No, a distribution point services 2-4 premises
One thing to be wary of with FTTdp ... When we talk about it here it is 2-4 premises from the pit/pole outside. When the NBNCo talks about FTTdp they might be talking about 48 premises at 100-200 metres. That's closer to being a mini-node imo. They really are a deceptive bunch.
pretty sure when the nbn first mentioned fttdp they described it as "pushing fibre closer to the premises the with the distribution point in the name referring to the individual junction box in the telecommunications pit in the street outside each property"
but whatever its not going to get rolled out anyway its just more smoke and mirrors to keep people distracted until they have rolled out fttn everywhere
Does NBN Co rollout map tell you whether you are getting FTTN ot FTTP? (This relates to something discussed above)
If not, how did you find out?
http://www.nbnco.com.au/lear
The table baked into the above page (not the downloadable 3 year plan linked from the same page)
has a column called anticipated technology, with either FTTP, FTTN (FTTN or FTTB), Fixed Wireless or HFC as the options. Things will get interesting when/if they split out FTTB from FTTN, and add in FttDp, HFCttVDSL, XGFast, GFast, 5GttVDSL, FibrettGnome & SpiderttN.
* The Three Year Construction Plan (the Plan) does not include premises that are already completed, in-build or covered by satellite, or new developments. nbn intends to update this information quarterly to include new areas and reflect ongoing variations arising from the planning process.
Good to see that NBNCo is still reporting that nbn intends to update this information quarterly
Not good to see that this info is still missing
1. Construction end dates (only has first site construction start dates)
2. First and last RFS dates.
3. Copper & HFC network switch off dates
The table baked into the above page (not the downloadable 3 year plan linked from the same page)
has a column called anticipated technology, with either FTTP, FTTN (FTTN or FTTB), Fixed Wireless or HFC as the options. Things will get interesting when/if they split out FTTB from FTTN, and add in FttDp, HFCttVDSL, XGFast, GFast, 5GttVDSL, FibrettGnome & SpiderttN.
again hoping that this is incorrect information on their page, as it says my area is expect to use fttn, finder also says this. but I have had an nbnco box and fibre pulled to it for 4 months now, I'm still not RFS for another month or two depending on which guesstimate you go by. When I call RSPs they also tell me I am going to be on FTTN.
So basically the answer is, that you cant find out anywhere what technology you are on but that its likely to be fttn
When the NBNCo talks about FTTdp they might be talking about 48 premises at 100-200 metres. That's closer to being a mini-node imo. They really are a deceptive bunch.
Up to 500m in low density depending on frontages and copper direction. More like what is referred to elsewhere as Fibre to the Street. They'll have a good spin on it though like you said.
Weasel words.
The table baked into the above page ...
Thanks. That says we're getting upgraded Optus HFC, which is a relief. I thought the problems they've had might have left us with FTTN.
I have had an nbnco box and fibre pulled to it for 4 months now, I'm still not RFS for another month or two depending on which guesstimate you go by. When I call RSPs they also tell me I am going to be on FTTN.
Unfortunately, it sounds like the partial FTTP construction has been abandoned.
Looking on the bright side, the cost of any Technology Choice change from FTTN to FTTP should be reduced and the time to build quicker because you already have a fibre lead in and FTTP "box" installed on the side of your premise. Just how back into the Network your FTTP lead in goes will likely influence how much they will quote you for any Technology change to FTTP.
Happy to consider chipping in some $ to assist fund any Technology Choice quote you request from NBNCo.
Many months later, they were re-added as "fixed line"
Or in some other cases, fixed wireless.
says we're getting upgraded Optus HFC, which is a relief. I thought the problems they've had might have left us with FTTN.
Not so fast.
Since the 3rd column of the http://www.nbnco.com.au/learn
Or it is only a 2 year construction plan, as there are no construction dates listed beyond H2 2018 (in 2 years time).
Can anyone be bothered to reconcile the table with the downloadable Sep 2015 plan linked on the same page
http://www.nbnco.com.au/
Good to see that NBNCo is still reporting that nbn intends to update this information quarterly
It falls in line with the long running NBNCo communications strategy, which is to suffocate discussion on the NBN and stick to the government narrative. One of the entire purpose of the AFP Raids was to do this and they achieved it.
Plans aren't updated, data isn't available about the network, FOI's are nearly always refused and then just watch the Senate. If our own elected members can't get answers, how can we the public. And then they'll spin it all away, very reminiscent of Telstra (and not surprising)
It's gone into the Marge Simpson strategy.
Listen to your mother, kids. Aim low. Aim so low mno one will even care if you succeed
And no one will, probably even if it utterly fails. Sad.
I knew that recent troll-talk of whirlpoolians not being able to persuade, even if their life depended on it, was a load of bull.
The goal is a return to a full fibre NBN. During the election, WP couldn't persuade the public to change direction. There's no point blaming the media for that.
That's what I was trying to say.
There's no point blaming the media for that.
Bullshit. We can most certainly blame the media for that. Nick Ross ring a bell to you Kingy or did we conveniently forget his name?
The goal is a return to a full fibre NBN.
So why support Turnbull and his MTM? It clearly isnt a return to it, stop lying to yourself.
It's gone into the Marge Simpson strategy.
Listen to your mother, kids. Aim low. Aim so low mno one will even care if you succeed
And no one will, probably even if it utterly fails. Sad.
The party to celebrate the milestone of the politically deemed completion of the NBN/MTM, will likely be about as much fun as the LNP's Federal Election HQ party on Election night 2016.
There's no point blaming the media for that.
Why not, how much media attention did the NBN get during the election? No matter how hard Labor tried, the media just weren't interested.
That's what I was trying to say.
The goal is a return to a full fibre NBN. During the election, WP couldn't persuade the public to change direction. There's no point blaming the media for that.
Thanks for elaborating and clarifying your comment.
There is an alternative, the ACCC could also issue direction to NBN Co that the CVC pricing is in fact the reason why users aren't getting what they pay for and force a lowering in costs.
The ACCC approved the SAU so I don't know how the regulator could force a lowering in costs.
Can anyone be bothered to reconcile the table with the downloadable Sep 2015 plan linked on the same page
I can confirm that that says HFC for this area (Frankston South) too. Also, Mr Mac found some info where the naming standard matched that of HFC areas. We're in 'build commenced'.
Not so fast.
I'm going to breathe a sigh of relief :)
So basically the answer is, that you cant find out anywhere what technology you are on but that its likely to be fttn
And it will not allow this scenario that they are promoting on their web site to be at all possible 8k tv but make out it is.
http://www.nbnco.com.au/blog
Outright fraudulent deceptive advertising to the max.
I don't know how the regulator could force a lowering in costs.
Careful using cost and price interchangeably. The of the CVC is the same for nbn no mater what they price it at.
It clearly isnt a return to it, stop lying to yourself.
I'm an NBN sceptic. I don't care about a return to full fibre. I only care about a return for the taxpayer and closing the digital divide.
The NBN is a open access wholesale, government monopoly that is supposed encourage competition. The news is that Morrow is urging end users to buy up higher speed tiers. That is just more proof that the NBN model was fundamentally flawed to begin with.
I only care about a return for the taxpayer and closing the digital divide.
Why the hell do you support Turnbull and the MTM so strongly then? Turnbull is taking us in the exact opposite direction of those two goals. Time to start asking some hard questions of both Turnbull and NBN Co Kingforce. There is so so much wrong with what is being forced upon us. Why are you unwilling to level any criticism at NBN Co and Turnbull when they are moving so far away from the aims you want achieved?
I only care about a return for the taxpayer and closing the digital divide.
Why the hell do you support Turnbull and the MTM so strongly then? Turnbull is taking us in the exact opposite direction of those two goals. Time to start asking some hard questions of both Turnbull and NBN Co Kingforce. There is so so much wrong with what is being forced upon us. Why are you unwilling to level any criticism at NBN Co and Turnbull when they are moving so far away from the aims you want achieved?
The NBN is a open access wholesale, government monopoly that is supposed encourage competition.
It would have under Labors model where the underlying infrastructure was all equal. We are a very long way from that now.
The news is that Morrow is urging end users to buy up higher speed tiers. Morrow shouldnt be talking to RSPs customers directly and trying to influence how they spend with a retailer. He is in serious breach and is once again speaking out of turn, just as he did at election time. I see you still have no problems with Morrow doing the wrong thing.
That is just more proof that the NBN model was fundamentally flawed to begin with. Yep. The MTM was always seriously flawed. Many of us here have been pointing that out since its inception. Isnt it a shame that those who have defended it and refused to ask the hard questions of Turnbull and co have let it slide and are pretending that they are concerned now. You should have been asking questions about the very clear flaws in the MTM long ago Kingforce. Way too late to pretend to be concerned now.
I only care about a return for the taxpayer and closing the digital divide.
But you are supporting the poor return and extending and increasing the digital divide with the MTM.
Its like ringing someone to bring a petrol tanker full of flammable liquid, instead of a fire fighting apparatus full of water and fire extinguishing chemicals to put out a fire.
How can anyone support something that is literally causing the opposite effect in terms of return for the tax payer and increasing the digital divide.
Poes law really.
If I ran a business like how the NBNco is currently runned now I wouldn't have a business left in 12 months.
I already said that I view a return to the taxpayer as the number one priority and then after that the end consumer.
