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

TLS - Telstra Corporation

Jump to new
boofhead, I don't have any references but I am making an assumption that there will be some kind of cost associated with a multiplexing device required at the home and also some form of labor and materials cost to pull out the copper and pull in the fibre. Also one would assume for a $43 billion outlay there would be some form return on capital required, maybe the taxpayer will wear it. But from information available on the net, places that have the superfast broadband have not seen a corresponding superfast take up of the services. At the end of the day it will depend on the cost, most people just browse and that speed is governed by the site you are viewing.
 
Copper is Telstra's asset. It is up to Telstra how it manages it. That is not an expense for FTTH.

Some FTTH deployments are exclusive to some fibre wholesalers which limits ISP choice. Also not many ISPs in the FTTH resale game. The Tasmanian stage 1 is in areas of lower population and generally lower socio-economic regions where there is a lower proportion of broadband users in general too.

Multiplexing etc. shouldn't be too bad as the depoyment is based off already deployed technologies and uses a lot of passive devices.
 
From a charting viewpoint TLS looks like a good short at the moment.
Overall it does seem to be the direction of the trend.

(click to expand)
 

Attachments

  • TLS 280410.png
    28.6 KB · Views: 27
Watching Stephen Conroy on ABC's Inside Business, one gets the impression he would like to grind Telstra into the dirt and would have no hesitation at using any amount of taxpayer's money and/or Legislative power to achieve that (either personally and/or as part of a broader ALP socialist agenda).

Political reality however suggests they need a successful negotiation with Telstra as they have failed in so many other policy areas but with this government you never know.
 
I know I resent the government choosing to spend MY money on a very risky proposition that only pays a 7% return assuming all the positive assumptions come to fruition. In some cases, that is what is needed from a government, but when they are replicating a portion of what is already available or do-able by a listed company, and kneecap that company at the same time-absolute thuggery. And when you look at their record of achievement with 'big ticket' items (insulation/schools) I wouldn't trust them to do a competent job. The sooner the next election is held the better. I only hope the swinging voters appraise what has happened over the last 3 years and vote accordingly.

I hold TLS, and a few miners/energy companies for that matter, too. And I vote.
 
Sainter said:
I know I resent the government choosing to spend MY money on a very risky proposition that only pays a 7% return assuming all the positive assumptions come to fruition.
Click to expand...
Me too. But, as drsmith says above, this battle has become personal for Conroy now (as has the internet filter), and doesn't give a damn if he wastes taxpayer funds as long as he gets to kick TLS in the head.
 
As I stated in an earlier post the Government is between a rock and a hard place. This is even more highlighted when you read in the Australian that they are contemplating legislation to stop Telstra competing with them, legislation to stop Telstra getting access to 4 G wireless, legislation to make them sell Foxtel. It certainly doesn't sound as though they think they can do it without Telstra and it knows Telstra can cream them in the market place. The reason little Kev has put Conroy on the case is because he is a bully like Kev the only problem is everybody can see through them. Telstra is pulling offf a blinder and i for one think Conroy is a hiding to nothing. This government is on top of the ski slope Australia isn't ready for communism or a dictatorship yet. COME ON THE NEXT ELECTION BRING IT ON.
 
There was another thread how can you make Telstra profitable, I can't find it. However I have the answer at last, go into competition against the N.B.N, all the other carriers will jump on board with the N.B.N because they will supply discounted access at the taxpayers expense. Then Telstra will be allowed to supply a service on a level playing field because it doesn't have a supposed monopoly. Then the Government will screw all the other carriers to pay for the blown out cost of unwanted infrastructure i.e more landlines, that the taxpayer has funded but is now a huge millstone on the Government. Meanwhile Telstra has a company that supplies everything and it is payed for. Like I said before it is a hiding to nothing for the Government. Even now the legislation being proposed must be bordering on restrictive practice and from a Governments point unconstitutional and I am no lawyer. If it keeps trying to push a political ajenda by making laws to disadvantage a publicly listed company(that it floated) it must be leaving itself open to constitutional chalenge.
 
Well that was a good call BOGGO $3.20 down to $2.85 ,approx 12% fall nearly got it with an all ords fall of 5000 to 4200 approx 18% fall. Maybe Mincor $2.20 down to $1.30 or Panoramic or BHP would have been better calls.
Actually maybe it would be easier to show shares that only fell 12%, there wasn't many in my portfolio.
 
sptrawler said:
Maybe Mincor $2.20 down to $1.30 or Panoramic or BHP would have been better calls.
Click to expand...

Maybe I am misunderstanding what you are saying above.

Are you saying that you did pick or could have picked and did/could have posted your entry, stop and target for any or all of those three on the day after they peaked and they all went to your assigned target or are you just making a general hindsight comment after the event ?

