the computer so no issues there. Heck, I could walk up to it in 20 - 30 minutes.




I have mobile broadband and it's fine for my needs, even streaming iView or YouTube.


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> I have mobile broadband and it's fine for my needs, even streaming iView or YouTube.





and vitacall?


----------



## SirRumpole

Tisme said:


> and vitacall?




I think that's some sort of offhand insult, but I'll let it pass through to the keeper. 

Also  doubt if the mobile network would stand the heat if everyone was using it, so I'm not saying it's a complete solution.


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> I think that's some sort of offhand insult, but I'll let it pass through to the keeper.
> 
> Also  doubt if the mobile network would stand the heat if everyone was using it, so I'm not saying it's a complete solution.




 can't fight old man time.


----------



## sptrawler

Here is an interview, from "Forbes" in the U.S on the state of broadband and 5G there. I will post the whole long winded interview, as I'm not sure if it is subscription. It was printed on September 22 of 2017, so is reasonably current.
But if you read the article, it answers a lot of the questions, we in Australia have regarding the NBN.
The photo's are from the article, not of me, well I haven't had hair like that for 50 years. lol




Washington BytesWe discuss the top technology policy issues in the Nation’s Capital
	

		
			
		

		
	





	

		
			
		

		
	
 Washington Bytes , ContributorPeter Rysavy, president of Rysavy Research, a consultancy on wireless technologies. Before founding Rysavy Research, Peter served as vice-president of engineering and technology at Traveling Software (later renamed LapLink), and as the executive director of the Wireless Technology Association. We were joined by network engineer Richard Bennett, co-inventor of Wi-Fi, international policy consultant, and founder of High Tech Forum; and Jodi Beggs, a consulting economist for Akamai Technologies and founder of Economists Do It With Models. The chat was moderated by _Washington Bytes_ editor Hal Singer. The transcript has been edited lightly for readability.

*Hal Singer: *Let’s begin with the state of broadband competition. Seems like we can’t describe competition until we measure it. In January 2015, the FCC redefined broadband upward to 25 Mbps. Richard, you’ve described the FCC’s reasoning on the redefinition as being “thin.” Why so harsh?

*Richard Bennett:* The FCC has failed to offer a substantial reason for raising the threshold. The agency’s Measuring Broadband America reports have consistently shown that web pages don’t load any faster at broadband speeds above 15 Mbps, and we don’t need more than 15 for 4K Netflix streams. Many VDSL packages top out at 24 Mbps, so the UK defines ultra-broadband at 24. The 25 Mbps “Wheeler Standard” looks like cooking the books. There aren’t any common apps that require 25 Mbps. It’s nice to have fast file downloads, but we don’t do much of that anymore.




*Peter Rysavy: *I don’t think many mainstream apps today can take advantage of 25 Mbps. But in the future, virtual reality can consume massive bandwidth. When I analyze demand for wireless broadband, I look at both Internet and TV cord replacement. TV content delivered to households can drive values much higher.

*Jodi Beggs*: Do these findings—that 15 Mbps is sufficient—still hold when there are a bunch of devices hooked up to the same household router? Is there a benefit of 25 Mbps if a household has, say, 10 devices using the connection, even though no single app/device can use the full throughput?


*Bennett: *Multiple people surfing the web on the same broadband pipe don’t have much effect on each other because there’s a lot of idle time. Multiple Netflix streams can impair each other, however. But 15 Mbps is enough for two HD streams plus web. Internet-of-Things type devices don’t consume a lot of bandwidth unless they’re always-on cameras. Netflix is the main high bandwidth app of concern, and it uses about 4 Mbps per HD stream. Netflix Ultra HD requires 8 to 12 Mbps.

*Rysavy: *The biggest driver of bandwidth today is video, so the more devices consuming video at the same time, and the higher the resolution (HD vs. ultra HD for example), the greater the demands. Today, HD requires 4 or so Mbps. Sports with rapid motion can use up to 30 Mbps in UHD. But you'd probably need a 70-inch television to see the difference. Goes back to whether you're trying to also cut the cord to TV.

*Beggs: *So bandwidth requirements expand to fill the space sort of like processor requirements do with software?

*Rysavy: *Yes, people will consume any bandwidth you give them.

*Bennett: *The trend that I see is networks getting 35% faster year after year because Moore’s Law. I only see about a 5% growth in application demand.

*Singer: *Shifting gears slightly, in terms of average download speeds, how much faster is the current generation of U.S. _wireline_ connections than the current generation of U.S. _wireless_ connections?

*Bennett: *The Speedtest Global Index says the average download speed for mobile is 23 Mbps in the US, and the average for wired is 73 Mbps. Akamai data is higher on wired and lower on mobile. But the ratio is roughly between 3:1 and 5:1.

*Singer: *Can a broadband user with a 10 Mbps wireless connection do the same things as a user with a 10 Mbps wireline connection? In other words, is there any measurable difference in quality between the two technologies holding download speeds equal?

*Rysavy: *For the most part, the two connections can do the same thing. A small cell connection will perform identically. Especially with 5G being designed for very low latency.

*Beggs: *Are there any performance differences between wireless and wireline in terms of latency (as opposed to throughput)?

*Bennett: *There are minor variations in latency on mobile networks, so wired tends to be more consistent…when it’s working. 5G may actually have less latency than cable, right Peter? A DOCSIS cable modem has a lot of synchronization overhead—that is, when a DOCSIS cable modem starts talking, it takes the listener a while to tune into the message.

*Rysavy: *Not sure about latency for cable vs. 5G. Probably depends more on backend architecture, not the access technology.

*Singer: *You guys just can't wait to talk 5G!! We’re not there in my outline!

*Beggs:* It's new and shiny!

*Singer: *Let’s accept the FCC's 25 Mbps standard—warts and all—and focus only on wireline connections. According to FCC census block data analyzed by CMA Strategy, as of June 2016 there were over 46 million homes with only one provider of wireline broadband speeds greater than 25 Mbps (the “underserved” homes), and there were roughly 11 million homes have no access to 25 Mbps fixed-line service (the “unserved” homes). That’s not a glowing report card, right?

*Rysavy:* Not if you use the 25 Mbps standard. But as discussed, most people don’t need that today.

*Bennett: *Well, both the share of census blocks unserved (relative to all homes) and the share of census blocks underserved (relative to all homes) dropped from late 2015 to mid 2016. Compare Figure 4 of the April 2017 report to Figure 4 of the November 2016 report. And bear in mind that the areas the FCC calls “served at 10 Mbps” are really getting as much as 24 Mbps.

*Singer: *That’s a good thing. And there appears to be even better news for broadband consumers on the horizon. Peter has a new report on the impact of the next generation of wireless technology or “5G” that might shake things up and make things better for folks living in underserved or unserved areas. Peter, can you explain to our readers what 5G is, and how it materially differs from the current, fourth-generation (“4G”) wireless technology?

*Rysavy: *The most important features of 5G are the ability to use a wide range of spectrum, radio channels of many different sizes, and the ability to address a wide range of use cases. For example, 5G will work in any band from 600 MHz to 100 GHz.

*Beggs: *How does this help from the average household's perspective?

*Rysavy:* 5G will have the capability to compete directly against wireline technologies such as DSL and cable. Also fiber in some cases. This will result in more broadband options for consumers.

*Bennett: *I expect the cable guys will build 5G networks, but that won’t increase competition. Households care about speeds, prices, and reliability.

*Beggs:* Why would a household care about the frequency range?

*Rysavy: *They don't care about frequencies. But I had to wait many months for Charter to bring coax under the street to my home. With 5G, the connection could have been installed much more easily.

*Bennett: *The discussion about “broadband” tends to be too focused on wired networks, but we’ve moved on. Wireless is now the primary network and wired is the accessory.

*Beggs: *Right. It seems like one of the main advantages of wireless in general is that it greatly lowers the fixed cost of onboarding a customer who doesn't have existing broadband infrastructure. Why is that?

*Bennett: *A great deal of the cost of building a network is the last 1,000 feet. FiOS costs Verizon about $700 to $1,000 per home, but small cells lowers that cost to $100 to $200 per home.

*Rysavy:* The cable guys are looking at 5G. Charter is doing some trials. But they will be at a competitive disadvantage compared to a cellular operator doing dense 5G deployments.

*Beggs:* Why are cable guys at a competitive disadvantage?

*Rysavy: *Because a cellular operator with a dense 5G network can provide both fixed and mobile broadband. A cable operator will only have a fixed network. To support handsets, the 5G network will tightly integrate with 4G for coverage. Cable operators don't have that macro 4G network to fall back on.

*Bennett: *Can’t cable operators build small cells? Nobody has them now.

*Rysavy: *Yes, cable operators can and will build small cells. But, as mentioned, they can't provide the continuous coverage, especially for mobile devices.

*Singer: *Peter, when do you envision 5G being routinely available to large swaths of the country? I need an exact month and day. Kidding. How about a year?

*Bennett: *When does the buildout start, when does it hit 50%, when does it hit 90%?

*Beggs:* [opens calendar, gets out pen]

*Rysavy: *As for 5G becoming available, depends on strategy. T-Mobile is deploying 5G in 600 MHz, and will be able to turn it on quickly across the country. Verizon is deploying small cells, but that will be a much longer undertaking, maybe a decade. 5G buildout will begin 2019 or so. Keep in mind though, that massive capacity gains rely on small cells and using mmWave.

*Beggs: *So does that mean that T-Mobile would be offering me a replacement for home broadband or will it still be only for mobile?

*Rysavy: *T-Mobile plans on running 5G in 600 MHz. That network won't be much different than T-Mobile’s LTE offering as far as capacity and speeds. So T-Mobile’s network will not be a home broadband solution. At 600 MHz, operators have tens of MHz of spectrum. At 28 GHz and higher, they have hundreds of MHz. Capacity is proportional.

*Beggs: *So pretty much more of the same, just faster.

*Bennett: *Mobile broadband is hampered by data caps today. Those have to increase for people to cut the cord on cable modem. Interestingly, T-Mobile raised their unlimited data caps yesterday from 32GB to 50 GB.

