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

NBN Rollout Scrapped

Be thankful they're doing copper remediation in your area. I'd be interested to know what suburb.

I believe they were budgeting for about 10% remediation over the FTTN footprint. If they can honestly get away with around 50% I'd be surprised.

Western Sydney but not the far west, Parramatta area...they are fair dinkum digging up half the street, they replaced every pit due to Asbestos and have now replaced all the 6 neighboring unit block property's, junction or pit to property building...completely replacing the old Telstra line, copper for copper = crazy.
 

I had hoped MT would see sense and if initial testing o the copper showed a majority would need to be replaced they'd just do fibre instead since the costs are comparable.

Seems that hope is for nought.

In the years ahead this will be viewed as the greatest economic vandalism to tax payers.
 
In the years ahead this will be viewed as the greatest economic vandalism to tax payers.

Actually it is now.I'm not surprised seeing that is was devised by two clowns on the back of a paper napkin during a four hour vip flight. Cost Benefit Analysis was a foreign language to these guys.

But it is good to see that you have a new-found concern for taxpayers which is normally alien to your Labor/Greens.
 
$150m FTTN rollout pilot signed between Telstra and NBN Co.


http://www.afr.com/p/technology/telstra_in_nbn_fibre_deal_2UhvyideUybBooTZ3nXFBI
 
http://www.zdnet.com/is-the-nbn-strategic-reviews-terminal-value-terminally-wrong-7000030856/

That whole objective was all but rubbished by NBN Co chairman Ziggy Switkowski, who has publicly conceded that the project needs to ramp up so aggressively as to be all but impossible to achieve under current guidelines. The Coalition has yet to offer a clear strategy about how and when the company is going to ramp up to roll out what Switkowski has conceded must be 100,000 premises per month for the next eight years.

The NBN Strategic Review addresses terminal-value calculations on just one page (p107), explaining that its internal rate of return (IRR) calculation of 5.3 percent is based on a terminal value of $45 billion in FY2040.

This valuation is “mechanically” calculated as being six times EBITDA for the theoretical revenues of NBN Co some 25 years from now – and 15 years after 2025, when by Ziggy Switkowski's own reckoning NBN Co will have already started to transition to a FTTP model.

By 2040, the actual NBN – the one based on the fibre that the Coalition refuses to pay for now – will have been built and will be based fully on fibre. Real revenues will therefore be based not on the services the government wants to build over its MTM model now, but on those that will have become capable over the FTTP network as it comes online.

The question to ask, then, is simple: Does the $45 billion terminal value assigned in the NBN Strategic Review seem reasonable?

In other words, in 1997, 1999 and 2006 the market valued Telstra at 6.5, 17 and 8.2 times EBITDA to give it market values of $43 billion, $100 billion, and $33 billion on revenues of $15,983b, $17.571b, and $22.75b respectively.

These figures would seem to support the 6-times-EBITDA metric – but can we therefore assume that NBN Co in 2040 will have an EBITDA of $7.5 billion?

That terminal value basically depends on NBN Co becoming a money-spinner on the scale of what Telstra was when it was sold off to the market. And that's a big ask – but a necessary one if the NBNSR is to hold water. Were the actual terminal value to be, say, 25 percent lower by that point, the Coalition's entire revenue model would be thrown into chaos – and its decision to forego a more-profitable FTTP network revealed as being highly questionable indeed.
 
Wow!

Bell Labs says that XG-FAST can provide up to 10 gigabits per second over a distance of up to 30 meters.

Bell Labs' test was done in -- you guessed it -- a lab. In the real world, there are plenty of factors that can reduce Internet speeds traveling over copper lines, including the thickness of the cable, signals picked up by other nearby cables and the length of the wire.


Wake me up when they can do it over 300 metres in real world conditions. Still good though. Also nice to see the US using the metric system.
 
Did you read the details? 30 metre length of copper, bonded pair. In a lab. I can see it being beneficial for apartment blocks, office blocks etc but for stand alone dwellings I can't see it being overly practical with many cabinets needed per street. Then add in extra electricity costs, $89 million for FTTN power
 

Of course I read the details. It has uses as you mentioned and the whole point about Turnbull's alternative implementation strategy is to use technology that is available where it is cost effective to do so. This isn't yet available, but may become usable at some stage.

The other point worth noting is that even though the 10 gigabits per second was achieved in lab condition on a 30M length, the technology does not appear to be limited to 30M stretches. What if they can get acceptable speeds, but not 10 gigabits per second, on 200M+ stretches. That would avoid having more cabinets than are currently planned.
 

The devil is in the detail...


And its a record for speed over copper.

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/...hone-line-a-new-world-record-set-by-bell-labs


http://au.pcmag.com/news/13100/bell-labs-hits-10gbps-on-copper-lines
 

Yet G.PON already does this over vastly longer cable lengths NOW. GPON doesn't require bleeding edge technology. What the original FTTN was rolling out was off the shelf 3rd to 4th generation technology. Cheap and reliable with well known performance chacteristics due to millions upon millions of installations around the world.