How to we get that under Turnbulls model that you so steadfastly refuse to question? Your defence of Turnbull and his MTM is seriously misplaced when you state aims like the ones you have.
And my view is that should be a return to the nation.
Precisely. There are so many non-cash benefits to the NBN that only a government can count as part of a return on investment. Its a shame Turnbull is too ego driven and pig headed to change his flawed MTM.
The MTM will not only not sufficiently contribute to the 'taxpayers' it will hold back Australia's development and progress.
Nothing is more certain.
were setting up to skip FTTP and go straight from FTTMTM to ... whatever it is that they can get to travel faster than light
AJLT � Alan Jones Laser Technology will be the next step.
I only care about a return for the taxpayer and closing the digital divide.
In a globalised world with offshore outsourcing, to and from Australia, and remote global teamwork, there's a number of digital divides that need closing, not getting too far apart, or staying ahead of as a trading nation.
The ACCC looked at the revenue assumptions of NBN Co's business model up until 2040 and said they were plausible. That allowed NBN Co to set AVC and CVC prices at roughly the levels they are today. If the ACCC were to force a lowering of costs then that would mean the ACCC was wrong to approve the SAU in the first place.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong about that.
Your wrong as usual, it was based off the FTTP 93% model which allowed for network scalability and volume increases to buy more CVC. Under FTTN, good luck with that. Up to speeds ring a bell? we dont need more than 25mbits?
I only care about a return for the taxpayer
So those that do not pay "net" taxes, because they do not earn enough income through unfortunate circumstances, receiving Government family benefits, having carers responsibilities, born into poverty, retired, too young to work, or with ill health, can go and get stuffed when it comes to the NBN and broadband?
I've been getting into reading the history of what has happened over the last 10 years. Jesus it is depressing. What a total balls-up.
Thank you for getting educated on the topic. If the rest of Australia got educated, these clowns wouldn't be governing today bringing us the MTM of junk.
You should also read up about Telstra and how we got here, it extends back at least 20 years. Telstra is one of the reasons we have bugger all competition in the telco industry.
When I read this article:
http://www.news.com.
and this paragraph:
FORMER Dick Smith boss Nick Abboud spruiked an ill-fated expansion into whitegoods by claiming the retailer�s �connected� appliances would mean �you can lie in bed and boil the kettle�, according to one former board member.
love those directors who live in a fairy world while destroying the company from which they are director. How much does this apply to NBN Co?
�It was an issue of competence, not dishonesty or deceit,� he said.
It always is and it makes the crash even more spectacular.
Heard today that I am a difficult in regards to the discussion of willingly and knowingly overselling bandwidth on the NBN. Being difficult is translated by me to a compliment as it means that my arguments cannot be addressed and they rather attack the individual.
They didn't had the guts to tell me directly but lucky enough somebody forwarded it to me.
You are difficult as a consumer of services. Difficult. I love that characterization of a consumer. It showcases no respect for Australian Consumer Law, Contract Law and the consumer. It is a overpowering stigmatization of the consumer to hide suppliers inabilities to perform. Difficult is how one is perceived as consumer when valid questions and arguments are brought to the table.
You must be difficult if a supplier considers that you have an option to go somewhere else. Bill Morrow style, consumers have options. Sure mate, dream on in your little fairy world. Choice in our market was killed off with the POI-policy. Apparently it is not relevant if you don't want to go somewhere else and simply want to receive what has been represented to you.
Remember that word. Difficult is what you Australians are if you discuss or question the willingly and knowingly overselling of bandwidth on the NBN. You should pay and be quiet or otherwise bugger off. Stuff the Australian Consumer Law, Contract Law and your rights.
I think I am going to be considered extremely difficult for a very long time.
FORMER Dick Smith boss Nick Abboud ..... love those directors who live in a fairy world while destroying the company from which they are director. How much does this apply to NBN Co?
�It was an issue of competence, not dishonesty or deceit,� he said.
Funny as I was going to post something similar after reading that Dick Smith article today.
Even worse are the other directors who sit around and do pretty much bugger all that is effective to head it off or take drastic action whilst the destruction is happening before their eyes.
So the NBN site just isn't granular enough this far out.
Not now since the "turnaround" from Turnbull to provide a more "transparent" nbnTM.
People in my neck of the woods are being told by the nbnTM website that they should apply for SkyMuster when Fixed Wireless is coming! How many bites at the nbnTM cherry can we have Malcolm? One install? Two? An upgrade with extra fairy dust maybe?
that's just it, if you don't get a 4 data + 2 VoIP port ntd in your home with the ability to have 4 separate data services then you don't have nbn. You just have dsl
Heard today that I am a difficult in regards to the discussion of willingly and knowingly overselling bandwidth on the NBN.
I think I am going to be considered extremely difficult for a very long time.
Go Frank !!!
Not very balanced reporting there, the writer obfuscates deliberately these interests and not one time it is mention in the article that Nokia is the technology partner of NBN Co for XG-Fast. Dirty reporting, no other words for it. Gets worse though at the end.
"Steiger's comments coincided with NBN Co and Nokia's first ever announcement that they would trial next generation, XG.FAST copper broadband technology in Australian conditions"
Double post in error. Sorry.
Oh yeah Einstein.
Tell all of the above to the law firm that has to get expert witness comments on photos to them by tomorrow.
Or the software developer who has to upload product.
Or the media person who's taken a stack of video footage.
I don't want to say it. But you are a Luddite.
Okay, I will tell it to them.
Hey law firm, if you see a competitive advantage then pay for it yourself and don't expect the average taxpayer to risk their dollars for it.
(Oh and how did justice get served before the idea of broadband?)
Hey software developer, if you see competitive advantage in high-speed broadband pay for it yourself and don't expect the average taxpayer to risk their dollars for it.
Hey media person....etc etc etc
I really don't care how we get the speed up but do care about taxpayer return given the ways/methods have been sold to us ...and I appreciate the benefits of broadband but they were just bad examples to support an argument that the government "demands" we must have super-duper fast broadband to participate in society but deny it to us as a basic right. Pointing out how commercial operations can directly benefit while ignoring average individual consumer real needs to participate in the society at a basic level (and have for years before broadband) is not really supporting an argument for Gbps service. That may change for many reasons and arguing that you need to future proof for such a possibility, I accept. How one goes about it is up for debate (for this little black Luddite at least).
Yours Sincerely,
Einstein
funny, note the LOWEST speed tier
look at verizon, bell canada, NZ, Singapore � there are already large areas of the world where the minimum broadband speeds on offer are better than the best that will be on offer to most of Australia in 5 years time when the MTM/nbn is completed.
And here what do you say to someone with a very limited income
oh come on. Various people posting here are just saying that effective use of IT has reduced the cost to government of delivering services. This is a good thing, which we should encourage with sensible infrastructure decisions. It doesn't mean that people without access to broadband should/will be excluded, on the contrary it means that there is more money available to help them.
Step back for a moment. What is the core reason for NBN's inception? Different people have different ideas about what that is.
now they have different ideas, but there was a core reason for its inception.
and while you touched on it with several of your points the one that was the main reason was ubiquity. levelling the playing field and giving everyone the opportunity to ge t the same service for the same price no matter where they were ( within reason, those 7$ were not considered coist effective YET, but it was written into the first plan that they were not to be forgotten and they would be included with fttp as soon as was possible ( kind of like how quickly we are getting our gay plebiscite or 25/5, no date, just as soon as is reasonably possible)
so Kingy can have whatever ideas he wants it doesn't change the reason we have an nbn. the reason was labor, LNP called it a white elephant and a waste of money, so it only came about because of labor, and their core reason for its inception was ubiquity. Its why they serviced some of the worst effected ADSL users first, not because that was financially sensible, they wre doing everyone anyway why not service some of the people that had been forgotten, and figure out the best ways to do it on those guys before you plough into a city and start disrupting businesses.
True, but there was NBN
Which was a great idea.
but now we have MTM.
Which is a different animal and hopefully an extinct species sooner than later.
To some (like Kingforce) it is to provide a return on taxpayers money.
To many it is to provide ubiquitous high speed internet.
The fundamental fallacy of the Lib's policy is that these two goals are mutually exclusive, when the reverse is true. An all fibre NBN could achieve both these goals. MTM can achieve neither.
Which is a different animal and hopefully an extinct species sooner than later.
It is dead but just does not know it yet like a chook body when the head has been chopped off, still runs around before Crashing.
High speeds, reliable internet & a return both great, but it's also helping our economical growth right now, as Turnbull admits:
Speaking to reporters in Vientiane�s oldest temple, Wat Sisaket, Mr Turnbull also conceded that Australia�s ongoing economic growth was due in part to Government spending, saying the rollout of the NBN was an important infrastructure investment
Much more important, in my opinion, is reliability and ubiquity.
It is the ubiquity, which I agree was a major feature, that has been the major cause of opposition to the original FTTP to 93% concept.
It is not very hard to work out that the thought of the "unwashed masses" being able to access very high speed internet at relatively low cost sent the "born to rule" into fits of fear that they would lose their pre-eminence. This is evidenced by the main characters in the misleading propaganda war that was started against the FTTP roll out and the censorship of all those who supported it.
The MTM was a feeble attempt to emulate the original concept and was a predictable failure that is now being supported and misrepresented, in main, by those who for nefarious reasons opposed the original FTTP concept.
True, but there was NBN but now we have MTM.
