NBN Rollout Scrapped

[Tisme]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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,

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]

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]

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