This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

NBN Rollout Scrapped


Considering how politicised MT made the NBN it's nice of him to decide to take the politics out now. Shame he couldn't bring himself to do it 3 years ago, but then he didn't have a policy till 6 months ago.

Will be interesting to see how they plan to change the rollout schedule to get more money in faster. That would seem to indicate rural areas will get an upgrade at a slower pace than metro areas with poor broadband, though how you determine what areas are poorly served will be a political exercise in itself.

Lets see how long the Nats play nice before we have a petulant "Boom Boom" Barnaby showing how unhappy he is. Any shock jock weddings coming up for him to do some megaphone diplomacy from???
 
Lets see how long the Nats play nice before we have a petulant "Boom Boom" Barnaby showing how unhappy he is. Any shock jock weddings coming up for him to do some megaphone diplomacy from???

Jeez Syd, I hope you've saved one of these for yourself.

another :topic

It's clear that Labor's one size fits 93% FTTP rollout was political from the start.
 
In Tasmania, the current rollout does not appear to be going particularly well.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-...e-nbn-rollout-in-tasmania/4999570?section=tas
 
Jeez Syd, I hope you've saved one of these for yourself.

It's clear that Labor's one size fits 93% FTTP rollout was political from the start.

And the Coalition FTTN was a political response, and still we have none of the transparency that MT has been saying.

Why is maximum cable distance to attain 25 and 50Mbs a state secret? Why have we yet to gain access to all the assumptions on the Coalitions policy that came up with their $29.2B price tag? So far they seem too scared to face any of the scrutiny they focused on the Labor NBN for 3 years.

MT expected quite a bit of information from the previous NBN board, yet so much of the same information is still not available now he's in charge.

Why couldn't he provide the Telecommunications Bluebook un-redacted saving a $2,000 FoI request? Now that would make me believe he was serious about transparency.

Oh, and why appoint a new Chair to the NBN board that is unable to take part in the Telstra negotiations? The single biggest potential cost blow out for the FTTN and Switkowski has be sidelined.

We've also yet to see MT say sorry for being so wrong about the cost of FTTP. All those years banging on about how expensive it was, and NBN has shown, after the steep learning curve, that it's about the same cost as copper to install.
 
Malcolm Turnbull in the ABC's Insiders program today.


http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2012/s3863199.htm
 

My bolds.
It's concerning that MT would make such a judgement when the lazy assumptions are based on data that shows no such decrease in demand for faster speeds. Considering how the internet is evolving to become the main media platform one must expect the demand for high definition media to be the way of the future, considering TV's are now moving to the ultra high definition format then it's only natural that the internet will follow the same path. This high definition media will require FTTP to keep up with demand and most likely the 1gbs that NBN co were implementing. So it seems quite clear the demand for higher speeds will be increasing in the not to distant future. Now one might support the position that it isn't the governments responsibility to build such a service but that's a separate argument.


MALCOLM TURNBULL: so you can very readily upgrade your service in that country town to very high speed broadband, higher than you can get with wireless, which is all that the Labor Party was going to offer them.

Isn't this the same party that suggested wireless was the way of the future while in opposition?
 
I love this from MT

The Labor Party said fibre to the premises would be the answer for 93 per cent of the population. One of the cut-offs was communities with less than 1,000 premises, 1,000 houses and businesses. There is a lot of country towns that fall into that category and they don't regard themselves as isolated hamlets.

So he wants to have FTTN in the areas with some of the oldest and least maintained copper. Can't wait to see what the remediation costs are. His 60 day report will hopefully show some real world test results of copper in various areas around Australia so a reasonable guestimate of how much copper will need to be replaced can be done.

I also love the way he argues people don't currently want / want the speed of FTTP, yet the sub 1000 premises towns deserves the highest speeds possible via FTTN. Which is it MT?
 
What I find encouraging from Malcolm Turnbull is flexibility in approach to deliver the best overall outcome.


That's something Labor and Mr Red Underpants had a lot more difficulty with.
 
More on the Tasmanian rollout,


http://www.afr.com/p/business/companies/turnbull_blames_leighton_subsidiary_EldNGORmFBwPJFqCPCjn9L
 
On the broader issue of cost, it would be interesting to know whether a 20 per cent increase in NBN contracts negotiated by Silcar as outlined in the AFR article above was factored into the June 2013 corporate plan.
 

Regardless of how the politics plays out from here, it's clear from Mike Quigley himself that Labor's full FTTP rollout was a political objective rather than a practical one.

Not at all. He's just stating the obvious. Quigley has never said FTTP was cheaper or faster to build than FTTN. Nobody has, to my knowledge.

But just because something is cheaper and faster to build doesn't mean it's the best course of action. And it absolutely does not mean it's the best long-term option.

A tent is much cheaper and faster to build than a house.

A dirt road is cheaper and faster to build than an asphalt one.


So why aren't we all living in tents, built alongside dirt roads?
 
We've been here before, but not all shelters need to be houses and not all roads need to be sealed. A tent is appropriate for a campsite as is a dirt road to that camp site.

This argument's been had and lost by Labor.

Time to move on.
 
We've been here before, but not all shelters need to be houses and not all roads need to be sealed. A tent is appropriate for a campsite as is a dirt road to that camp site.

This argument's been had and lost by Labor.

Time to move on.

Indeed, and the remote "campsite" only had a dirt road and a tent under the ALP policy.

Turnbull, on the other hand, thinks that 77% of Australians only need a tent and a dirt road. Despite the fact that over 60% of NBN fibre subscribers so far have chosen a speed that's in excess of the speed limit on his dirt road. And that's now! Imagine what that percentage will be by 2020. What broadband speed did you have 10 years ago?
 
Imagine what that percentage will be by 2020.
Not 93% or anything close to that. To continue your analogy, millions would still be out in the weather with no clothes at the pace Labor's rollout was progressing.

With regard to the AFR article above on the Tasmanian rollout, do you have any insight on whether Silcar's negotiated 20 per cent increase in NBN contracts as reported is reflected in the June 2013 corporate plan costs ?
 

Would it not hit both versions of the NBN?

Or will businesses somehow decide to provide the L=N party a mates rate install?
 

If there is a $60 billion difference, then sure, people who only want to camp in their backyard, only need tents (ie download pr0n and pirate dvds)

It is only the businesses that export that need the asphalt for their trucks to get to the port.... you know the ports that could well do with some of that $60 billion cash injection.

The problem with the NBN is that it is being rolled out to everyone, of which a huge majority only needs ADSL.

We could have done this in 10 years time with better, cheaper technology.

MW
 

1. The "$60bn" difference has already been exposed as BS. http://delimiter2.com.au/just-plain-wrong-full-refutation-coalitions-94bn-nbn-costing/

2. Around 60% of NBN signups have already chosen 50/20 and 100/40Mbps speeds. Well above those available on either ADSL or even FTTN. Especially upload (you know, the bit you need for "exporting".)

3. The vast majority of NBN costs are construction, not equipment. So it will be vastly more expensive in 10 years, not cheaper.
 

You sure? Would you have said the same thing if someone had told you 10 years ago that most people would have "24Mbps" broadband today?

Given that ~60% of people have already chosen 50/20 or 100/40, what percentage do you think it would be in 2020 if people have the choice?

And more to the point, what percentage would it have to be for you to support the continuation of FTTP?


No idea about Silcar's reported increase being included in the Corp plan or not.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...