Yep, and there goes the reliability that is needed to deliver a load of benefits. Nobody is bashing Turnbull over the head with this, though.
seems as though nbn� have now broken the fixed wireless system some extracts from SkyMesh sub section
There's no question, it's an nbn co Fixed Wireless problem. Our guess is they have oversubscribed the towers or your particular radio or the backhaul or all of those. It's not our CVC or backhaul as you can see from Furyan's speed tests. If he can get speeds like that on the same CSA that you're on, it can't be a SkyMesh issue.
I've hinted at this before, but it's worth saying again. The (up to) 50/20 Mbps Fixed Wireless Plans have broken Fixed Wireless. It's great in some areas and terrible in others. Customers on 50/20 Plans with ISPs such as Optus with 'unlimited' downloads have just killed some of the towers.
We're getting close to dumping (up to) 50/20 Mbps Plans in some areas and asking 25/5 Mbps customers to consider dropping to 12/1 Mbps to they at least get close to their peak speeds.
cheapa � only achievable by cutting corners, ie overselling tower access, reducing fixed line coverage footprint and thus moving more to towers
fasta � only in dreams
betta � a whitegoods retailer
You are quoting significantly more words than you have written.
Consider whether you need to quote at all
betta � a whitegoods retailer
Or a dairy products company
http://bettamilk.com.au/
:-P
Or a dairy products company
http://bettamilk.com.au/
Is there someone standing behind Nikki that we cant see? Her face is priceless.
True, but there was NBN but now we have MTM.
Indeed. The conflation of the two needs to stop. The business case under Labors NBN is very different to Turnbulls MTM. One had one, one hasn't for a start.
their core reason for its inception was ubiquity
The MTM has moved a long way from that! There is no ubiquity between FTTP,HFC and FTTN. Its now a lucky dip for those on HFC and FTTN.
Which is a different animal and hopefully an extinct species sooner than later.
It wont be going away anytime soon. We will be stuck with the mess the MTM has created for decades!
seems as though nbn� have now broken the fixed wireless system some extracts from SkyMesh sub section
Thats is appalling! RSPs having to recommend customers move off higher speed plans to counter NBN Co incompetence. This is stark in contrast to Morrows recent announcement that NBN Co is actively going to be in contact with end users to encourage them to move up. NBN Co are obviuosly desperate for this to happen and they badly need the revenue.
No doubt NBN co is blaming someone else for the tower problems.
Thats is appalling! RSPs having to recommend customers move off higher speed plans to counter NBN Co incompetence
its not just wireless I had Telstra business in offering business nbn and saying that we should only go for 25/5 as in their experience the absolute best outcome is getting close to 50/20
No Turnbull and Fifield?
Let's see what they have to say when the new corporate plan comes out and when they have to sort out funding for the NBNCo beyond this financial year.
It wont be going away anytime soon. We will be stuck with the mess the MTM has created for decades!
At least a generation! We won't see a return to a fibre based network until post 2050.
Wonder that the reaction from the audience will be?
Ah, Bill is on a well-known path of criticising others by being educational. Hope he is not that condescending what he normally is in the Senate hearings.
Don't think Morrow will be wanting to say too much about the above sentence in his speech today.
He will sell it that he did it for cost-economical reasons while not telling them that he actually put the signature under the purchase of Telstra and Optus HFC network.
And Israel, Singapore, the US, and a whole swag of other nations will say "Thank you Zwitowski, Morrow, Abbott, Turnbull, Telstra, and Murdoch".
They will say "sure" while they are building their FTTP network. This lot are overseas considered wasted time. That they like to hear the sound of their own voices, doesn't mean the rest of the world does.
It certainly is. It's much worse than you sometimes read in the papers (or on whirlpool or delimiter RIP)
Would love to see the audience and attending media reaction at this point of the speech.
The state of the NBN is similar and a direct reflection of the state of this government, lots of waffle, no substance, no result and not even remotely connected to reality.
Put Australian ahead of the world? More like at the (Dick)head end of the world.
"Look what those idiots down-under came up with. A reverse innovation agenda on brandband infrastructure. The first country in the world that moves from a fibre policy to a copper policy. Hahahaha, those dumbo's. We signed a free trade agreement with them. Those Ozzies can order on our web store and we can deliver it easy to them, while they have no means to compete with us in the global market. Ozzie Ozzie Ozzie, three cheers for Mr Internet."
�As a nation, we need to make it easier for entrepreneurs to get started, grab opportunities and build scale, locally and globally,�� Mr Morrow will say.
Innovation and entrepreneurship is driven by demand. Not policies.
�And the NBN has a vital role to play here.�
NBN does not drive demand, much the opposite, its restricts demand as it is based now on a supply driven policy, the MTM-policy. Our government and NBN Co decides what is good enough for us. This is not an environment where innovation and entrepreneurship is promoted.
While little Bill was sitting in the class room of grade 2, the teacher drew a cross on the blackboard and said to the class "This cross represents each and one of you". Then she drew a big circle around the cross and stated "This is the rest of the world and you all are the centre of the world".
The above is taught in schools around the world, including Australia. If you have any doubt why the world develops as it is, then the above is the source of the problem.
The right of individual identity which is now the latest PC trend is simply an extension of the above doctrine.
And little Bill?
He was asked to "repair" the biggest infrastructural failure in the world. As he is convinced that his job is now done, he is explaining to the rest of the world, while they are all looking at him, how great his achievements are.
Need a coffee...
Jesus. I feel bad for Morrow, essentially he was handed a loaded bowl with no flush button. But the spin.. My god "put us ahead of the world"....
Wow. Is all I can say to that.
Jesus. I feel bad for Morrow, essentially he was handed a loaded bowl with no flush button. But the spin.. My god "put us ahead of the world"....
Morrow does not care he is getting paid a lot of money for this lame duck.
If he had any convictions he would of not accepted the job or resign.
Why feel sorry for him.
Mr Morrow will also say Australia is on track to becoming the first continent to be fully wired up to broadband.
I heard him say this on AM this morning also. Looks like this is the latest weasel-phrase. Don't compare us to countries, compare us to complete continents.
He also said they were on track and on budget for completion in 2020. I thought the target was 2019.
Mr Morrow will also say Australia is on track to becoming the first continent to be fully wired up to broadband.
Satellite, Fixed Wireless and Mobile Broadband are going to be really peeved if he actually says that. Magiced away as though they do not exist as the only option, or only cost effective option, for millions of their customers.
"will put Australia �ahead of the world"
behind 59 other countries on internet speeds. *** can't compute ***
Mr Morrow will also say Australia is on track to becoming the first continent to be fully wired up to broadband.
About every non third world country is fully wired to the home. Yes of course, there always some difficult premises in each of those countries, but on the total number, they are very marginal. What a empty statement to sprout your achievements.
I thought the target was 2019.
NBN rollout on track, on budget says Bill Morrow
Actually it was 2016 but not longer after being elected on that mandate they announced a "slight" delay 2020 being the new date for completion.
The state of the NBN is similar and a direct reflection of the state of this government, lots of waffle, no substance, no result and not even remotely connected to reality.
Don't forget who voted this government in. Collectively we did.
http://www.ispreview.co.uk/i
Oh dear NBN / Turnbull won't be able to use UK as an example now.
Actually it was 2016 but not longer after being elected on that mandate they announced a "slight" delay 2020 being the new date for completion.
Next year it will be 2022 if the trend continues. There is a parallel between the year we living in and the year NBN will be finished. We never reach the moment of finishing.
But as I argued before, you cannot state that the NBN will be finished at such or such a time. Global developments and progress will dictate that we keep building continuously and what we SHOULD try to achieve as a nation is that the revenue of NBN Co pays for the continuous building.
The cards at the moment state a negative cashflow and consequently no money for upgrades in 2020. Severe problems with raising capital at the moment, so all these so called "achievements" are in fact only empty soap balloons ready to be popped.
Daddy can sell one of his investment properties to help fund a business grade fixed broadband installation and monthly service fees.
Not every student innovator has a rich businessman daddy with an investment property. Turnbull thought everyone has such types of daddys because he had long ago forgotten the difficulties of struggling people.
Did you see him hand out $5 note to a homeless bloke on a Melbourne street? He also had $10 and $20 notes in the same hand, but chose to hand out only $5 just to "feel good" or show the world that he has a big heart.
Daddy can sell one of his investment properties to help fund a business grade fixed broadband installation and monthly service fees.
AhhI see now. MTM is a housing affordability programme :-).
Actually it was 2016 but not longer after being elected on that mandate they announced a "slight" delay 2020 being the new date for completion.
I am pretty sure that date has also been changed in the most recent releases to "as soon as possible" kind of like his plebiscite on gay marriage.
Morrow is a tool and a puppet but you cant really blame him, well you kinda can, but none of this has been his decisions. This is Malcom Turnbulls policy.
Just go back over the order of events, there really is only a couple of key steps that show clearly where it was going wrong.
in the 2013 election Malcom Turbull went to the polls with
"faster, sooner and cheaper"
his plan was to use FTTN to achieve this .. ok we all agree with this so far right ?
what was his first action as the now minister for comms and tech ?
you remember ... it was the strategic review ( along with the halting of roll out etc ) the strategic review was there to do what ?
to see if FTTN would be delivered sooner for less money right ?
But he had already told us it would .. before he did the study .. that was his election promise right ??