*Rysavy: *Agreed about the caps. Throttling is in place today so users don't experience congestion. Throttling addresses real capacity limitations. The result is that today, 4G LTE provides a much more consistent user experience than say, Wi-Fi at airports. But if the network has much greater capacity, operators can offer much larger plans. 5G in small cells with mmWave increases capacity by 100 times or more. So caps for 5G will be consistent with other fixed broadband, such as 1 TB per month.

*Singer: *Jodi, what date did you mark in your calendar? Not sure I've got an answer.

*Bennett:* It’s probably a ten-year project overall.

*Singer: *In the long run, we are all dead.

*Beggs: *I'm going to be so mad at you guys if 2019 rolls around and I don't have 5G on my phone.

*Bennett: *5G is a marketing term so you’ll have it on the 2019 phones. Even if there’s no network to connect to right away.

*Rysavy: *You should probably adjust to early 2020s for any decent coverage and availability in handsets.

*Singer: *Peter, what percentage of U.S. homes do you expect to switch to a pure wireless home Internet solution within (say) the next five years? Or the next ten years? And if it’s large, wouldn’t that represent a massive redistribution of spending from cable operators like Comcast and Charter and towards wireless operators like Verizon and AT&T?

*Bennett: *Pew says that’s already happening; peak wired broadband was like 3 years ago.

*Beggs: *Hal, your question assumes that cable operators don't get into wireless, either organically or via acquisition.

*Rysavy:* Within 5 years, 5G could support 50 million homes or more. With respect to redistributing spending, yes, if cellular operators can roll out the hundreds of thousands of small cells, the competitive landscape will shift in a major way.

*Singer: *But “could support” is different than actual penetration right? I'm trying to figure out how much wireless substitution we should expect.

*Rysavy: *I believe that eventually consumers will pay for just one broadband connection, fixed and mobile. When I say 50M or more homes, I mean wireless substitution. I think you can draw a parallel with local telephone service and long distance. The long distance business evaporated. Similarly, today's fixed and mobile broadband services will collapse into one. The cellular operators today are better positioned to take that market.

*Beggs: *But the cable operators are probably going to try to fight them.

*Singer: *So is it fair to say cable operators will be the "losers" from 5G and the telcos will be the "winners"? Or will cable also get into the act?

*Rysavy: *Cable operators will defend their business, but they don't have the massive mobile infrastructure that the cellular operators have. Cable operators face a serious threat from 5G. A dense 5G network will leapfrog over current cable coaxial networks in capability. So customers could see greater speeds and bigger buckets.

*Bennett: *Cable is learning about the wireless edge from their Wi-Fi experiments. With their massive backhaul, all they need is an edge. And don’t things get interesting if Spectrum (the former Charter and Time Warner Cable) buys T-Mobile?

*Beggs: *I worry about that merger because that likely would reduce competition and/or give Spectrum an incentive to hold back on what T-Mobile offers for fear of cannibalization.

*Singer: *Sticking with the competition theme, does the fact that 5G wireless will be provided by fiber to the home (FTTH) providers imply that those operators will be reluctant to deploy both technologies (FTTH and 5G) for fear of cannibalization?

*Bennett: *Once we have 5G, we don’t need FTTH. Look at how people use FiOS: the primary connection is Wi-Fi. I suspect we’ll have 5 to 8 5G options in cities and suburbs.

*Beggs:* But more generally, it's important to note that the cannibalization provides an incentive for cable companies to block innovation.

*Rysavy: *Separate operators provides no benefits. Instead, as operators densify their fiber networks, they'll want multiple access technologies. In some cases, FTTH makes the most sense, such as for companies with big servers on the Internet, or needing huge bandwidth to partners or other locations. But in other cases, radio works better. A home user may never need fiber, but many businesses will.

*Beggs: *Separate operators provides no technological benefits but may provide competitive ones.

*Singer:* Econs teaching engineers economics! Peter, in your paper you forecast the number of small cells. Why is the number of small cells important for understanding 5G?

*Rysavy: *The number of cells is central to capacity. First, mmWave only works over shorter distances, so cells are inherently small. Second, to get the capacity gains, you only want a small number of users in each cell.

*Bennett:* See Hal, bigger is not always better.

*Singer:* Picking on the short guy? Let me also ask another from the naysayer department: At some point, Verizon stopped pushing FiOS out in its territory. Why will things be different for 5G? Are the economics for 5G that much better than the economics of FTTH?

*Bennett: *The FiOS deployment stalled when Verizon ran into markets where the uptake was too low. Consumers tend to go with what’s good enough, not with what’s best.

*Rysavy: *The economics are similar in needing to push fiber closer to the edge. 5G provides an advantage for the last 100 to 250 meters. FiOS and 5G are complementary.

*Singer: *So does that mean that Verizon will push 5G deployment to 100% (or something close) of its wireline footprint? And if so, will I get to keep my FiOS or will that service be discontinued?

*Rysavy: *Verizon's fiber acquisitions are as significant as their 5G plans. Once you have fiber to a building, there's no reason to ever stop using it. So you should be able to keep your FiOS.

*Bennett:* Verizon will have some hard decisions to make about overbuilding FiOS with 5G. FiOS areas will be cheap for small cells because you already have backhaul in place. Could be they’ll do thin 5G deployments and play with pricing.  They don’t want to cannibalize existing accounts.

*Rysavy: *The same core fiber network should be able to support both FiOS and 5G, so if one building has FiOS, I don't see any reason why the next one can't be served by 5G.

*Beggs: *It's important to make explicit that the main benefits of 5G are for those households that are currently unserved or underserved. For everyone else it's incremental change at most.

*Bennett: *Actually, the main benefits of 5G will fall to underserved homes. Unserved homes will get non-mobile 4G.

*Singer: *Say it isn’t so! Peter, is 5G not a solution to the unserved problem in rural areas?

*Rysavy: *Richard is correct. Regarding rural areas, small cells using mmWave with 100 to 250 meter range don't make sense for rural.

*Bennett:* Where the only network is DSL at less than 15 Mbps, a 100 Mbps 4G non-mobile network makes a lot of sense. Rise Broadband is building fixed wireless in rural areas with some success. They acquired 120 WISPs.

*Rysavy: *And the 3.5 GHz is coming online and that will provide greater range. Ultimately, 5G will play a role in rural, but it may use different architectures than the initial wave of 5G deployments. 4G or 5G in lower frequencies is a good rural solution. Also, 5G will improve over time. More antenna elements will allow focusing of radio beams, extending range.

*Singer: *Peter is not the only guest engineer with a new paper on broadband. Richard has a fascinating new pieceon measuring Internet performance. One cool factoid was the finding that of four major newspaper websites studied, three loaded faster since 2010, but the _New York Times_needed more time to load. In particular, above-the-fold text that appeared in four seconds in 2010 now takes six seconds. Richard, aside from the being the enemy of the people, what’s wrong with the _New York Times_?

*Bennett: *The web is generally stagnant in terms of speed. The _New York Times_ has too many ads and a slow content delivery network.

*Singer: *While 5G may speed up the overall load, do you anticipate publishers adding page weight that negates any improvement to the end user experience?

*Rysavy: *I think a lot of web pages are already sagging under the weight of all their ads. Networks are becoming so fast that in many cases, the content servers can't send out the content fast enough.

*Bennett: *Pages aren’t growing that much larger, but they can’t load until the ad auctions are complete. So the performance of the web has less and less to do with network speeds.

*Singer: *Richard, your paper explains how several factors outside of network speed can affect webpage load time, including Web server performance, browser performance, webpage design, and human factors. Given these myriad factors, how is it possible for users to detect the proximate cause for slow page loads and take action to resolve them? Or is it just easier to blame their ISP?

*Bennett: *The FCC’s Measuring Broadband America datashow pages don’t load faster on 100 Mbps pipes than on 15 Mbps one tells us a lot. They have a scatter chart for web page load time that shows the threshold is 12 to 15 Mbps. The text will say pages don’t load faster above X, where the value of X is the current broadband definition. But the charts don’t lie. People have been trained by certain (unnamed) media outlets to blame their ISP, but the pokey web is on the site owners and page designers.

*Beggs: *As one with a web site, I can confirm that this is generally the case. Visitors probably yell at Comcast because I didn't splurge for the better AWS service, for example.

*Singer: *Let's turn to some policy implications for the last stretch. Because 5G will likely be first deployed in dense areas, such as major cities, do you think there should be incentives for operators to rapidly deploy 5G in less dense areas? For example, do you envision mayors and city councils offering to help defray the cost of new equipment/sites or to change permit processes in order to woo faster than planned deployment of 5G to their areas, similar to the Google Fiber gambit?

*Beggs: *I guess I don't understand why providers don't have the incentives to do this on their own. As a manager, wouldn't you rather go where there is more upgrade benefit and less competition?  I know it's not that simple, but I find it perplexing.

*Bennett: *Some municipalities are doing the opposite of a subsidy, by insisting on high fees for small cells, because of their pension obligations. These cities will be slow to upgrade.

*Rysavy: *More important than subsidies is to simplify the ability for operators to deploy new infrastructure with consistent policies across regions. So maybe incentives are not needed, but removing the barriers is.

*Bennett: *I think the operators do want to go where the money is. State legislators are hearing bills to cap the fees municipalities can extract for small cells. If some states impose monopoly fees on attachments to light poles and traffic lights, they can demand them. But they’re gonna be bypassed. Some states are setting fee caps across the whole state, but cities complain the caps are too low.

*Beggs: *I think it'd be helpful for people to know that their governments are potentially limiting their Internet options for the sake of revenue.

*Singer: *Policymakers from rural areas (no names) seem fixated on addressing the unserved homes. But aren’t underserved homes also deserving of some attention from policymakers? Would you guys support an end-user subsidy to stimulate demand in those areas, or from the supplier’s side, a tax credit to subsidize deployment by a second or third operator?

*Rysavy:* I'm not sufficiently trained in economics to answer that question.

*Singer:* That’s never stopped a guest from opining about policy!

*Rysavy: *Maybe it stops engineers like me.

*Beggs: *I would want to understand the degree to which the underserved households are affected by monopoly power before making a statement on this. For example, having somewhat higher than competitive pricing is far less of a problem than no access at all. Subsidies should only be necessary if the fixed setup costs, even if lower, still outweigh potential profit from new customers. I think that I would want to see how it plays out on its own first.  The change in cost structure might solve the problem in itself.

