NBN Rollout Scrapped

[drsmith]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.