So why did he do a review if he already knew it was going to be sooner cheaper why then do a review ?
surprise surprise the review said that yes he WAS right all along ... so again why the review for 2 years Malcom ? you told us you knew, then you won on that assumption .. then you spend millions and years proving to us you were right rather than just doing what you said you would ...
and now you have been proved very very wrong ... but you cant admit that, in the vein hope that you can sweep this under the carpet and retain another government next time ...
I think there is actually a case for criminal proceedings, imagine a class action with the entire HFC, FTTN footprint as recipients and the liberal party as the defendants.
the first continent
there always some difficult premises in each of those countries
Don't be suckered by the c-word. The statement is a bald-faced lie from many angles.
(a) We are using satellite to achieve our coverage anyway, so it's not wired.
(b) Have a look at the various breakdowns of what a "continent" is considered to be: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continent and you will see we've got a bit of work to bring internet to a lot of little islands that are classed as part of the "Australia" continent. The highest point on our Australia continent is Puncak Jaya in Papua. Bet you didn't know that! (I didn't, until I looked it up)
Don't be suckered by the c-word. The statement is a bald-faced lie from many angles.
Weasel words again.
If NBNCo had actually engaged with the market, enthusiasts, and been a hell of a lot more open and honest about things, then maybe they'd have less criticism (asides from the never say die)
if NBNCo had actually engaged with the market, enthusiasts, and been a hell of a lot more open and honest about things, then maybe they'd have less criticism
the way the nbn have been played its like a military hierarchy.
They were created by the government and report to the government. Government a said do things this way and they did, they talked up their successes and the technology and kept on doing what the government told them.
then the gove4renment changed and now the government say do it this way, and nbn say yes sir, and hop to it ..
I get the feeling this was always going to be Morrows get out of jail free card
"I was just following the policy set by the government"
if nbn had actually done cost benefit analysis it wouldn't be rolling out fttn it just wouldn't.
Don't be suckered by the c-word. The statement is a bald-faced lie from many angles.
Obviously as on whatever level you lift his statement (country, continent, province or city), this statement remains a lie. Personally, I do not consider the country/continent discussion so relevant, it is merely an indication of their grotesque thinking.
We are using satellite to achieve our coverage anyway, so it's not wired.
Indeed, many factual incorrect statements. And the question of competency should be raised, in all fairness, if such an individual should lead such a large infrastructural, if he keeps making such grotesque incorrect statements. It raises the question of capability, it raises the question of judgement, it raises the question of humility being a CEO of a GBE.
Now, I understand why this is happening (note I don't write approve). The NBN Co needs to be sold. Not sold as in changing ownership, but sold as in attracting investment. They think to achieve this through political tactics, which is obviously is not going to work. Investors are not idiots and are not going to invest on unrealistic views of a Board. In fact, each large investing company has people working for them which are highly specialised in an area, for example the Telecom Industry. The follow many global companies, like for example Chorus. They know what drives Telecom companies to success.
This kind of actions actually achieve the opposite as it shows a disconnected Board which doesn't understand global development and the demand they need to satisfy to generate sufficient revenue.
Bill doesn't get out much............
I submitted this to the Gawler NBN conversation but i also put it here to cover the broader issue. If there is fibre going right pass my door, and if the node is around 500m down the hill � how am I connected to the node � would part of it be fibre or would it be copper all the way. The fibre going pass my house was put there over a year ago. New fibre is being pulled along adjacent street.
With fibre so close why am I not offered FTTP.
"Heaps of activity on Redbanks Road today. spoke to a tech who verified that there fibre that goes right passed my house � done more than a year ago BUT I still will be connected to the node at the cnr of Paxton Street and Main North Road -500m + away depending on the route. Would it be copper connection all the way or fibre -it seems weird when there is fibre right in front of my front fence that it would not be used.
My ADSL is around 7/0.6 mbs. Once connections start in December I would need to get some good feedback from early adopters before making the move, 'cause despite my low speed it does have the benefit of consistency."
Pay attention Bill.
http://mybroadband.co.za/new
Vumatel and Telkom � who quickly adopted the same strategy, experienced greater investment interest following the surge in demand enabling an aggressive rollout strategy of FTTH.
Demand drives innovation and ***rofl*** investment interest. And may I state that demand drives a higher revenue? Yes, I may.
Bill, if you wonder where funding is going from investors. In aggressive FTTH rollout's by smart and agile companies.
And these basic principles you should be able to understand too.
Principle 1
Active premises mean profits which consists out of revenue � expenses.
Passed premises, not active means losses which consists out of expenses only (no revenue).
Principle 2
Higher speeds means higher uptake, higher revenue, higher profit margin, less not active premises and higher investment interest.
Lower speeds means lower uptake, less revenue, less profit margin on active services, less active premises and lower investment interest.
Principle 3
Slower access technology means lower outlay, a faster deployment, lower speeds, lower uptake and consequently a faster build-up of recurring expenses on premises that are not active while the active premises generate a lower profit.
Faster access technology means higher outlay, a slower deployment, faster speeds, higher uptake and consequently a larger amount of active premises from which the expenses are covered by revenue (and profit). while generating a higher profit.
That going faster on the rollout under cost-economical or cheaper reasons to justify the odd non economical political argument of a "investment ceiling" is not such a smart idea when you opt for slower access technologies. Effectively you consuming the capital faster as you ending up with more recurring expenses as the uptake is lower plus the profit per service is lower. That "investment ceiling" will go up, a lot, while there is no money to upgrade to faster speeds.
Sorry to say Bill, you painted yourself nicely into a corner if no extra capital is coming forward.
Lets quote a bit from the above article.
Often referred to as the �endgame technology�, fibre infrastructure offers a very attractive business model over the longer term.
The targets being set by the infrastructure providers are aggressive, and the more rapid deployment of the network and seemingly increased interest in funding will mean potentially reaching those goals with relative ease.
Bill doesn't get out much............
Watch out, you're being watched!
https://twitter.com/
:)
Let's see what they have to say when the new corporate plan comes out and when they have to sort out funding for the NBNCo beyond this financial year.
Why? Turnbull has been saying for years that the aim of his MTM is to rollout national broadband, faster, cheaper and at less risk to the taxpayer. He has said across all those years as well that his MTM would provide a return to the taxpayer.
If we are supposed to be hitting him over the head with things, why do we have to wait for him to say it again before we start?
Watch out, you're being watched!
I see she it is back dribbling garbage on twitter once again.
Maybe we should post some broadband speed comparisons between the two countries instead.
If we are supposed to be hitting him over the head with things, why do we have to wait for him to say it again before we start?
You are surely not suggesting we haven't been hitting him over the head for the last four years?
We have said over and over again that he is wasting money and that the government will be lucky to give the NBNCo away and only lose $29.5bn. A few of us have speculated that the government will either have to put in more money, either directly or indirectly, or wind up the NBNCo. Let's see which it is and then hit him over the head some more.
Bill doesn't get out much............
"We're quite confident of the numbers we've put together; I think it's important for everybody to realise we now have contracts in place to complete the entire build. This is the first time that we've had that, so we've removed much of the uncertainty," Morrow said.
He has been busy locking in contracts to ensure MTM can never be rolled back.
We all have to accept that there will never be a return to FTTH and nothing can be done about it with locking in of contracts for the entire build.
http://www.zdnet.com/article
Would it be copper connection all the way or fibre
They will cut the copper of from where the node is that feeds the service pillar.
You will then have a copper connection from your place to that pillar and back ro rhe node
Watch out, you're being watched!
https://twitter.com/
:)
FrankBuijk @FrankBuijk � 36s
@karinakeisler Size doesn't matter, understanding Telecom business principles does. whrl.pl/ReH5EM Say Hi to Bill from me. :) #NBN
In spite of the upgrade paths, and criticisms that only full fibre could provide high enough speeds in the future, nearly half of all NBN premises are still on 25/5Mbps.
This really irritates me.....
Lol at that tweet. You could zoom in for days and still not fill the area with connected available Reliable broadband.
NBN are rolling out HFC in suburbs like Ocean Reef and Woodvale which already have really fast speeds (100mb/sec) via Telstra HFC a well as having ADSL2 speeds pretty high due to their proximity to their Exchanges whilst ignoring suburbs that are classed poorly served and are supposed to be given prority in the Govt SOE.
http://www.nbnco.com.au/cont
When planning the rollout, nbn should prioritise locations that are poorly served, to the extent commercially and operationally feasible.
Prioritising does not equate to giving everything a high priority. It is a process of grouping/ranking of importance.
Priority categories can be grouped into High, Medium and Low priorities.
The SOE does not state that poorly served locations should get a high priority for being RFS.
Within the HFC footprint, you would have thought that the priority should be for those premise that can't get the HFC or those that don't have HFC lead ins or HFC running down their street. Or Optus HFC areas that are overloaded or in disrepair. But from the uncertainty of what is happening with the Optus HFC, and the announcement that it will cost too much to fill in the HFC network, it seems like those most underserved in the HFC Network are going to have to wait even longer to be more adequately served.
Genetic Modified Zealot writes...
He has been busy locking in contracts to ensure MTM can never be rolled back.
GMT says with glee!
We all have to accept that there will never be a return to FTTH and nothing can be done about it with locking in of contracts for the entire build.
GMT says with glee!
I've never understood your stunted attitude GMT. It is just so politically slanted. Don't you think that the good of the nation is more important? Rhetorical question by the way GMT. No response required from myopic individuals.