The other main issue is the use of bonded pairs ie using 2 copper lines for a 4 wire service. To achieve that in the real world would require massive investment in laying more copper. Why go down that path when fibre provides a superior service?

So pretty much any copper tech that requires bonded pairs will have little use for a country wide FTTN project. It MAY be useful in an office building, but only small ones. 30M is really barely useful for the internal cabling of a building. Unless it was possible to install mini media converters in the building you'd MAYBE get a few of the offices closest to the MDF within 30M, a few more at 100M, assuming there's enough spare copper pairs to make the service possible.
 
Some senate committee action yesterday,


Mr Turnbull’s spokesman said Mr Morrow had done “a magnificent job” and that NBN Co had met its June 30 targets “for the first time in its history”.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...o-reach-majority/story-e6frgaif-1226986152979
 
The AFR in a recent article has expanded a little more in this,

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/broadband_race_shifts_up_gear_M1xovZkYk07iE0LqjdEM5L

Meanwhile, NBN Co loses a $200m court case with Telstra over their original deal,

http://www.afr.com/p/technology/telstra_beats_nbn_co_in_case_oLeJCf791cxhlxdVl13mtN
 
Hopefully the ACCC decides to keep protecting consumers rather than giving Telstra and the Govt a free kick. Got to laugh they still haven't been able to get power to the trial nodes in Epping VIC as yet.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...l&utm_content=844223&utm_campaign=kgb&modapt=

So what does the government do? Turnbull and Cormann write to Sims arguing that the 2011 agreement between NBN Co and Telstra should be ignored during the ACCC’s public inquiry into making Final Access Determinations (FADs) for the declared fixed-line services.

Arguing that a determination by the ACCC leading to a downward adjustment of fixed-line service pricing is bad for consumers beggars belief. What a ham-fisted attempt to influence the ACCC, a regulator that is required to take into account all reasonable information and industry pricing agreements when setting regulated prices.

To fail to include the 2011 agreement would lead to chaos where other companies will argue that their pricing agreements should be ignored.

If the ACCC complies with the government’s wishes then it is important that the decision be tested in court. Any suggestion that consumers should pay higher prices to utilise the obsolete and degrading CAN is unacceptable and demonstrates the level of desperation surrounding Turnbull’s office at the moment.

You might think the government would be interested in protecting the interests of 22 million Australian consumers... but you would be wrong.

The government letter states, “the terms agreed by Telstra, NBN Co and the government were approved by Telstra’s 1.4 million shareholders in October 2011. It will undermine the integrity of this deal if Telstra shareholders are deprived of the benefit of arrangements they did not initiate but negotiated in good faith.”

Wait a minute. Why would the government intervene to protect Telstra shareholder interests?

Can you remember the last time a Coalition government espousing an 'open and competitive market' mantra intervened to protect the interests of shareholders in what might be considered to be a regulated monopoly fixed-line infrastructure provider?
 
Wait a minute. Why would the government intervene to protect Telstra shareholder interests?

It would be interesting to know the collective TLS holdings (if any) of our Federal members.

Ethically I agree with you sydboy but how many politicians these days actually make any decisions or act based on what is best ethically.

I've given up on all of them - both sides of the political divide as well as the ones on the fringe. They all walk around with the same hats on their heads labelled - SELF INTEREST.

So as a substantial TLS shareholder I'm inclined to don the same hat that they wear and say 'bravo Mr. Turbull'.
 
The Libs still want copper hey?


Danish researchers break fibre-optic data transfer record


http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/web/danish-researchers-break-fibre-optic-data-transfer-speed-record-1259938
 

The Liberal FTTN. Stalled in Epping VIC because they can't get power to the nodes. Now that's incompetency for ya. I wonder how many other suburbs will face the same fate as Epping?? Supposedly they had a fully worked out plan to do a nation wide rollout in 3.3 years. Not looking so good on that score now. Close to a year in office and they've got 1 test result for the public of FTTN and another for FTTB.

Then we have a $150M money throw to Telstra. No open tender for the work. For a Government all about open free markets and competition, how does that stand up with giving a very large amount of money to Telstra without seeing if they could get a better deal from someone else? Maybe they could have done a deal with TPG / Optus, or tendered out for FTTB trials. I'd love to know what Turnbull was expecting in return from Telstra on awarding them such a lucrative contract.

Only good thing about this report is the call for any Govt investment over $1B to have a full CBA done. Hopefully that includes Abbott's broken promises on roads funding. Why invest in a Melbourne road tunnel that provides 80c in economic return for every $ invested?? If the debt ain't self liquidating then it just increased the burden on the rest of us.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...