NBN Rollout Scrapped

[drsmith]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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?

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: 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]

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]

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]

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."

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

You completed missed the point.

If I understand this correctly, what the NBN is actually paying for is the duct either way.

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.