Watch out, you're being watched!
https://twitter.com/
The whole land size argument drives me nuts.
Watch out, you're being watched!
https://twitter.com/
Not this crap again. Seems the twits at MTMco and the ones who defend their garbage never stop and think about it logically.
NBN thought bubbles..
Compare Australia to the UK because its got nodes..
Can't compare Australia to Singapore because it has fibre..
Australia only x31.4 larger then the UK
'Stralia leading from behind
http://www.zdnet.com/
"The really critical thing is: We've been making so much momentum and we're well on track to actually be the first continent to have a fully connected universal access broadband that has 25Mbps or better, and in fact on the speed I think it's important we all realise that 40 percent of the nation when we're done will have access to 1Gbps," Morrow said in an interview with ABC radio on Friday morning.
They are already failing on this. We already have places in the FTTN footprint in our city that cannot get 25mbps. NBN Co blame everyone else for the problems.
"That's better than we think any other nation will be at the year 2020, and then we'll of course always be upgrading according to consumer demand, we will not leave people behind, our country will be in a leadership position, we're going to keep it that way."
What a crock! People are already being left behind. NBN Co have to be in front of consumer demand. If they wait until customers are pushing the envelope, its too late. They then need to find the resources, technology etc to upgrade them. They will no doubt have to hit the government up for many more billions, and as we have seen so many times before, the wheels turn slowly in government and the politicking that goes along with a project like this only makes it worse.
NBN last week outlined the upgrade paths for each network technology that could see most parts of the MTM attain gigabit speeds over the next five years.
Umm, what????? Five years???? Where are plans for that? Isnt it supposed to be consumer demand driven? Where is the money coming from? Why dont journalists ask these questions?? It really doesnt take much effort to understand even the most blatant problems with the MTM.
"It is about making sure we provide a minimum performance level today with an upgrade path. This is vitally important," Morrow said last week.
Fail! Minimum performance levels are not being met today! So frustrating that they keep getting away with this sort of lie and that people are letting them get away with it without question.
By removing the date requirement for the finish of the NBN from the revised SOE (Aug 2016), and replacing it with ASAP, the Federal Government appears to be indicating that it has serious doubts about when the NBN/MTM can be declared as finished, and that it is probably not possible for it to be finished within the previous 2020 target.
This removing of a solid required end and realistic date enables the Federal Government to try and get out of jail free if the NBN/MTM is not finished by 2020.
As soon as possible = it will be impossible to finish building it any time soon, so lets leave the end date as open to whenever it is finished.
NBN thought bubbles..
Compare Australia to the UK because its got nodes..
Can't compare Australia to Singapore because it has fibre..
Australia only x31.4 larger then the UK
Yep... We're (much) larger than Singapore as NBN likes to point out. Yet, with such large distances we still insist on using copper.....
p.s. Canada, USA, Russia say hi!
likely turn on Morrow first.
I don't think he cares considering his past.
Pocketing $3m for being a yes man, pretty nice indeed.
Morrow is comparing us to Middle Earth Internet.
Fibre to the Hobbit (FttH).
Gotta have that FTTC(ave).
In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit. Not a nasty, dirty, wet hole, filled with the ends of worms and an oozy smell, nor yet a dry, bare, sandy hole with nothing in it to sit down on or to eat: it was a hobbit-hole, and that means comfort.
Of course Morrow is happy, his contract is up next year. Ziggy's is up at beginning of next month, I'll assume he'll get reappointed
Ziggy's is up at beginning of next month, I'll assume he'll get reappointed
For breaching the caretaker conventions for old pal Mal, for sure and throw in a nice little bonus too.
Definitely not the 59 that are better than us.
Here's one of them...
FOCUS ON OPPORTUNITIES, NOT COST: NBN BOSS
He he.
I won't link the article because thebull.com.au has some security holes in it my server doesn't like.
NBN Co boss Bill Morrow is urging Australians to forget the $49 billion price tag on the national broadband network and focus on the many opportunities it offers.
Yet cuts users off HFC to FTTN.
Yet tells us that cost is everything and the whole reason we're headed down MTM.
"The NBN is unique globally
Finally Bill said something right. Yes the only place on Earth that purchases its old assets back and then dumps billions of dollars into them.
I would not be the least bit surprised if the next major update of Pokemon Go App includes a creature called Edon
Large, green and covered in grafiti
Can be found near to real life FTTN Nodes
Requires a special ball to catch it. A Turnball.
Evolves from only 2 candies from another late entry into the Pokemon clan. A creature called Moclam. Making the Edon extremely prolific, and renowned as a bit of a pest.
Unsurprisingly, it currently does not evolve into any other Pokemon.
Although Niantic are still trying to find a way to see if it can be set up to evolve into an Erbif, or possibly an Euqitna for more realism in the game.
Edon's 3 standard gym fighting moves of the copper whip, electric shock, and the data pulse, are not very effective against any other Pokemon
The Edon is of little value for anything other than levelling up, or the pleasure of throwing Turnballs at.
In spite of the upgrade paths, and criticisms that only full fibre could provide high enough speeds in the future, nearly half of all NBN premises are still on 25/5Mbps.
This really irritates me....
me also I cannot get any higher than 25/5, sure I might be able to sync mid 30/15 but be paying for 50/20 or 100/40
dear Bill, please come and show me what upgrade path there is for me to achieve 50/20 on my FTTN connection, let alone 100/40
currently the maximum line rate according to both my modems (different brands and firmware) is
Max Rate (Kbps) 12839 41216
remember the max line rate is "calculated" with NO NOISE on the line
Wonder how much Bill would scream if his nice expensive bottle of red was only half full but he had to pay full price
Finally Bill said something right. Yes the only place on Earth that purchases its old assets liabilities back and then dumps billions of dollars into them.
I corrected the statement for you. Only in Australia is this a world first.
I don't know how Bill can make a statement that 40% of Australian's will be able to get gigabit speeds.
AFAIK, only 10% of homes in Australia got FTTP (if that).
Again Bill is telling porkies. The whole thing is a big joke. I think the amount of hate the FTTN network is generating will continue. There is only so much they can spin until people experience how horrible this technology is. Keep up the story LNP, roll out more fraud.
"The NBN is unique globally
Is that a mispoke. Antique or unique?
The first Government in the History of the Universe to construct an antique, cobbled together from odds and sods and with about as much value as a leprous White Elephant.
NBN Co boss Bill Morrow is urging Australians to forget the $49 billion price tag on the national broadband network
because its 5 billion more than the lnp said was a waste when it was nearly full fibre, so yeah .. don't think about the cost of it at all ...please ...
You know what, Bill might be right when he says we lead any nation in 2020. In weasel words, we'll lead any nation in 2020 with 2005 technology
http://www.thebull.com.au/ar
Mr Morrow believes the public's attention should be on the technological advances the NBN could afford in health, education and entertainment.
What about that all important pastime called WORK?
A Node a day helps you get educated, rest and play?
saw this and thought it was a fairly clear picture of the state of the greenfields roll out
http://users.on.net/~deadlyc
For a little background, about 20 houses built while labor were in power have fttp, the rest of this greefields estate is on that node, including the ones that are just being completed now.
Has anyone checked that the scales are correct and equal (which may even vary with latitude given the curvature of the earth when laid out flat)?
Comparing Australia and Singapore on size is idiotic anyway. If the NBNCo wants to make a comparison they should do it on population density.
I was simply pointing out that the NBNCo has been meant to provide a return on taxpayers money from when it was announced by Conroy and Rudd. It's not just something that Kingforce has dreamt up recently.
Turnbull took up the same cudgel when he his party came to power. He had the opportunity to change it then, as Fifield has in his tenure but neither of them have. It should not be ignored that Turnbull and Fifield are just as keen to seek a return from taxpayers money (though far, far less likely to get it) as Labor was.
He he.
That post should carry a health warning. My blood pressure just shot up. You're spot on, though :)
Of course Morrow is happy, his contract is up next year. Ziggy's is up at beginning of next month, I'll assume he'll get reappointed
Cant see why not. The shareholders of NBN Co think they are doing a wonderful job!
NBN Co boss Bill Morrow is urging Australians to forget the $49 billion price tag on the national broadband network and focus on the many opportunities it offers.
Isnt it a shame Morrow didn't say that to Turnbull when Turnbull ordered him to go to the cheapo, second rate MTM.
There was no discussion of forgetting the price tag for FTTP (which was very close to what the MTM is now) and focussing on the benefits from Morrow back then. No doubt we could have had a much different outcome. Hypocrisy at its finest!
There was no discussion of forgetting the price tag for FTTP (which was very close to what the MTM is now)
the 93% fttp roll ouit would have been cheaper, by severa l billion at least. and would have been finished quicker .. the 2020 date has already slipped to as soon as possible.
Let us pause for a moment and imagine what would have been said by the Liberal party had Mike Quigley said this anytime prior to the 2013 election.
The LNP chucked a hissy fit on 44billion for a much more superior network. Just like New Zealands Chorus one (look at how well that's going).
But now we are told, its 49 billion, forget about the price tag. We bought junk and garbage with it.
But now we are told, its 49 billion, forget about the price tag. We bought junk and garbage with it.
Telling ya the only way to deal with these people is force these days. It's not fair they can change their tune whenever they feel like it and get away like they have some politician immunity.
So NZ get a real NBN and Australia gets a junk network that will cost twice as much to get to the same level as it has to be built twice.