*Rysavy:* Even the economist is hesitating.

*Bennett: *We need a combination of new tech, subsidies, and builder-friendly permitting.

*Rysavy: *The great thing about some of the forthcoming technology is that it will be increasingly easier for even small entities, like smaller WISPs, to deploy broadband in rural areas. Fiber densification and small cell deployments are the "railways" of this century. Regions that encourage deployment will benefit.

*Singer:* Ok guys, we'll have to end it there. Thanks so much for joining!


----------



## sptrawler

Now add to the previous post and the discussion of 5G small cells, autonomous driving cars.

https://www.techradar.com/news/why-self-driving-vehicles-could-be-the-biggest-winner-in-a-5g-world

If this is all correct, fibre to the node, with a 5G cell in the node, may well have been a master stroke.

If heavy coverage of 5G is the pre requisite for autonomous cars, and it can deliver high speed to the home, Malcolm has pulled off a blinder, each node becomes a 5G cell tower.
It also ensures that the NBN, isn't made redundant, as 5G is rolled out.
As I always say time will tell ,and just because the media say something is crap, doesn't always make it so. lol


----------



## sptrawler

While we are on the subject of wireless broadband, I've just done a couple of months touring England and France, their wireless coverage is rubbish. In England once you are out of Town, you're out of coverage.
Our wireless coverage, is heaps better, probably because it has to be due of remoteness.


----------



## DB008

Well, looking back to reflect on the Governments decision, and it was the right one.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-16/huawei-britain-history-helps-explain-australia-anxiety/9875582​

l'm glad that they banned Huawei parts from the NBN. They should be kicked out of the country - all products, including NRL sponsorship too.


----------



## sptrawler

DB008 said:


> Well, looking back to reflect on the Governments decision, and it was the right one.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-16/huawei-britain-history-helps-explain-australia-anxiety/9875582​
> 
> l'm glad that they banned Huawei parts from the NBN. They should be kicked out of the country - all products, including NRL sponsorship too.




That is the problem with cutting edge technology, you have to have technical expertise, to vet what you are getting.
You may well be getting optional extras, you don't know about.


----------



## sptrawler

S & P thinks 5G wireless technology, will cause a write down in the NBN's valuation, as the new technology will capture small cap users.

https://www.smh.com.au/business/the...pears-inevitable-s-and-p-20180724-p4ztae.html


----------



## PZ99

One hopes 5G pricing plans can come down to NBN levels. I pay $60/m including the phone.


----------



## sptrawler

PZ99 said:


> One hopes 5G pricing plans can come down to NBN levels. I pay $60/m including the phone.




I suppose the 5G will attract those, who just want to go all wireless and not have a home phone. It would probably attract me, except I have a daughter and a couple of grandkids living with me, so it won't be happening.


----------



## HelloU

DB008 said:


> Well, looking back to reflect on the Governments decision, and it was the right one.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-16/huawei-britain-history-helps-explain-australia-anxiety/9875582​
> 
> l'm glad that they banned Huawei parts from the NBN. They should be kicked out of the country - all products, including NRL sponsorship too.



OT NBN - but to show the complexity of this

some of our quite important front line defence equipment is not 'owned' by australia.......and we use it on a return to owner for repairs/under bonnet tweaking type agreements (with little/no knowledge of what is done under the skin during that process).

many contracts are done with australian companies that are subsidiaries of a foreign company. (and I am not talking exclusively USA here but countries we have been at war against).

One of the technical issues for NBN is that not a lot of communications electronics is made in Australia......another is we have never been at war with China - like we have with Japan and Germany.


----------



## Humid

sptrawler said:


> As was said, when it was first announced, $50billion dollars is a lot of money. Just to enable high speed pr0n to be downloaded and play internet games.
> It wouldn't be so bad if the ISP providers had to fund it, I'm sure Australian taxpayers would have been better served, if their money had been spent on high speed rail, gas pipeline from W.A to Cooper Basin, Snowy 2 battery.
> They still would have had $30billion dollars left over, what a scam, what a bloody disgraceful waste of taxpayers money. IMO




What do you reckon little Johnny’s war on terror and invasion of Iraq cost us?
The NBN is going through my area now and seems to be fairly labour intensive with traffic management,cable pull and pitting and piping which is great for the local economy and us plebs.
All the wireless talk is great but it still relies on towers which I guess are still hard wired?
So is the problem the fibre to the kerb and node?


----------



## HelloU

hard wired - yes (usually) but do not have to be......if cable is crappy they will go fully wireless....(but think that may not necessarily be nbn for cable)... that is where my laymans expires....over to someone who knows

on the peeps out the front of yours i suspect they are good for local take-aways and motels but not so good for actual locals (but I would be very pleased if u said they were though)


----------



## sptrawler

Humid said:


> What do you reckon little Johnny’s war on terror and invasion of Iraq cost us?
> The NBN is going through my area now and seems to be fairly labour intensive with traffic management,cable pull and pitting and piping which is great for the local economy and us plebs.
> All the wireless talk is great but it still relies on towers which I guess are still hard wired?
> So is the problem the fibre to the kerb and node?




The problem, IMO, is two fold.
Firstly it should have been started at the CBD, so high volume data users i.e business could use it and give it a solid financial return.
Secondly, IMO, it should have at least been part funded by the telecommunication sector and if it was rolled out on a financial rather than social model, it would at least be giving a reasonable return on capital.


----------



## Tisme

S&P evaluate NBN as over valued. Suggestion of $20bn writedown


----------



## HelloU

Tisme said:


> S&P evaluate NBN as over valued. Suggestion of $20bn writedown



not seen the article..but 20 down from govt value (sell value) or 20 down from a previous S&P figure?

(will look back to see if govt figure is in here somewhere)


----------



## sptrawler

sptrawler said:


> The problem, IMO, is two fold.
> Firstly it should have been started at the CBD, so high volume data users i.e business could use it and give it a solid financial return.
> Secondly, IMO, it should have at least been part funded by the telecommunication sector and if it was rolled out on a financial rather than social model, it would at least be giving a reasonable return on capital.




I guess this latest comprehensive S&P analysis of the NBN, sums it up better, then again Garpul summed it up perfectly very early in this thread.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...y-the-nbn-is-a-big-loser-20180725-p4zth5.html


----------



## overhang

So 12 months on from connecting the FTTN and I'm now having constant drop outs.  Over the last 2 months the drop outs have made the internet connection somewhat unusable some days.  It can have constant disconnections for a couple of days and then go several days with very few.   Rang the ISP some time ago, over the stage of several days we went over the elimination process, new router, phone lead, they put me on a stability profile which essentially drops performance in the hope of a stable connection.  None of this worked so they lodged a fault with NBN co.

A subbie for NBN co come over this week, even though my ISP did extensive testing and logs the subbie was not passed on any information from NBN co about the fault.  After explaining it to him he ran a bunch of tests from both my wall socket and the box on the side of the house which essentially told him the copper is in good condition.  The first two tests my upload failed the NBN minimum speed but the next one passed.  He rang NBN co to ask for advice, they could see the constant drop outs and low upload speed looking over the logs but as the last test passed they advised him the job was a "fault not found".  I told him that the issue isn't fixed, the drop outs aren't going to fix themselves, so he told me to just lodge a fault again through the ISP the next time it happens.  Said next time he might change the pairs, inside the house.

Hours after he left the dropouts occurred again, contacted ISP who have now lodged another fault.  Reading up and this isn't an uncommon problem with FTTN however the problem seems to be a nightmare to fix with people reporting NBN Co making over 5 visits to fix the problem which by all accounts seems to be a fault with the port at the node but this is the last thing NBN co look at. 

I guess I'm an example of what the experts advised was a failure of a NBN policy this coalition government implemented.


----------



## Tisme

overhang said:


> So 12 months on from connecting the FTTN and I'm now having constant drop outs.  Over the last 2 months the drop outs have made the internet connection somewhat unusable some days.  It can have constant disconnections for a couple of days and then go several days with very few.   Rang the ISP some time ago, over the stage of several days we went over the elimination process, new router, phone lead, they put me on a stability profile which essentially drops performance in the hope of a stable connection.  None of this worked so they lodged a fault with NBN co.
> 
> A subbie for NBN co come over this week, even though my ISP did extensive testing and logs the subbie was not passed on any information from NBN co about the fault.  After explaining it to him he ran a bunch of tests from both my wall socket and the box on the side of the house which essentially told him the copper is in good condition.  The first two tests my upload failed the NBN minimum speed but the next one passed.  He rang NBN co to ask for advice, they could see the constant drop outs and low upload speed looking over the logs but as the last test passed they advised him the job was a "fault not found".  I told him that the issue isn't fixed, the drop outs aren't going to fix themselves, so he told me to just lodge a fault again through the ISP the next time it happens.  Said next time he might change the pairs, inside the house.
> 
> Hours after he left the dropouts occurred again, contacted ISP who have now lodged another fault.  Reading up and this isn't an uncommon problem with FTTN however the problem seems to be a nightmare to fix with people reporting NBN Co making over 5 visits to fix the problem which by all accounts seems to be a fault with the port at the node but this is the last thing NBN co look at.
> 
> I guess I'm an example of what the experts advised was a failure of a NBN policy this coalition government implemented.





I'm on my third modem at home, the last one cactus because the copper line in carried a lightning surge that then killed almost all the hardwired network TV's, amps, electronics, cameras, in the place.... and that's a lot of gear. I'm guessing the nodes aren't earthed the same as the old pillars. I now have RJ45 surge diverters on all the end connections.