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=551600&postcount=663
 
Hi Boggo, It appeared from your post that the fall in the Telstra price was predicted in your previously posted chart. When in actual fact the fall was due to an overall fall in the market. I don't mind people taking credit where credit is due. It would be really creative charting to predict when Telstra is going to go up instead of down.LOL
 

Well Boggo I am not a chartist, but Telstra seems to be going against the market. If a deal is struck with N.B.N it could mean a decent return of capital and all the punitive, restrictive rules that apply to Telstra being lifted. At last there may be a light at the end of the tunnel. What do you think Julia and Dr Smith?
 
Telstra is the scum of the earth as far as i'm concerned

Yes I hold telstra shares, but not enough for me not to want the government to pummel them to the ground.

*hides from everyone*

Here's an example. Try to keep an open mind and pretend you don't hold shares and pretend you aren't blessed with decent internet. With decent i'm talking ~$70 a month around 8mb with maybe 30+gb

I'm currently living in an apartment serviceable only by a Telstra DSLAM. ADSL2+ is unnecessarily ridiculously expensive. So i'm on ADSL1 8mb and I pay for a phone line which has no phone connected to it. I know how much cheaper it can be as i've had ADSL2+ before in a different home.

Fast forward 2 months and i'm moving to a new estate.. yes NEW estate(<5 yrs). This estate is plagued by RIMS which are limited in available ports with some residents waiting for YEARS to get ADSL.. not ADSL2.. but ADSL in general.

Now to connect a phone line just to get an OPTION to apply for internet, I will have to dig a trench from the house to the box on the side of the house which with telstra's contractors is about $280. Then I have to pay a first time connection fee of $299. Then I have to pay a monthly fee of at least $20 just to get an option to apply. But what's the point of having a phone If i can't even get internet? I don't require a physical phone at all.

I'd have no hesitation paying that fee if I'd get a guarantee of an internet port which most suburbs have and you would expect new suburbs to have. But Telstra has gone on the cheap and installed RIMS to save their cost.

It's fked me over and it has fked over plenty of other people too. You may have been lucky but there are other people out there that have been screwed over.

I still hold the shares because I believe an agreement will be struck.
 
I understand your frustration and the Government is tying to pummel them into the ground, therein lies the problem.
Why would Telstra put in all the conduits and trenches in these new suburbs? What is the upside at the moment. The Government is wanting to buy the infrastructure on the cheap(written down cost base) so why put in more infrastructure. Even if Telstra puts it in for themselves the Government wants to legislate to stop them using it (cherry picking) legislation. So really get on to your local MP and get NBN on the job, maybe yours could be the first suburb(after Tassie). Meanwhile I for one think it is in the shareholders interest, not to be installing equipment for the Government at the shareholders expense.
On a final note can't wait to see what it costs you with the NBN $43B someone pays one way or another.
 
By the way chb I forgot to respond to the other part of your post, the one that mentions the apartment block serviced by Telstra. If the apartment block was easily serviced at a good return on investment one of the other service providers would be supplying a competing service i.e Optus, Iprimus etc. But obviously they don't want to.
This is the funny thing with the N.B.N, they don't want anybody cherry picking the high volume areas, but have been forcing Telstra to allow all the other carriers to cherry pick for years.
Like I have said on numerous occasions Telstra can take on the N.B.N on a level playing field and it will take a lot of draconian legislation to make the N.B.N a viable alternative. With the Governments socialist record this sort of legislation would put us in a real tailspin. Chairman Rudd isn't that stupid, well I don't think he is.
 
Hi sptrawler, thanks for your meaningful response.

Here in lies the problem, I would have no beef with telstra and the NBN would not have existed or even have been required if telstra in the first place did things with quality and costed their items at reasonable prices. When you say with the apartment block that other ISPs can install their own equipment that is possibly true(i'm not sure if it is full or just not profit worthy). But what ideally would happen is that since telstra is such a large communications organisation they could have priced competitively but they've chosen not to do this to maintain maximum profits. They're paying for this now via the NBN.

Hopefully an agreement gets sorted out for all parties involved, telstra, the government and the people of Australia.
 
sptrawler said:
: What do you think Julia and Dr Smith?
Click to expand...
Sorry, sptrawler, I haven't been following what's happening with Telstra.
Maybe consider that on the outside chance the Libs win the election, Mr Abbott has said he will not proceed with the NBN project. Has the government ever actually got round to doing a feasibility study on all the costings, including the take up rate from the public?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
My strategy/plan going forward
Replies
13
Views
837
RbNEO
R
Trading US Stocks
Replies
3
Views
2K
karenjones
K
Revisit and rehearsal on WETT a.k.a Weekend Trend Trader (WETT)
Replies
0
Views
681
bettamania
S
What could be safer than writing a covered call?
Replies
15
Views
2K
Santafe
S
Thoughts on Trading and Investing : Garpal Gumnut :
Replies
15
Views
3K
Garpal Gumnut
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...