[Chorus:]
It's not about the money, money, money
Cos it's not our money, money, money
We just wanna make the world laugh,
Forget about the price tag
Ain't about the (uh) ch-ch-ching ch-ching
Ain't about the (yeah) bl-bling-bl-bling
Wanna make the Zealots cry,
Forget about the price tag (OK)
Whirlpool needs a like button :)
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/20
On top of just-shy-of-a-gigabit download speeds, Telstra is getting close to tripling the current maximum uplink speed seen in most LTE networks globally. Increasing social sharing and video uploads is driving the need for higher uplink performance for smartphone users across the network, Telstra says, and improving uplink speeds is also important for remote and onsite workers use of enterprise cloud applications for unified communications � especially video-conferencing apps.
NBN CEO says to talk to your RSP about your internet speed requirements.
RSPs with Mobile Spectrum offer and promote much faster speeds on their mobile broadband offerings than their fixed line offerings.
Tier 1 RSPs retailing the nbn prevented from marketing mobile broadband as a substitute to NBN.
Tier 1 RSPs advertising their nbn in terms of the volume of data you can transmit/receive.
Tier 1 RSPs promoting their mobile broadband in terms of the peak speed you can achieve.
The NBNCo and their shareholders saying that they can't currently see or foresee a widespread need for speeds higher than 25/5.
BTW. Great work Telstra.
And across the ditch in NZ we are being shown what the fools here have destroyed as an option for all at a price of $60 per month.
https://delimiter.com.
Who in Australia can we run a class action against and fix it before the sun dies.
Swift1 Only By Fibre writes...
Who in Australia can we run a class action against and fix it before the sun dies.
Don't panic!
Let's see what happens when Labor (or the Greens!?) get back into forming federal government first. :) They will be more pro-NBN.
Has Prime Minister Turnbull or Comms Minister been grilled about New Zealand's "Gignation" in Federal Parliament, and what was their reply? :)
Tier 1 RSPs retailing the nbn prevented from marketing mobile broadband as a substitute to NBN.
What are you talking about? NBN has the same requirements for everyone. What Telstra and Optus have in their contracts is that they cannot deploy their own fixed line fibre networks for a period of 20 years.
Optus even sell http://www.optus.com.au/shop/
Tier 1 RSPs advertising their nbn in terms of the volume of data you can transmit/receive.
Marketting decision. Its been a fairly standard practice to do this, so they are just continuing with the current formula.
Tier 1 RSPs promoting their mobile broadband in terms of the peak speed you can achieve
Marketting decision. Telstra particularly are very proud of their claim to one of the fastest mobile networks in the world. They then use this as their selling point to convince people to go with them instead of the competition. Neither of these 2 have anything to do with NBN.
The NBNCo and their shareholders saying that they can't currently see or foresee a widespread need for speeds higher than 25/5.
Telstra also used this as their justification that 1500/256 adsl was fine too, until internode came along and screwed the business model entirely. Don't offer a reasonably priced connection capable of more and there won't be demand. Don't build it they won't come.
I believe it is not that hard to move to NZ.
Having gone both ways, no its not hard. Its extremely simple actually. As long as you have no criminal convictions you could buy a 1 way ticket tomorrow and live there. We have a bilateral agreement in place with NZ that allows visa free travel both directions to work and live, not just visit.
Surprisingly, you may need to do an IELTS English test (at least people who move from NZ to Australia need to do this).
No, you don't, not in either direction. NZ is a little more laid back than here, also allowing people on permanent residency visas access to the program, however AU does not accept NZ permanent residency visas, and only accept NZ citizenship for an SCV (special category visa), so people who are NZ permanent residents need to follow the directions for residency as prescribed in the agreements for the country they are a citizen of to get residency in Australia, that means if your country of origin requires an IELTS language test, then you need to do it. SCVs however do not, its the same as the other way, come on the plane, visa granted at the immigration desk, and you can work in Australia
Being lead on the road to ..... ?
But unlike britain we bought back the network from the incumbent before then ploughing in billions to give the same level of service to many of the customers...BT are just sweating an EOL asset. We bought an EOL asset off of a laughing Telstra (and Optus)
Comparing Australia and Singapore on size is idiotic anyway. If the NBNCo wants to make a comparison they should do it on population density.
My point to Karina when I said size doesn't matter. It is the most ridiculous comparison, land mass size and broadband speeds. Comparing apples with pears.
And I think it is actual a convenience excuse, that Australia is difficult due to its geographic nature and size etc etc. Rubbish.
Deploying fibre in for example NZ is much more difficult due to earthquakes and ground movement. In Holland you can never find really solid ground, due to the country being in majority under sea level. No rock to be found except in the South East for a very small area. But take for example the US. The US has metro centres all over the country. We are in a massive advantage there as our centres are concentrated in the South East and narrow strips of land along the East Coast. It should cost less, not more. Realise that when we are talking about cost per premises for FTTP. We should be leading and not run behind other countries with a ridiculous high price that nobody believes.
So this whole convenience excuse doesn't even make sense.
What would make more sense is that we discuss where other countries have progressed to solutions and frameworks in which they can easily upgrade Telecom infrastructure. A trench should be made for example only once. As I stated this previously in other countries the utility providers work together. That is also why in those countries the electricity is underground rather than above ground.
The first utility provider digs a deep trench. Mostly this is the gas company due to the hazard of gas so this goes in the bottom of the trench. Some soil goes over and the electricity company throws his cable in. The electricity company again throws some soil in and the water board puts the water pipes in. Again some soil is added. Then the telecom company lays their cables and the trench is closed. The telecom company does not put cables in the ground bare, they use pipes first so it is simple to replace them from the pits. It is mostly different with other utilities as they do not really require upgrade. Gas, water and electricity declines to more energy efficient equipment. Telecom just goes the opposite.
This approach has many advantages.
Financially for all utility providers, only one trench is made and costs are equally shared over the companies. Easier for developers and councils as companies coordinate deployment.
Safety, no above ground electricity posts, which is safer with car accidents and storms (fallen power lines). Utilities are at the correct depth in relation their hazard level. Less road works.
Reliability, only one path, dial before you dig is simple. No cables and pipes all over the place on common ground. In storms no outages due above ground facilities.
In other words, it could be so simple, yet we make everything deliberately complicated and as a result expensive. Australia really should step up as it stays behind on efficiency, productivity and innovation.
What are you talking about? NBN has the same requirements for everyone. What Telstra and Optus have in their contracts is that they cannot deploy their own fixed line fibre networks for a period of 20 years.
I was talking about the below restrictions. Now to dig up what happened to the promoting wireless as a substitute restrictions on Telstra and Optus in the revised in 2015 agreements with NBNCo. Maybe the restriction was watered down or removed completely on both Telstra and Optus.
https://delimiter.com.au/201
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission today warned a clause in Telstra�s $13 billion contract with NBN Co prohibiting Telstra from marketing wireless technologies as an alternative to fibre broadband could be �detrimental to competition� and should be investigated further.
When Telstra unveiled its NBN contract in late June, it revealed a segment of the contract stated that part of the NBN deal is that it �may not promote wireless services as a substitute for fibre-based services for 20 years� from the commencement date of the contract.
Telstra chief executive David Thodey has maintained the clause isn�t an issue
https://delimiter.com.au/201
Exetel chief executive John Linton speculated Telstra may have ulterior motives for opening up access to its infrastructure.
�If I was a conspiracy theorist, which I�m not by any definition of that term, I would say that the only reason that Telstra would wholesale a high speed mobile service should be taken in the context of the strange clause in the �break up agreement� that forbids Telstra from �advertising its high speed mobile service in competition with the �NBN2�,� wrote Linton.
When Telstra unveiled its NBN contract in late June, it revealed a segment of the contract stated that part of the NBN deal is that it �may not promote wireless services as a substitute for fibre-based services for 20 years� from the commencement date of the contract. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission believes the clause has the potential to harm competition. Optus has similar constraints in its own contract with NBN Co
If another telco markets a re-badged Telstra Next G mobile service as an alternative to the NBN fibre, does that place Telstra in breach of its contract with NBN Co?
Maybe the restriction was watered down or removed completely on both Telstra and Optus.
Its quite possible because it is in neither of the disclosures for the V1 and V2 agreements
Maybe the restriction was watered down or removed completely on both Telstra and Optus.
https://delimiter.com.au/20
as recently as 2011 and 2012:
(a) NBN was demanding that Telstra agree to a term that Telstra not market Telstra�s wireless
internet services as a substitute for NBN services
(This was an original condition in the Definitive Agreements between NBN and Telstra)
; and
(b) The ACCC was concerned that such provisions would be �detrimental to competition in the
markets for the supply of wireless voice and broadband services�
19. For these reasons, TPG thinks that it is plain that mobile broadband should be considered as a
possible substitute for fixed broadband services. To continue to treat mobile broadband as merely
a complement is to ignore the enormous developments in that market (even in just the past
month). Further regulation will significantly constrain the ability of SB providers to fully compete
with increasingly competitive wireless offerings, to the detriment of the LTIE.
http://www.telstra.com.au/ab
TELSTRA REVISED NBN AGREEMENTS
The detailed Telstra document to the ASX about the changes in the late 2014 NBNCo agreement, do not mention a change in the wireless internet marketing restriction clause. So I assume that there was no material change to the clause.