----------



## PZ99

overhang said:


> So 12 months on from connecting the FTTN and I'm now having constant drop outs.  Over the last 2 months the drop outs have made the internet connection somewhat unusable some days.  It can have constant disconnections for a couple of days and then go several days with very few.   Rang the ISP some time ago, over the stage of several days we went over the elimination process, new router, phone lead, they put me on a stability profile which essentially drops performance in the hope of a stable connection.  None of this worked so they lodged a fault with NBN co.
> 
> A subbie for NBN co come over this week, even though my ISP did extensive testing and logs the subbie was not passed on any information from NBN co about the fault.  After explaining it to him he ran a bunch of tests from both my wall socket and the box on the side of the house which essentially told him the copper is in good condition.  The first two tests my upload failed the NBN minimum speed but the next one passed.  He rang NBN co to ask for advice, they could see the constant drop outs and low upload speed looking over the logs but as the last test passed they advised him the job was a "fault not found".  I told him that the issue isn't fixed, the drop outs aren't going to fix themselves, so he told me to just lodge a fault again through the ISP the next time it happens.  Said next time he might change the pairs, inside the house.
> 
> Hours after he left the dropouts occurred again, contacted ISP who have now lodged another fault.  Reading up and this isn't an uncommon problem with FTTN however the problem seems to be a nightmare to fix with people reporting NBN Co making over 5 visits to fix the problem which by all accounts seems to be a fault with the port at the node but this is the last thing NBN co look at.
> 
> I guess I'm an example of what the experts advised was a failure of a NBN policy this coalition government implemented.



FTTN is a classic case of running a square peg in a round hole. It's akin to expecting CD quality audio from a cassette tape. I've had FTTP for two years and no dropouts yet. Copper is the weakest link no matter how hot it gets


----------



## overhang

Just to update I rang the ISP today as I hadn't heard anything since they lodged the last fault.  Turns out NBN co have closed the ticket, they sent the ISP logs they had and claimed these show I went 10 days without a dropout yet he said the very logs they sent show I had only 2 days out of 14 without a dropout.  So they have lodged another fault and I'm back to square one.


----------



## PZ99

They should compensate you by replacing the copper with fiber to the house.

You're paying for a technology that isn't working.


----------



## HelloU

wow..feel ur frustration.
I will avoid comments on a government entity keeping data on you..........could i suggest you have a contract with ur ISP, not the NBN (their relationship with NBN is not your relationship)......the last time I dealt with the ombudsman I got a complaint number and a 'special' phone number for my provider. It got very quick results cos the ombudsman charges the provider for each part of the investigation until it is concluded, and that comes off their bottom line.


----------



## Smurf1976

PZ99 said:


> FTTN is a classic case of running a square peg in a round hole. It's akin to expecting CD quality audio from a cassette tape.



There have been plenty of examples over the years where an old technology tried to mimic a new and vastly improved one.

Combined rail and air trips across continents are one and gas powered radios are another. Various contraptions to turn B&W TV pictures into colour were another one that were around briefly. Mid-1980's attempts to do fancy things with jumping from song to song on cassette tapes just as CD's were starting to become popular were another and may as well mention AM stereo broadcasting as well when FM was already available.

Without fail these things are at best a limited improvement over the original old tech and come nowhere near truly replicating the new tech. They tend to be around for a few years at most before disappearing altogether and rarely achieve mass adoption. Most non-enthusiast consumers never did buy an AM stereo receiver and they never bought a proper fancy cassette deck either because in both cases there was already something else that was better.

It has happend many times and this will be another case of that almost certainly. The future might be FTTP or it might be 5G wireless but it isn't likely to be FTTN.


----------



## sptrawler

Smurf1976 said:


> It has happend many times and this will be another case of that almost certainly. The future might be FTTP or it might be 5G wireless but it isn't likely to be FTTN.




That is the pertinent point, at least at the moment, there is only a $20billion write off. Christ knows what the final write down would have been, with FTTP.
The next obvious step, when it is completed, will be the ability to upgrade your connection from the node to fibre, if you so wish. 
Whether that will be at your cost, or a bundle deal with your provider, who knows? At least only those who want it or need it will get it, and it won't be a taxpayer funded hole, that requires heaps more tax increases to fill.

The three dwellings next to our place, have had FTTP since the beginning, it was one of the first roll outs, none of them are connected still.


----------



## Humid

Tisme said:


> I'm on my third modem at home, the last one cactus because the copper line in carried a lightning surge that then killed almost all the hardwired network TV's, amps, electronics, cameras, in the place.... and that's a lot of gear. I'm guessing the nodes aren't earthed the same as the old pillars. I now have RJ45 surge diverters on all the end connections.




Last time we got hit by lightning it cost me a surge diverter and a modem


----------



## Tisme

Humid said:


> Last time we got hit by lightning it cost me a surge diverter and a modem




NBN or ADSL?


----------



## Humid

Tisme said:


> NBN or ADSL?



ADSL


----------



## Humid

No power for 3 day’s
Blew pole fuses and a breaker flew out the box


----------



## Tisme




----------



## PZ99

Plenty of holes in that design


----------



## Tisme

PZ99 said:


> Plenty of holes in that design




It's the pits


----------



## SirRumpole

Tisme said:


> It's the pits




Are they all on a high fibre diet ?


----------



## PZ99

Tisme said:


> It's the pits



So that's the dark web everyone's talking about


----------



## Tisme

SirRumpole said:


> Are they all on a high fibre diet ?




Heavy lifting light pipes.


----------



## Tisme




----------



## overhang

To update on the dropout problem, I had 2nd NBN appointment booked and cancelled a couple of days before as NBN believed it was caused by RFI inside my house.  The first tech tested for RFI and the test detected none on the line.  Finally had a 2nd tech show up, he ran the same tests as the first one which detected no fault on the line or RFI, he rang NBN co and asked them to reset the port and that if this doesn't fix it he will change my port physically at the pillar next time.  Well the dropouts continued, my ISP went back and forth with NBN co who wanted me to jump through all the same hoops again (test different modem, test different lead etc), finally a 3rd appointment was arranged.  Well this tech was a no show and no reason given by NBN why he failed to turn up.  Now I have gone a week with only 1 or 2 dropouts so the problem for the time been seems to be resolved and I'm yet to find out if this is due to work carried out or not.

I'm semi tech literate and live in a modern house and was able to disconnect my 2nd phone point myself.  I really feel for any older members of the community that have this problem as NBN co will always point the finger at the wiring inside your house before their network.  I'd hate to see people paying hundreds of dollars to have their house rewired only to find it wasn't the problem and the problem was on NBN's network.


----------



## overhang

Final update.  Had a call from my ISP to ask how everything is going, they could see no drop outs have occurred for a week or so.  I asked if NBN had actually done anything to fix the problem and they confirmed that NBN had finally done some work at the pillar to fix my issue.  Quite remarkable the amount of hoops I and my ISP had to jump through to finally get NBN to fix the problem on their network.  No doubt this is part of the problem with using infrastructure that is coming to the end of it's use by date.  How much money is going to be continually chewed up fixing these issues that wouldn't exist on FTTH connections.


----------



## Tisme

overhang said:


> Final update.  Had a call from my ISP to ask how everything is going, they could see no drop outs have occurred for a week or so.  I asked if NBN had actually done anything to fix the problem and they confirmed that NBN had finally done some work at the pillar to fix my issue.  Quite remarkable the amount of hoops I and my ISP had to jump through to finally get NBN to fix the problem on their network.  No doubt this is part of the problem with using infrastructure that is coming to the end of it's use by date.  How much money is going to be continually chewed up fixing these issues that wouldn't exist on FTTH connections.




It's the triple handling of everything, with remote Indian tech centres doing all the co-ordination. Everytime a (telstra) NBN tech rings them to install or replace a modem, they have to sit through a 20 minute Indinglish lecture on how to install and configure.


----------



## sptrawler

Well the 5G roll out commences.

https://thewest.com.au/technology/i...ched-on-for-compatible-devices-ng-b881001151z

From the article:

_SUPERFAST mobile internet has arrived in Perth with Telstra today switching on its first 5G-enabled base station.

Telstra customers living or working near the Narrows Bridge will now have access to internet speeds up to 20gigabits per second through their mobile data plans.

That is 200 times faster than the best available NBN plans, which currently boast a maximum speed of 100 megabits per second_


----------



## sptrawler

It may end up being a god send, that we rolled out fibre to the node, "what I don't believe I said that". lol 
The Government will probably have to write off $30b, if they had run out fibre to the premise, it would be double that.


----------



## DB008

The speeds l'm getting on my NBN is so ad-hoc, it's crazy.


----------



## sptrawler

Some good news on the wireless front, the new 802.11ax will reduce congestion on wireless bandwidth, which will be great with the introduction of 4k t.v.
These days a lot of homes mistake internet supply speed, with a congested wifi network.

https://www.eeworldonline.com/whats-new-wi-fi-6-focus-high-efficiency/


----------



## sptrawler

Optus to roll out 5G, in competition against the NBN, in March. A little behind the promised January, but not bad.
Here is an article on the subject:
https://www.cnet.com/au/news/optus-...l-router-for-homes-in-australia-january-2019/


----------



## HelloU

DB008 said:


> Well, looking back to reflect on the Governments decision, and it was the right one.
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-16/huawei-britain-history-helps-explain-australia-anxiety/9875582​
> 
> l'm glad that they banned Huawei parts from the NBN. They should be kicked out of the country - all products, including NRL sponsorship too.



and now 5g ....... pretty sure that most will be OK though, their stuff comes in boxes from hong kong that say Duawei. lol.

(sarcasm peeps - please do not tell me about ericsson et al, if you are going exclude chinese products from this market for reasons that are banned from discussion in a democracy, then the battle may be long and bloody - and bloody expensive - viva USSR)


----------



## sptrawler

With the advent of folding phones, with 7.5" screens 12Gig of RAM and 1TB of storage, expandable to 2TB with SD card.
Add to this 5G spectrum with NBN speeds, it won't be long before the only thing in the house, connected to the NBN will be the modem and the T.V.
The next thing that will be going out on the junk collection, will be the home computer box.

https://www.techradar.com/au/news/foldable-phones


----------



## Humid

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/02/enough-5g-hype
Hype


----------



## Humid

Sound familiar


----------



## sptrawler

Humid said:


> Sound familiar



Yes talking to a Telstra tech, he said the nodes would be used to house 5G transmitters, down the track.


----------



## SirRumpole

Farmers are sick of waiting for the NBN and are building their own.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2019-03-17/farmers-build-own-internet-network/10909040


----------



## sptrawler

Optus starting to roll out reasonable price 5G.

https://www.whistleout.com.au/Broad...N-Optus-5G-home-wireless-broadband-has-landed


----------



## sptrawler

Interesting article on the NBN situation.

https://www.smh.com.au/business/com...ects-nbn-write-down-talk-20190408-p51bx7.html


----------



## sptrawler

At least labor isn't going to throw more taxpayer money, at the white elephant, the biggest waste of taxpayers money in history. IMO
The technology will be overtaken in the next few years, and all we will get out of it, is pay t.v instead of free to air t.v.
While the telco's will get the free to air band width, to charge us more for data.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...n-overhaul-in-new-policy-20190408-p51bzj.html

Next Labor will be using taxpayers money, to upgrade the electrical distribution system, so the electrical companies can charge us more for the extra electricity to charge our cars.


