NBN Rollout Scrapped

[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]

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]

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]

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]

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

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]

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]

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]

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]

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."

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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.