Happy to be corrected on this, (Little Steve?) if anyone can provide any evidence or even speculation about what happened to these mobile broadband marketing restrictions.
Its quite possible because it is in neither of the disclosures for the V1 and V2 agreements
If the mobile broadband marketing restrictions were removed or watered down at some point after the original 2011 agreements with Telstra and Optus were signed in 2011, then their removal was one that appears to have sneaked under the radar and appears to have received absolutely not promotion, publicity, or even having been publicly disclosed in any manner whatsoever.
Is it possible that they were removed or modified by way of what was deemed a CiC minor contract variation sometime between the 2011 signing and before the 2014 signed revised agreements with both Telstra and Optus?
If the mobile broadband marketing restriction clauses were removed in the Revised main 2014 agreements with Telstra and Optus, and this change not disclosed by ACCC or Telstra and Optus to the ASX, then that is very interesting.
Was a deal done between the ACCC and NBNCo, Telstra and Optus to change these clauses and it all done on the quiet?
That's a good question for the next NBN Senate Estimates to put to NBNCo, if it was not already asked and answered already in Senate Estimates.
Place you bets on what happened here, as one way or another, all will be revealed before the NBN is finished.
We are in a massive advantage there as our centres are concentrated in the South East and narrow strips of land along the East Coast.
It should cost less, not more. Realise that when we are talking about cost per premises for FTTP. We should be leading and not run behind other countries with a ridiculous high price that nobody believes.
Lets see if this federal parliament is smart enough to launch a committee to investigate why our FTTP deployment costs are so much higher than those being reported in other countries and to make recommendations on how to deploy FTTP at a lower cost.
I don't think they were removed and it wouldn't stop them on selling rebadged mobile broadban to another company who could then market it as an alternative
I don't think they were removed and it wouldn't stop them on selling rebadged mobile broadband to another company who could then market it as an alternative
Based on the evidence presented so far, I also don't think the marketing of mobile broadband as alternatives clauses were removed at any point.
I also posted some long time ago how Vodafone or whoever got their hands on Vodafone's spectrum via acquisition, merger or JV (i.e TPG), might have no restrictions whatsoever on marketing mobile broadband as a substitute or alternative to fixed line NBN. That is, unless NBNCo made it a condition of retailing NBN services, that no RSP could market mobile broadband as a substitute or alternative to fixed line NBN. Which would be totally against what Bill Morrow announced this week that NBNCo would not be telling retailers how to do their jobs.
"We're not going to tell the retailers how to do their jobs � that would be out of line for us
Noting that TPG has since gone and purchased some mobile spectrum itself.
If the mobile broadband marketing restriction clauses
Oh the marketing restriction, the marketing restriction doesn't mean they can't sell broadband as fixed line, they just aren't allowed to market it as a substitute for an NBN connection. Like the Optus one doesn't say "get this instead of NBN", and they can't try and convince you to go for the wireless broadband instead of their NBN service. I get what you mean now with those clauses. Those are still in place. Its to protect NBNs interests there.
Telstra may not promote wireless services as a substitute for fibre based services for 20 years from the Commencement Date, but otherwise remains free to compete in the market for the supply of wireless services. http://www.nbnco.com.au/conte
This is entirely different to their prohibition on building a passive optical network, and the fixed line preference where if NBN wireline services exist that Telstra must exclusively use them.
Lucky that NBN is not in the retail business.
Then again, there might be some some lessons for NBNCo to learn from the Dick Smith implosion, in the ramifications of NBN or its retailer RSP's not selling things that customers want and need.
Dick Smith made many unhealthy choices. The only fatal one in retail is to stock things customers don�t want.
to understand your customers and predict what they will want. If you lose focus on that, everything else is irrelevant.
Based on the evidence presented so far, I also don't think the marketing of mobile broadband as alternatives clauses were removed at any point.
Telstra may not promote wireless services as a substitute for fibre based
services for 20 years from the Commencement Date, but otherwise remains
free to compete in the market for the supply of wireless services.
I appreciate it's just a press release and not the text of the actual agreements, but do you think MTM would qualify as a fibre based service?
but do you think MTM would qualify as a fibre based service?
I'm sure either Bill Morrow or Turnbull would class MTM as a fibre based service because it technically has fibre in it. Except Sat and Wireless (Not counting Backhaul)
I appreciate it's just a press release and not the text of the actual agreements, but do you think MTM would qualify as a fibre based service?
well BT in the UK market FTTN as a fibre service, nbn� claim it is, heck every telecommunications service in Australia is a fibre service (at some point in its path)
Realise that when we are talking about cost per premises for FTTP. We should be leading and not run behind other countries with a ridiculous high price that nobody believes.
This is the biggest of the NBNCo's lies imo. They're sticking to a big number that makes FTTP unviable. Nobody believes their number but there's nothing anyone can do about it. The government and the NBNCo know this. Bastards!
Nobody believes their number but there's nothing anyone can do about it. The government and the NBNCo know this. Bastards!
From what I've seen from the leaked documentation its because the numbers are absolute BS. HFC and FTT(B/N) numbers are quoted without PSAA/lease in the capex, and FTTH are quoted with the PSAA/lease amortised into the capex cost. To make things worse at least one document amortises the PSAA/lease into capex, and then includes it in the opex too.
The numbers for FTTH are deliberately being inflated to make it look unviable, including cutting timeframes short by a year or 2 before FTTH's reduced operating costs start tipping the balance.
well BT in the UK market FTTN as a fibre service, nbn�
I believe it was updated in the newer agreement to replace all instances of fibre with fixed line when talking about the access network.
I appreciate it's just a press release and not the text of the actual agreements,
Its the summary sheet, so those terms as they are appear within the agreement. The formal agreement then goes into things in depth, however that is CiC as it should be because it also includes numbers.
The thing that you're missing is that the agreement doesn't say "Telstra must not offer home broadband over wireless" it says they can't market it as an alternative to NBN fibre in the original agreement, which means Telstra can't run a campaign like "Telstra 4GX home internet, twice as fast as an NBN connection" or "Telstra 4GX home broadband, when you don't want the NBN". That kind of advertising where they are comparing it to the NBN as a competing service. They can sell 4GX home broadband as a service, just not with any marketing campaign targeting NBN customers.
My point to Karina when I said size doesn't matter.
In fact I would say FTTP is far more suited to Australia's medium density suburbs than FTTN will ever be because the working range of FTTP from the active hardware is a lot further than VDSL's reach from nodes.
We bought an EOL asset off of a laughing Telstra (and Optus)
And now we (ie, Turnbull & Co, but with our money) will pay out another fortune to power all the nodes and have the corroding crap copper maintained for the foreseeable future.
Tell me again about how it's such an exciting time right now to be here in innovative and agile Australia.
FTT(B/N) numbers are quoted without PSAA/lease in the capex, and FTTH are quoted with the PSAA/lease amortised into the capex cost. To make things worse at least one document amortises the PSAA/lease into capex, and then includes it in the opex too.
The sort of thing that might result in charges if a RC was allowed
The numbers for FTTH are deliberately being inflated to make it look unviable, including cutting timeframes short by a year or 2 before FTTH's reduced operating costs start tipping the balance.
Also that the HFC/FTTN/GF CPP is based on the estimated average at the end of build in 2021. FTTP BF is based on "actuals" build to date. So while the other techs have efficiency's built in as part of forecast, FTTP BF has none of it. If FTTP BF was ongoing and forecasted it would be at least < $3900.
Also add on to the fact that NBN new Mgmt inflated payments to delivery partners and guaranteed overheads for the FTTP deployments, then you start to get an artificial increase. Which is a contributing factor on FTTP going up instead of down.
Then to top it off, FTTP not being given opportunity to mass deploy into urban areas, unlike the FTTN forecasts, where arguably that the FTTP costs would have further decreased.
Like everything with NBN now, just weasel forecasts and spin to suit the narrative.
Adelaide to try to bypass Turnbull's NBN and build their own FTTP 10 Gbps networks?
because.......
�Over 150 cities in the USA are moving toward building 10 gigabit optical fibre networks for their city.�
http://indaily.com.au/news/2
�The 10 gigabit infrastructure will future proof Adelaide and enable the use of next-generation broadband that, overseas, has become a magnet for entrepreneurs, start-ups and folks working in tech-savvy and creative industries.�
If endorsed at tonight�s meeting (and confirmed at a full council meeting next week) the council�s updated strategic plan will feature a commitment to �work with key partners to deliver a 10GB per second capable broadband network across the City and North Adelaide to all premises�.
What does the $699 charge include?
A: The $699 installation fee include:
Civil work to connect to your lead in conduit
Haul fibre into your junction box.
Install junction box
Install wall plate
Provide Optical Network Unit (ONU) and patch cord.
Please note: Customer is to provide power point where the ONU is placed if required.
[edit � added speeds available]
A: Speeds available are as follows:
12Mbps/1Mbps
25Mbps/5
25Mbps/10Mbps
50Mbps/20Mbps
100Mbps/40Mbps
What was the NBN FoD price again?
And this alone proves, that the coalition just want more money to save their failing model doing anything they can to protect the Telstra monopoly and Murdochs empire.
You are quoting significantly more words than you have written.
Consider whether you need to quote at all � unless you are quoting to respond to a specific statement, it's usually easier to just mention who you're responding to.
Otherwise, trim the quoted passages down as much as you can.
What was the NBN FoD price again?