----------



## SuperGlue

*SpaceX launches first satellites in massive Starlink project to beam internet access from space*

"Musk said six more launches of 60 satellites each will be necessary “for initial activation,” and 12 more to provide “significant coverage.” 

In all, the Starlink project aims to eventually launch up to 12,000 satellites.
------------------------
Australian Govt. should just scrap the NBN. Gonna cost billions to fix it.
*Let Musk do the whole lot for Oz including remote areas in 100 days. Musk lives and breathes when there are challenges.*
Just like what he did for SA power backup.

*Beam OZ up Musk.
*
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/s...ss-from-space-2019-05-23?mod=mw_theo_homepage


----------



## sptrawler

I find it interesting Labor didn't use the NBN as a political big stick, at the last election, I wonder why? Because it is a bloody $50billion white elephant, from the last time Labor were in.
Thankfully the NBN cabinets in the street, can be used as 5G transmitters, for autonomous cars.


----------



## investtrader

I wouldn't have been a white elephant if it was built correctly like it was originally planned. Funny how blinkered people get when their political bias starts to show.
All the knockers never seem to consider how the NBN has helped. Our business was stuck with extremely marginal 3G that virtually stopped after school finished on a week day. Absolutely no prospects of anything happening as we are semi rural but close to Brisbane. Big black hole. We now have NBN. We use cloud accounting, EDI for orders and numerous other applications. The improvemenst in productivity is immense (40 staff,5 in office) My daughter is about to get NBN and is in the same situation. No ADSL and non existent 3G/4G and she is in a developed urban area. She can now do work at home, where she had to stay late at the office when really busy in her job as group financial controller of listed company.
There was no incentive for telcos to fix these situations.


----------



## sptrawler

investtrader said:


> I wouldn't have been a white elephant if it was built correctly like it was originally planned. Funny how blinkered people get when their political bias starts to show.
> All the knockers never seem to consider how the NBN has helped. Our business was stuck with extremely marginal 3G that virtually stopped after school finished on a week day. Absolutely no prospects of anything happening as we are semi rural but close to Brisbane. Big black hole. We now have NBN. We use cloud accounting, EDI for orders and numerous other applications. The improvemenst in productivity is immense (40 staff,5 in office) My daughter is about to get NBN and is in the same situation. No ADSL and non existent 3G/4G and she is in a developed urban area. She can now do work at home, where she had to stay late at the office when really busy in her job as group financial controller of listed company.
> There was no incentive for telcos to fix these situations.



The biggest flaw with the NBN was the way they started with low income areas, instead of CBDs


----------



## bellenuit

sptrawler said:


> The biggest flaw with the NBN was the way they started with low income areas, instead of CBDs




I'm still waiting for it in inner city Perth.


----------



## MarketMatters

SuperGlue said:


> *SpaceX launches first satellites in massive Starlink project to beam internet access from space*
> 
> "Musk said six more launches of 60 satellites each will be necessary “for initial activation,” and 12 more to provide “significant coverage.”
> 
> In all, the Starlink project aims to eventually launch up to 12,000 satellites.
> ------------------------
> Australian Govt. should just scrap the NBN. Gonna cost billions to fix it.
> *Let Musk do the whole lot for Oz including remote areas in 100 days. Musk lives and breathes when there are challenges.*
> Just like what he did for SA power backup.
> 
> *Beam OZ up Musk.
> *
> https://www.marketwatch.com/story/s...ss-from-space-2019-05-23?mod=mw_theo_homepage




More Satellites!!!

It's already a timing issue for the space shuttle and others trying to navigate the ring.


----------



## macca

bellenuit said:


> I'm still waiting for it in inner city Perth.




Crazy isn't it, if it had started in the city where demand is massive we get a completely different result.

Set up for speed, sign up the big buck users and you have cash flow immediately to fund the ongoing installation.

Typical govt, doing things ass about. ( my son worked there for a while, crazy place)


----------



## SuperGlue

sptrawler said:


> The biggest flaw with the NBN was the way they started with low income areas, instead of CBDs




Tasmania was selected as the first state for a three stage trial FTTP rollout.

A workmate's retired parents living in beautiful Scottsdale had NBN FTTP connected to the house but didn't sign up as they were computer illiterate and communication to the outside world was the good old Telstra landline and newspaper.
 Apparently many in the same street didn't either for the same reason.

Here i am screaming for FTTP but got HFC with frequent dropouts and scrambled egg telephone conversation.


----------



## bellenuit

A question to those who have got NBN. From about two months ago, I have been receiving letters from ISPs asking if I want to pre-book them for when I get the NBN activated. Today I responded to a FaceBook ad from Aussie Broadband that allowed me to check the status of the NBN at my address and would also let me know what speed I could get. When I entered in my details, it said the NBN was already available and I would be able get up to 100Mbs. It said my connection would be HFC Hybrid (I have Foxtel cable installed). I then checked at the NBN site and it too confirmed that the NBN is available at my house. 

Did those of you who are on the NBN receive any communication to say that it is available and you should apply for activation?


----------



## SirRumpole

bellenuit said:


> Did those of you who are on the NBN receive any communication to say that it is available and you should apply for activation?




No, but on another issue I received a recorded message saying that my landline would be cut off because the NBN was available in my area. The fact is that it is not available to me as confirmed by the NBN salesperson on their help desk. 

All I can get is mobile Broadband which fortunately is good enough for my purposes.


----------



## macca

We were inundated prior to the connection but then it was just quietly turned on without any fanfare.

We had about 12 months to change over before they killed the old land lines.


----------



## captain black

bellenuit said:


> Today I responded to a FaceBook ad from Aussie Broadband that allowed me to check the status of the NBN at my address and would also let me know what speed I could get. When I entered in my details, it said the NBN was already available and I would be able get up to 100Mbs. It said my connection would be HFC Hybrid (I have Foxtel cable installed). I then checked at the NBN site and it too confirmed that the NBN is available at my house.
> 
> Did those of you who are on the NBN receive any communication to say that it is available and you should apply for activation?




We got a few flyers in the mail saying the NBN would soon be available.

Aussie Broadband is a great ISP, we've been with them since we had the NBN connected. Originally had FTTN but out of town now with a Fixed Wireless Service. Both have been rock solid under ABB. They have local call centres and a strong presence on Whirlpool, always quick to answer questions.

They're pretty much what Internode used to be before iiNet then TPG took them over.


----------



## IFocus

Our area was told 18 months before cut off that it was ready plus I had a Irishman turn up and dig a 30 meter trench to run the fibre in .

Whirlpool will likely have some thing on your area or a reliable source to update your connection status.


----------



## bellenuit

Thanks to all who answered above. Just one more question (I might as well use this thread as the thread title is completely redundant anyway).

I currently get the free-to-air channels through Foxtel Cable on Telstra Broadband. Some of the ISPs talk about a Fetch Set Top Box connecting to their NBN service that provides many of the same channels as Foxtel, but as far as I can see, that requires an antenna to be plugged in to get free-to-air. Is there any alternative way of getting free-to-air through the NBN without an antenna or without Foxtel? I don't think an inside antenna would work as I am completely hidden from the transmitting masts by a large block of flats next to me. I could put up an outside antenna as a last resort, but that seems so last century, but it does have the advantage of providing at least the free-to-air channels if the NBN goes down. I do get the Freeviw stuff on my iPad at the moment, but I miss out on live AFL as Freeview or the stand-alone apps for each channel do not show live AFL.


----------



## sptrawler

The white elephant is turning grey.lol
The most expensive taxpayer funded scam, in living history.


----------



## Humid

sptrawler said:


> The white elephant is turning grey.lol
> The most expensive taxpayer funded scam, in living history.




It’s probably a bit over the top for a bloke who has retired and sits on a forum all day typing with one finger.


----------



## MarketMatters

Interesting. Optus threatened with various letters 12 months ago with the final cut off date in April '18. We accepted the verdict to convert around this time. Roll into 2019 and no mention of NBN installation still. Happy with current arrangements (no down time on cable) so not making any noise at this stage !! We are on HFC - in which I last heard the rollout has been suspended in Sydney ....extinguishing numerous install fires?

Concerning FetchTV. I believe it is reliant on an aerial connection which is how we receive the feed. That's not to say you couldn't run a direct internet feed through it but my hardware (3 year old box) didn't allow for that. As compared to Foxtel it is more a poor cousin than a replacement though that depends on what you're after really! Foxtel is struggling and will try to fight to hold on to its customer base. Sky Business/Your Money has gone as are some sport channels so they are becoming quite lean!!


----------



## bellenuit

I decided to do some speed checks this evening so I can make a comparison to what I get after I migrate to the NBN. I currently am on BigPond Broadband on cable. On the four occasions I did measurement, using servers in Adelaide, Sydney and Bali (I am in Perth), my down load speed was about 110Mbps.

This is more than the top speeds being offered by the ISPs I checked. Even Aussie Broadband's 100Mbps offering says to expect only a max of 86Mbps typical evening speeds. 

If this is typical over the next week, then I see no reason to migrate (until forced to).


----------



## peter2

I feel the same and annoyed that I have to migrate to a slower and less reliable service. (In Sydney)







Edit: Oh no, is this in General Chat, damn, sucked in again.


----------



## bellenuit

peter2 said:


> I feel the same and annoyed that I have to migrate to a slower and less reliable service.




How long were you given between the service being available and being forced to upgrade? And was the forcing just the removal of the land line (in other words, if you drop the land line, do you get longer)?

Apart from the faster speed, one reason to delay the upgrade would be to see what alternative technologies become available. Not only to the NBN, but also the components that you need to get the full service you want (Fetch TV, routers etc.).


----------



## peter2

NBN went "live" in my Syd suburb a few months ago. Since then TLS upgraded my speed to 100mbps and asked me to not convert and for at least six months due to them being very busy. I believe I've got 18 months before I have to change.  Meanwhile I'm hoping their 5G network slowly creeps outward from the CBD.


