NBN Rollout Scrapped

[sydboy007]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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,

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.