----------



## IFocus

bellenuit said:


> I decided to do some speed checks this evening so I can make a comparison to what I get after I migrate to the NBN. I currently am on BigPond Broadband on cable. On the four occasions I did measurement, using servers in Adelaide, Sydney and Bali (I am in Perth), my down load speed was about 110Mbps.
> 
> This is more than the top speeds being offered by the ISPs I checked. Even Aussie Broadband's 100Mbps offering says to expect only a max of 86Mbps typical evening speeds.
> 
> If this is typical over the next week, then I see no reason to migrate (until forced to).




Wow wasn't aware you could get that speed without paying a Moza, you wont beat that speed on NBN 80 to 90Mbps is the norm and less if the exchange is needing CVC upgrade.

Being in the back blocks out beyond the black stump (45 mins south of Perth) I went from 1.5Mbps to 25Mbps thinking I was killing it


----------



## sptrawler

Well it will be interesting in the near future, the NBN will have its work cut out, trying to hold wireless at bay.
*Top speeds*

*NBN* - *100 megabits *per second (top tier available to buy)
*5G* - *1,450 megabits *per second (US test of peak speed)
*6G* - *8,000,000 megabits *per second (predicted)
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-22/huawei-reportedly-entering-into-6g-research/11427056
From the article:
*5G*
Tests with US mobile provider Verizon have recorded peak download speeds of 1.45 gigabits per second(more than 14 times the top speed of Australia's NBN).
*6G*
To get your head around what 6G may deliver, it's going to be a matter of scale.

Dr Shirvanimoghaddam said 6G networks had the potential to give users speeds of 1 terabyte per second, or 8,000 gigabits per second.

To put this in perspective, streaming Netflix in its highest quality for an hour is worth 56 gigabits of data, so in 6G-terms, you'd be able to download just over 142 hours of Netflix's top-quality video every second.

Technology certainly moves along.


----------



## bellenuit

sptrawler said:


> *Top speeds*
> 
> *NBN* - *100 megabits *per second (top tier available to buy)




I get 120Mbps on my current BigPond Cable connection so I see no reason to upgrade to the NBN. Pentanet are offering a 120Mbps wireless connection, but requires line of sight to their transmitters.


----------



## sptrawler

Interesting stats with regard home technology.
https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2019/09/more-australians-have-netflix-than-a-home-telephone/

I wonder how long it will be before we see, "Live and not free" in the top corner of the T.V screen.
I suppose they will have to wait. untill the NBN rollout is finished.


----------



## SirRumpole

5G may make 4G faster some say.


https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10...ter-expert-says-mobile-phone-network/11586082


----------



## sptrawler

SirRumpole said:


> 5G may make 4G faster some say.
> 
> 
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10...ter-expert-says-mobile-phone-network/11586082



I hate to say "I told you so Rumpy", but how many times did I say it was a disgrace that the tax payer should foot the bill, to replace infrastructure we already had, so that telecommunication companies can charge us more to use it.

https://www.smh.com.au/business/com...n-built-telstra-chairman-20191015-p530pa.html

From the article:
_Telstra chairman John Mullen has claimed all Australians would have access to high-speed internet at a "fraction of the cost" if the government had not proceeded with the $50 billion National Broadband Network project.
"The creation of the NBN 10 years ago has had a seminal effect on our industry and Australia," Mr Mullen said.

"It is always easier to comment with the benefit of hindsight, but it is my view that over the last 10 years private sector competition between strong players such as Telstra, Optus, TPG and others was always going to build 100 Mbps broadband access and speed to the majority of the population of Australia, in an ongoing competitive landscape and at no cost whatsoever to the taxpayer," he said_ .

_Mr Mullen said the government could then have decided how much in subsidy they could provide to the industry to extend this coverage to regional and rural areas where the private sector economics didn't stack up.

"This would have been at a fraction of the cost of today's NBN," he said _.

Like we said at the time, just a brain fart and waste of taxpayers money. Even now the mind blowing stupidity of starting in regional areas first, is impossible to understand, only now are high density City areas of Perth getting done.
Again, unfortunately it just supports those who say the Government should stay out of providing services.


----------



## Humid

Like generating and supplying electricity


----------



## sptrawler

Humid said:


> Like generating and supplying electricity



Absolutely, they should either own it, or privatise and regulate it.
Trying to have a foot in each camp ends in a disaster, mainly because the Government owned plant becomes generator of last resort, so they cop the rough end of the stick and the privates get the cream.
The privates run all the time and the Government units have to make room for them, when someone has to back off, it becomes the Government ones just the way it is.


----------



## Smurf1976

sptrawler said:


> Like we said at the time, just a brain fart and waste of taxpayers money. Even now the mind blowing stupidity of starting in regional areas first, is impossible to understand, only now are high density City areas of Perth getting done.



There was some sense in parts of Tasmania where the power industry had already effectively built part of what's now the NBN before the federal government came up with the idea. 

There might (?) be places in other states where that or something similar also applies? Don't know really.

Here in SA I've still got a copper wire strung (overhead) to the house.

One thing though, looking at the amount of data 6G can transmit the whole thing does seem a bit like putting a V12 engine in a lawn mower or supplying a few megawatts of power to every home. For the purpose of ???


----------



## chiff

Smurf1976 said:


> There was some sense in parts of Tasmania where the power industry had already effectively built part of what's now the NBN before the federal government came up with the idea.
> 
> There might (?) be places in other states where that or something similar also applies? Don't know really.
> 
> Here in SA I've still got a copper wire strung (overhead) to the house.
> 
> One thing though, looking at the amount of data 6G can transmit the whole thing does seem a bit like putting a V12 engine in a lawn mower or supplying a few megawatts of power to every home. For the purpose of ???



At least ten years I used the internet at the Mildura library.I was amazed by the speed-almost instant.I found that Mildura, inner Ballarat and Geelong had been wired by a firm called Neighbourhood Cable-well before the NBN.My adsl was hopeless,and when NBN came to our town I went to wifi.Nbn with cable not to the house was unacceptable.


----------



## sptrawler

The good old NBN, the biggest con ever perpetrated on the Aussie taxpayer, now it looks like you are going to get a service charge on it even if you aren't connected to it.
What a Brain Fart of an idea, get the tax payer to replace the telecommunication network that the telecommunication company owned, so that the telecommunication companies can charge you more to use it. Priceless.

https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/broadband-tax-announced-by-government-012626031.html

Under the bill, announced by Communications Minister Paul Fletcher, households and businesses not using the NBN will be hit with a $7.10 monthly fee. That’s $85 Over the course of the year.
The proceeds of that tax would be used to fund the future costs of commercially nonviable parts of the NBN network, and reduce reliance on the federal budget.

The bill, if passed, would see Australians taxed from July 2020. It was first introduced in 2018.


----------



## Smurf1976

sptrawler said:


> The good old NBN, the biggest con ever perpetrated on the Aussie taxpayer, now it looks like you are going to get a service charge on it even if you aren't connected to it.




I'm not against technology but the idea of charging someone for a service they choose to not use is totally unreasonable in my view.

What next? Woolworths charges me for their provision of a supermarket that I don't use?

Mazda send me a bill because there's a Mazda dealership not far away and I should have bought a car from them?

Whoever the local council at Port Headland is sends me a bill on the basis that by not living there I'm avoiding paying their rates and that as a tourist I once used a public toilet?

The concept is ridiculous yes. What it does confirm though is that no matter which party's in government, they'll take your money if they can get it.


----------



## Humid

I see a couple of problems here
1.You went to Port Hedland as a tourist!!! What were you thinking?
2.If the sewerage runs past your house in WA you pay whether connected or not
Don’t agree with it but nothing new

FTTC in my Street is awesome super fast and so far reliable


----------



## Humid

sptrawler said:


> The good old NBN, the biggest con ever perpetrated on the Aussie taxpayer, now it looks like you are going to get a service charge on it even if you aren't connected to it.
> What a Brain Fart of an idea, get the tax payer to replace the telecommunication network that the telecommunication company owned, so that the telecommunication companies can charge you more to use it. Priceless.
> 
> https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/broadband-tax-announced-by-government-012626031.html
> 
> Under the bill, announced by Communications Minister Paul Fletcher, households and businesses not using the NBN will be hit with a $7.10 monthly fee. That’s $85 Over the course of the year.
> The proceeds of that tax would be used to fund the future costs of commercially nonviable parts of the NBN network, and reduce reliance on the federal budget.
> 
> The bill, if passed, would see Australians taxed from July 2020. It was first introduced in 2018.




Your franking credits should offset it 
Stop moaning you voted for them。


----------



## Humid

https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2019/09/how-the-coalition-destroyed-the-nbn/


----------



## sptrawler

Humid said:


> Your franking credits should offset it
> Stop moaning you voted for them。



They are getting eaten away fast, but not to worry, only 2 years to go untill 66.5


----------



## Humid

sptrawler said:


> They are getting eaten away fast, but not to worry, only 2 years to go untill 66.5



 Not surprising you jet setter


----------



## sptrawler

Humid said:


> https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2019/09/how-the-coalition-destroyed-the-nbn/



The NBN should never have been a taxpayer funded project in the first place, but trust the media to find some way to apportion the blaming to the wrong part of the argument, good old confuse the plebs with nonsense rather than the real issue.


----------



## sptrawler

Humid said:


> Not surprising you jet setter



You bet, this bloody virus is a bit of a worry, booked to go Yokohama to Vancouver in April, then the U.S and back.
The main problem is a while back, I booked a 10 day tour of China and cruise back to Freo from Shanghai in October, hopefully it is all over by then.
If not I may well have done my dough, but if silly Billy had got in I wouldn't have had it anyway, always look on the bright side.


----------



## Humid

sptrawler said:


> The NBN should never have been a taxpayer funded project in the first place, but trust the media to find some way to apportion the blaming to the wrong part of the argument, good old confuse the plebs with nonsense rather than the real issue.




The point is what they did when they inherited it
It happened you need to deal with it and accept the Libs gave us a substandard service for the basic same price


----------



## sptrawler

Humid said:


> The point is what they did when they inherited it
> It happened you need to deal with it and accept the Libs gave us a substandard service for the basic same price



That is an assumption, being a sparky what the Libs did was cut the most time consuming part from the job, getting the cable from the street into the house.
That part of the job would have added a huge amount to the labor content, the fact is the whole system will be obsolete within 20 years, people want the ability to take their internet on the go, so 5G and wireless will take over the bulk of private usage.
The NBN will be used for big business data streaming, because it is secure point to point and their connection will be fibre all the way.
With regard private residential, the NBN will end up just being cable T.V and fibre to the house isn't really required. If someone does want it they will be able to get their provider to upgrade their cable to the node. Got to go (kids)


----------



## Humid

Jesus if your not prepared to read it I’ll post it for you

Second, and as mentioned above, former Communications Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, abandoned plans to build a fibre to the premise (FTTP) network across the majority of the country, instead replacing it with a multi-technology mix that included previously retired copper cabling. This change was marketed as a cost-saving move. However, the huge amount of rectification works required quickly saw the price tag for the NBN surge from an expected $30 billion to around $50 billion.


----------



## Humid

sptrawler said:


> That is an assumption, being a sparky what the Libs did was cut the most time consuming part from the job, getting the cable from the street into the house.
> That part of the job would have added a huge amount to the labor content, the fact is the whole system will be obsolete within 20 years, people want the ability to take their internet on the go, so 5G and wireless will take over the bulk of private usage.
> The NBN will be used for big business data streaming, because it is secure point to point and their connection will be fibre all the way.
> With regard private residential, the NBN will end up just being cable T.V and fibre to the house isn't really required. If someone does want it they will be able to get their provider to upgrade their cable to the node. Got to go (kids)




Assumption and then waffle on about 5g lol
Whose assuming 
I stay in a camp in Hedland where there’s a 4g tower next door
Works great until everyone knocks off at 6


----------



## sptrawler

Humid said:


> Assumption and then waffle on about 5g lol
> Whose assuming
> I stay in a camp in Hedland where there’s a 4g tower next door
> Works great until everyone knocks off at 6



That's because of bandwidth, 3g was better than 2g, 4g is better than 3g, 5g is 10 times better than 4g, they are trailing 6,7 and even 8g.
Times move on and like I said everyone will be wireless for personal use within 20years.
There is a lot of info around, here is a quick one.
https://www.technopediasite.com/2018/06/countries-using-ultra-fast-7g-and-8g.html
From the article:
*Sixth Generation (6G)*
6G is proposed to integrate 5G with satellite networks for global coverage.It is considered to be a cheap and Fast Internet Technology to provide unbelievably high data rates or very fast Internet speed access on air through wireless and mobile devices possibly up to 11 Gbps, while travelling or in a remote location.

*Advantage of 6G Technology*



Ultra fast access of Internet.
Data rates will be up to 10-11 Gbps.
Home automation and other related applications.
Smart Homes, Cities and Villages.
May be used in the production of Energy from galactic world.
Space technology, Defense applications will be modified with 6G networks.
Home based ATM systems.
Satellite to Satellite Communication for the development of mankind.
Natural Calamities will be controlled with 6G networks.
Sea to Space Communication.
Mind to Mind Communication may be possible.
*7G Deals with Space roaming*
After 4G the next generation 5G aims a real wireless world with no limitations while 6G integrates 5G with satellite networks. Due to variable technologies and standards, with 6G handoff/roaming will be an issue. This drives the 7G of mobile wireless networks which aims to acquire space roaming


----------



## sptrawler

Humid said:


> Jesus if your not prepared to read it I’ll post it for you
> 
> Second, and as mentioned above, former Communications Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, abandoned plans to build a fibre to the premise (FTTP) network across the majority of the country, instead replacing it with a multi-technology mix that included previously retired copper cabling. This change was marketed as a cost-saving move. However, the huge amount of rectification works required quickly saw the price tag for the NBN surge from an expected $30 billion to around $50 billion.



That $30B was a back of the napkin brain fart, but i guess you can believe anything you want, it is your prerogative.
The cost of the original plan was never tested, because they were thrown out, as no one believed them.
A bit like the cost to the economy of silly Billie's plan was never tested, because no one believed him either.
You will always have the rusted on, which is good because you wouldn't have an opposition without them.


----------



## Humid

Ok whatever forget the cost
Look at the crap result we ended up with due to the Libs 
A mixed technology no better than the copper wire it replaced in so many areas.
FTTP would of kept the economy ticking over but your lot don’t seem to want that
Obsessed with surplus and Hawaii


----------



## sptrawler

Humid said:


> Ok whatever forget the cost
> Look at the crap result we ended up with due to the Libs
> A mixed technology no better than the copper wire it replaced in so many areas.
> FTTP would of kept the economy ticking over but your lot don’t seem to want that
> Obsessed with surplus and Hawaii



I don't disagree with you on the Coalition, they are crap, it is just I thought they were going to do less damage than the other lot.
With regard the NBN, I really think it was a waste of taxpayers money, Telstra, Optus/Singtel and Vodaphone would have had to have done it anyway, the copper network was shagged so if they wanted to stay in business they would have had to fix it.
It was just a waste of taxpayers money, and now because we the tax payer are stuck with it, we are going to have to keep working on it so that Telstra, Optus, Vodaphone, TPG and anyone else can charge us to use it.
Just crazy $hit.
The money spent on the NBN could have been spent on infrastructure we needed, not to replace private infrastructure already there.
Just my opinion, I hated the idea when it was floated and I hate it now, all that is going to happen is it will end up like domestic water you pay a service charge for it even if you don't use it. Mind numbingly dumb.


----------



## Humid

It was only private because you flogged Telstra


----------



## IFocus

The NBN is as Humid  says was good until Turnbull basically saved it from destruction from Abbott but increased the cost while decreasing the fibre.

Unlikely wireless will ever replace it if you want speed and bandwidth as each generation of wireless gets eaten up by technology, 5G onwards no different as transport automation takes off etc.

And remember the government had to build if it was to reach rural areas plus unlike private capital the government will see a return of sorts on the investment


----------



## sptrawler

Humid said:


> It was only private because you flogged Telstra



I agree with that, but it has gone back to a mess, that the taxpayer is going to pay dearly for.


----------



## Knobby22

NBN backflip! 
Fibre to the home and its going to create jobs. Umm, suppose this thread is now redundant.


----------



## sptrawler

It all works out in the end, also we have NBN boxes for tapping points and 5G bases, win/win. Those who want fibre can now get it, just get a high speed plan apparently, which is what we talked about some 200 pages ago.👍


----------



## sptrawler

Knobby22 said:


> NBN backflip!
> Fibre to the home and its going to create jobs. Umm, suppose this thread is now redundant.



Knobby, this to me is my pet hate with politics, if you read through the posts from 4550, on the previous page all the examples are there.
The Government spending taxpayers money, to install upgraded equipment, so that the private enterprise can charge the taxpayer more to access the service they once owned.
It is unusual that the whole story is covered in one page of posts, but interesting reading in hindsight IMO.


----------



## overhang

Well well, what a backflip, almost like all the experts were correct.  The Labor NBN was never about the now, it was about future proofing.  And here we are 6-7 years later after the Libs ripped up the plan and now they realize the billions we have spent on FTTN is now effectively obsolete. 
Whilst this is still a step in the right direction it's still has the same issues the Lib rollout was had from the start, the digital divide will still be there and given that 2 million of the 4.7 million FTTN homes has been foreshadowed to be upgraded then it will be NBN lotto all over again.  

All though details aren't clear yet it can't work like how it sounds, Not everyone who orders a high speed plan will receive fibre to the home.  I think how this will work is that they will upgrade select areas or streets from FTTN to FTTC, then those that order a high speed plan inside that area would receive the lead in to the home that gives FTTP.  How they decide which area's would be upgraded is unknown, prob like the sports rorts it will be a spread sheet where the blue area's get it and the red area's miss out.  Again though it's just costing us more when they should do the 4.7 million to FTTC so that we get that economics of scale cost reduction instead of coming back and do the other 2.7 million in another 6 years.


One issue with how shortsighted the Libs NBN has been is that all though they acknowledged in early days that FTTN would need to be upgraded down the track they never mandated that new developments required FTTP, so we have many new developments still using copper that will no doubt need to be upgraded with tax payer $$$ to FTTC.


----------



## sptrawler

overhang said:


> Well well, what a backflip, almost like all the experts were correct.  The Labor NBN was never about the now, it was about future proofing.  And here we are 6-7 years later after the Libs ripped up the plan and now they realize the billions we have spent on FTTN is now effectively obsolete.
> Whilst this is still a step in the right direction it's still has the same issues the Lib rollout was had from the start, the digital divide will still be there and given that 2 million of the 4.7 million FTTN homes has been foreshadowed to be upgraded then it will be NBN lotto all over again.
> 
> All though details aren't clear yet it can't work like how it sounds, Not everyone who orders a high speed plan will receive fibre to the home.  I think how this will work is that they will upgrade select areas or streets from FTTN to FTTC, then those that order a high speed plan inside that area would receive the lead in to the home that gives FTTP.  How they decide which area's would be upgraded is unknown, prob like the sports rorts it will be a spread sheet where the blue area's get it and the red area's miss out.  Again though it's just costing us more when they should do the 4.7 million to FTTC so that we get that economics of scale cost reduction instead of coming back and do the other 2.7 million in another 6 years.
> 
> 
> One issue with how shortsighted the Libs NBN has been is that all though they acknowledged in early days that FTTN would need to be upgraded down the track they never mandated that new developments required FTTP, so we have many new developments still using copper that will no doubt need to be upgraded with tax payer $$$ to FTTC.



What was short sighted, was to start the roll out in marginal residential areas, rather than business CBS's, but let's just omit that.
The other thing that was dumb was to run fibre to every house, when only a few actually need, or indeed want it.
How many renter's want to pay for a high speed internet plan, how many old people want an internet connection at all, how many would prefer wireless anyway?
The way it has been rolled out will prove to be the right way IMO. Those that want fibre and bling speed can get it, those that don't want or need it don't have to pay for it.
As the copper degrades in a property, the carrier will change it out anyway.
There are lots of places where I live that have fibre to the house, it was one of the first places in the original roll out and they still aren't connected 10 years later.
It won't be many years before it becomes just a cable t.v system anyway, everyone will want the flexibility of high speed wireless, 5g, 6g are not far away.
Anyway, it is what it is and time will tell if it was a great idea or a white elephant.


----------



## overhang

sptrawler said:


> What was short sighted, was to start the roll out in marginal residential areas, rather than business CBS's, but let's just omit that.
> Agreed






sptrawler said:


> The other thing that was dumb was to run fibre to every house, when only a few actually need, or indeed want it.
> How many renter's want to pay for a high speed internet plan, how many old people want an internet connection at all, how many would prefer wireless anyway?




Well no, as it turns out it wasn't a stupid plan, evidenced by the coalition now wanting to go back to the same pits that techs worked in over the last 6 years where in some cases they ran new copper and replace it with fibre, that my friend is the definition of stupid.  As to who wants high speed plans the stats show the large increase in uptake of high speed plans, and it would be higher just so many can't access greater than 50mb speeds anyway.  Old people probably don't want or require high speeds but many renters do, as they are young and live in the digital age with Netflix subscriptions etc.


Wireless will never become the main service median, I can't even get 2 bars of 4g in the local bunnings, the packet loss on 5g is huge, but they certainly can co-exist together.



sptrawler said:


> Anyway, it is what it is and time will tell if it was a great idea or a white elephant.




The time is now for FTTN.  In the perfect world I think the rollout should have been FTTC with users to pay for the lead in if they require higher speeds.


----------



## sptrawler

overhang said:


> Well no, as it turns out it wasn't a stupid plan, evidenced by the coalition now wanting to go back to the same pits that techs worked in over the last 6 years where in some cases they ran new copper and replace it with fibre, that my friend is the definition of stupid.  As to who wants high speed plans the stats show the large increase in uptake of high speed plans, and it would be higher just so many can't access greater than 50mb speeds anyway.  Old people probably don't want or require high speeds but many renters do, as they are young and live in the digital age with Netflix subscriptions etc.
> 
> 
> Wireless will never become the main service median, I can't even get 2 bars of 4g in the local bunnings, the packet loss on 5g is huge, but they certainly can co-exist together.
> 
> 
> 
> The time is now for FTTN.  In the perfect world I think the rollout should have been FTTC with users to pay for the lead in if they require higher speeds.



I agree fibre to the kerb makes the most sense of all, that then leaves it up to those that actually want or need it, with the opportunity to upgrade later and would save the taxpayer from footing the last and worst bit of the connection.
Talking to a techy who was installing the node, he was saying there is a possibility they will house 5g transmitters at a later date, which I thought was interesting.


----------



## PZ99

In my case it wasn't whether I want or need it - it was the unreliable ADSL being switched off and replaced with 50mb NBN for a slightly lower monthly fee that made it a no-brainer. No installation cost and the land line phone still works during a blackout. Scored a free wifi / voip adapter in the deal. So all up, I think it was worth it. The infrastructure problably could've been sold off by now had the original rollout happened. 

In my view - NBN is to the Libs what boat people was to Labor.


----------



## bellenuit

PZ99 said:


> and the land line phone still works during a blackout.




How does that work? Does the NBN box or whatever it is called have battery back up? Wouldn't the VOIP adapter need its own power source? Not saying you're wrong, but trying to figure out how it hangs together.


----------



## PZ99

Battery backup


----------



## sptrawler

sptrawler said:


> It won't be free to air in a few years it will all come through the internet via the governments filter.:1zhelp:
> Then not only will the government know what you are watching, you will be paying to watch "free to air"



Well that post was in 2012 and now the time is closing in, enjoy 'live and free' while we still can.









						‘Win-win reform’: Telcos back government plans for spectrum split
					

Australia’s telcos and TV networks are on a collision course over a government proposal to make the radio-frequency spectrum used for TV services available for 5G.




					www.smh.com.au
				



Australia’s three largest telcos are urging the federal government to push ahead with a proposal that would allow them to use some of the radiofrequency spectrum occupied by television networks to deliver 5G services to their customers.

Telstra, Optus and TPG Telecom have backed a proposal outlined in a government green paper that would allow them to receive some of the 600MHZ spectrum used by television broadcasters. The views are at odds with the industry group for commercial television broadcasters, Free TV, which said it did not believe the current proposal would help the networks in the long-term.

Free TV chief executive Bridget Fair has previously said the proposal would affect the number and quality of services that television broadcasters can provide to the public. One of the main issues with the current proposal is the type of compression technology being suggested by the government that the TV networks could use to reduce their spectrum use. The commercial TV industry believes the use of MPEG-4 compression technology would reduce the number of multi-channels available to the public and coverage quality.

Free TV chairman Greg Hywood said on Monday there were alternatives to the government’s current proposal to hive spectrum away from broadcasters and sell it to the telcos.

“There is a better option with better technologies, which will enable broadcasters to be able to deliver by the quantity of programming through existing channels, plus move to higher quality transmission, but it’s going to take a bit of time,” he said.
However, Mr Sheridan said services will not be reduced if the government’s proposal was successful, adding that there were a number of alternatives already available for tradition broadcasting services.
“Optus can confirm that alternatives to traditional terrestrial broadcasting already exist and there will be even more multi-cast...options in the very near future,” he said.

“High-speed broadband infrastructure, such as the NBN, high-speed mobile networks, and satellite delivery platforms provide viable commercial options across metropolitan, regional, rural and remote areas.”


----------



## sptrawler

sptrawler said:


> Now add to the previous post and the discussion of 5G small cells, autonomous driving cars.
> 
> https://www.techradar.com/news/why-self-driving-vehicles-could-be-the-biggest-winner-in-a-5g-world
> 
> If this is all correct, fibre to the node, with a 5G cell in the node, may well have been a master stroke.
> 
> If heavy coverage of 5G is the pre requisite for autonomous cars, and it can deliver high speed to the home, Malcolm has pulled off a blinder, each node becomes a 5G cell tower.
> It also ensures that the NBN, isn't made redundant, as 5G is rolled out.
> As I always say time will tell ,and just because the media say something is crap, doesn't always make it so. lol



A post from a few years ago and early signs are starting to show.





						No Cookies | Daily Telegraph
					

No Cookies




					www.dailytelegraph.com.au


----------



## Belli

A good a thread as any.

Such an interesting time with the internet yesterday which spilled over to this morning.

Yesterday the NBN went down at home around 10 am.  Not really a matter of concern for me as I am not wedded to looking at news sites, the share market or much else.  A check indicated there was an NBN issue and it was expected to be resolved in a couple of days.  Issue was partially fixed by 5 pm.

However, and this is where the fun began, not one peripheral worked.  No connection with the solar inverters, my sound system.  Zilch with the smartphone, not that I use it much apart from the app for the sound system.

Checked the modem.  Broadband working normally.  OK, so something, whatever it is, will be fixed overnight or so I think.  This morning, the same situation. Nothing.  Again checked the modem.  Yep, broadband working normally but then I noticed none of the Wi-Fi peripherals are listed and also noticed a small advisory 2.4G and 5G Wi-Fi is off.

Did some digging in the services area and neither were enabled and had to turn the Wi-Fi on manually within the modem.  Now all are working as intended.

What a bummer for some who may not know how to do it but it really is poor service when the NBN service is restored by the provider if  the broadband is down for an extended period it does not apparently automatically enable Wi-Fi at the same time.  I don't know if this is standard practice but if it is just not good enough in my view.


----------



## Belli

Belli said:


> Such an interesting time with the internet yesterday which spilled over to this morning.




To add to this, while the internet provider sent me a text on Wednesday saying the problem with the internet had been fixed (I did report it to them) on Friday an NBN technician called me about the problem.  After a brief discussion about what had occurred, he said he would check anyway.  He then turned up and told me there was an issue with one connection being loose.  A speed test sow the downland speed has now doubled.

A down vote to the internet provider saying the problem was fixed but at the same time an half up vote for arranging for an NBN technician to check it out. The half because they didn't tell me.


----------



## sptrawler

Priceless, the taxpayer puts in the NBN for the telco's, so that the telco's can charge more for content and now everyone is on the drip the cost just keeps cranking up. I hope the ACCC cans the price rises.

NBN prices to ‘double over the next decade’​A redacted submission to the competition regulator shows prices for entry level plans will climb as high as $104 per month, which retailers have called ‘a slap in the face’ for consumers.


----------



## mullokintyre

sptrawler said:


> That is an assumption, being a sparky what the Libs did was cut the most time consuming part from the job, getting the cable from the street into the house.
> That part of the job would have added a huge amount to the labor content, the fact is the whole system will be obsolete within 20 years, people want the ability to take their internet on the go, so 5G and wireless will take over the bulk of private usage.
> The NBN will be used for big business data streaming, because it is secure point to point and their connection will be fibre all the way.
> With regard private residential, the NBN will end up just being cable T.V and fibre to the house isn't really required. If someone does want it they will be able to get their provider to upgrade their cable to the node. Got to go (kids)



A very prescient comment from @sptrawler .
From The Evil Murdoch empire


> The NBN faces a slide in demand as retailers ramp up the sales pitch on cheaper, faster 5G offerings – as the competition watchdog considers a proposal from the broadband network that could see internet bills double in a decade.
> More than a quarter of Australians consider their phone and internet costs to be unaffordable, a recent study from the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network (ACCAN) found, and retailers are now increasingly pushing wireless 5G plans which in many cases are superior – and less expensive – than those offered by NBN.
> 
> In May TPG’s subsidiary brands launched a new $60 per month 5G home internet service that the telco said offers superior value compared to NBN’s 50 megabit per second plans and is particularly customers keeping a close eye on their budget. Home 5G typically offers speeds of between 100 and 600 megabits per second, which in many cases is as much as 12-times the speed of NBN’s 50 megabits per second plans.
> TPG executives say the migration of every 100,000 NBN customers back onto its own infrastructure represents around $50m in annual savings for the telco.
> 
> Since launching its 4G and 5G home broadband services last year, it has signed up more than 110,000 customers nationally.



Unfortunately for us out here in regional Australia, we are unlikely to see much of the vaunted 5G services.
The short range of the 5G network mean that a lot of Antenna have to be mounted to provide coverage, so it will be uneconomic in less populated areas. 
So we will be saddled with higher prices for a slower service.
Mick


----------