Carefully pitched at a level to ensure MTM� wasn't going to get an embarrassing flood of applications?
Carefully pitched at a level to ensure MTM� wasn't going to get an embarrassing flood of applications?
Maybe we should all do it and then quote whittlesea's council and redtrains price to them? I bet they'd hang up on all of us
Remarkable � Fibre on Demand for $699 � did anyone else look at their pricing for installation?
https://www.redtrain.com.au/whittlesea/faq.php
What does the $699 charge include?
A: The $699 installation fee include:
Civil work to connect to your lead in conduit
Haul fibre into your junction box.
Install junction box
Install wall plate
Provide Optical Network Unit (ONU) and patch cord.
Please note: Customer is to provide power point where the ONU is placed if required.
NBNCo appears to have selected a construction and design model that massively increases the overall cost to the taxpayer, and that makes moving to FTTP under the Technology Choice Program as massively expensive for most premise occupants or owners.
Time for a Federal Government Select Committee to investigate why and how Australia can reduce the cost of FTTP, if it were to be used in the brownfields rollout, and for how NBNCo can provision Fibre on Demand at a lower cost than the current quotes. And why the reported current and forecast cost of FTTP via NBNCo appears so high. Particularly on what the longer term costs (TCO) are for the different technologies.
NBNCo appears to have selected a construction and design model that massively increases the overall cost to the taxpayer, and that makes moving to FTTP under the Technology Choice Program as massively expensive for most premise occupants or owners.
Anyone here can contact someone on the Senate Committee coming up for this and mention whittlesea as a prime example of how cheap it is for local government? I mean this clearly shows that NBN's method is way overpriced and wrong.
What does the $699 charge include?
That sounds like they're running fibre down the street and the $699 is to connect the premises to that fibre. That's a lot less than it was costing under Labor. More importantly (imo) why is the NBNCo estimating that cost to be ~$2,000?
Could this have been a viable alternative to Labor's NBN? There would have been no need to pay Optus and Telstra a fortune to get out of the market. The NBNCo could just roll fibre down the street and let the RSPs pay, in full or in part, to connect premises as and when the customer ordered a retail service. Pity it wasn't considered by either major party imo. It would be a lot better than the MTM.
That sounds like they're running fibre down the street and the $699 is to connect the premises to that fibre. That's a lot less than it was costing under Labor. More importantly (imo) why is the NBNCo estimating that cost to be ~$2,000?
Under labor the lead in was down to $1,300 per premises.
I think a big problem with the cost of FTTP can be traced back to the prime contractor model, this always inflates costs and squeezes the little guys actually doing the work.
Under labor the lead in was down to $1,300 per premises.
Yep. I remember Quigley's estimate being $1,100 � 1,400 so that fits. I wonder if the $699 is the full cost in Whittlesea or just the part the RSP has to pay.
iirc the cost of passing premises under Quigley was $1,000. That's just $10bn to pass 10 million brownfield premises with fibre. That's got to be close to being viable in competition with Optus and Telstra.
Could this have been a viable alternative to Labor's NBN? There would have been no need to pay Optus and Telstra a fortune to get out of the market. The NBNCo could just roll fibre down the street and let the RSPs pay, in full or in part, to connect premises as and when the customer ordered a retail service.
NBNCo could have chosen to complete head on with Telstra and Optus.
With the Telstra response likely to have been that they announced their own FTTP rollout using their own conduits and pipes and pits which NBNCo does not own and NBNCo being restricted as to what they could run between power poles in areas that actually still had above ground power infrastructure (poles and wires), because the poles were already full in some cases with HFC wires, and some of the pokes were already in private hands or possibly tied up with exclusive usage rights to Telstra or Optus (speculating here).
So Telstra and NBNCo would have followed each other, attempting to build competing duplicate FTTP infrastructure with both of the targeting high demand and high return areas first and the ones each other was targeting.
Who would blink first. At point would NBNCo have stopped their rollout because they were just going to rack up massive losses. Particularly with Telstra having so much infrastructure and ability to retail already in place + their content tie ins with Foxtel and existing overseas links and backhaul. NBNCo could not have competed against Telstra without racking up massive losses that would have had to bring their investment and costs on budget.
TPG, Vocus and Optus would also likely have joined in the cherry picking party.
I think a big problem with the cost of FTTP can be traced back to the prime contractor model, this always inflates costs and squeezes the little guys actually doing the work.
Imagine how much cheaper the rollout would be if the builder and owner of the Network only had to deal direct with their own workforce or direct with contractors contracted directly to them, without all the costs of the middle man process.
That sounds like they're running fibre down the street and the $699 is to connect the premises to that fibre.
That's what I understand from their website. Plan costs are completely separate and on top of the installation cost. I wouldn't be surprised if the installation was at cost or even subsidized to get a larger customer base connected. The profit will be made over the following years in usage charges, and they obviously can charge a premium for fast and business grade plans.
NBN is only promising those speeds to 40% of the country by 2020 or 'as soon as possible'.
he profit will be made over the following years in usage charges, and they obviously can charge a premium for fast and business grade plans.
That's one of the problems with trying to recover capital/installation costs when you are just a wholesaler and not a vertically integrated wholesaler+retailer operating in a monopoly market, and have agreed with some of your main customers to not compete head on for business grade services (or at least appear to have delayed the business competition for as long as possible).
Dealing with an efficient vertically integrated provider should in theory be so much cheaper (economies of scale) and make design/rollout/installation/migration much less risky, and more streamlined, and with less issues, provided you do not have too many outsourced suppliers in the supply chain that have systems that have not been designed bottom up to integrate with yours.
With the Telstra response likely to have been that they announced their own FTTP rollout ...
I'n not convinced they would. If access to the NBN was affordable there are probably better options for Telstra to invest than building a competing fixed-line 'last mile' network. The government could provide some short-term overbuilt protection.
The NBNCo could have created their own duct/pit network, possibly in a deal with the power companies as mentioned by Frank. This was the assumption in the implementation study so we have to assume it's viable.
TPG, Vocus and Optus would also likely have joined in the cherry picking party.
Optus clearly wanted out of the fixed-line infrastructure market so I doubt they would have done anything. I don't know about the others. The thing to consider is the cost of money to the government is a lot lower than it would be to those companies. I think the thing that makes cherry-picking attractive is the high cost to access the NBN. If that cost was lower due to a lower build cost then the business case to build competing infrastructure is much harder.
I wouldn't be surprised if the installation was at cost or even subsidized to get a larger customer base connected. The profit will be made over the following years in usage charges, and they obviously can charge a premium for fast and business grade plans.
Redtrain also wholesale their service, SkyMesh retail it, so not all money goes into their "bucket"
guess if an estate is connected to their fibre, then they have a captive audience for fixed line services and will ammortize the cost over a longer term than nbn� are using
NBN is only promising those speeds to 40% of the country by 2020 or 'as soon as possible'.
The Federal Government only currently requires a finish of ASAP.
NBNCo is currently forecasting a 2020 finish of what they claim is still an NBN. That a 2020 so called finish is possible.
A finish likely leaving the majority of Fixed Line customers stranded on FTTN, as opposed to most of them being on HFC/FTTB or FTTP.
If access to the NBN was affordable there are probably better options for Telstra to invest than building a competing fixed-line 'last mile' network. The government could provide some short-term overbuilt protection.
The discussion is all academic, when one takes into account the additional effort that News Corp would have likely out into destroying any Australian Government or wannabee political group, that tried to bypass or overbuild it's strategic partner (Telstra) and it's Foxtel distribution Network (Telstra HFC), as opposed to engineering an outcome where it's HFC Network was effectively upgraded and futureproofed free of charge by the taxpayer, and protected from competition from having as little FTTP/B as possible, a largely shut down Optus HFC Network, under-provisioned FTTN, and a CVC charging regime and economics and of the whole eco-system that results in most people on the lower speed tiers.
Whens the next Senate committee btw?
Whens the next Senate committee btw
From what I see no further committee hearings this year.
So will likely have to wait till next year, likely March 2017.
*Cheaper* alternative instead that can do the same speeds and achieve much more then what FTTP could ever do for half the price and will last as longer as FTTP. /s
Please, don't start me. Your /s quote is so exactly on song, it's hard to read it without wanting to point out a few facts about MTM (and of course NBN) in language that is better unheard.
Thank you and have a good day
No, no � it has to be Have a nice day. That's what they say in the Bronx shops, anyway.
Here's a toast to Morrow.
For Services Rendered, perhaps?
Leading Australia into an Orwellian future.
We should give credit where due. After all, it's Malcolm The Magnificent who earns an Orwell Award for:
a) Declaring the NBN would take too long, be too expensive, and would provide inferior service.
and then came the true Orwellian Newspeak bit:
b) Confidently asserting his MTM would be Faster!, Cheaper! � and would of course be More Modern!
Most ADSL providers were/are resellers of other telco's DSLAM networks....
Well, before the mergers iiNet, Internode and Adam all had DSLAM's in my local exchange (Blackwood, South Australia) and Internode used a fibre ring that was owned by SA Power Networks (and I'm assuming that they leased dark fibre � an entire fibre or a particular wavelength on a fibre) so that they had very good control over the bandwidth to that and other DSLAMs.
Had a terrible thought on the way home from the shops and looking at the all the nodes we were passing.
When the day comes that nbn� run out of government funds. They will probably just start buying the second-hand DSLAMS and other equipment from iiNet, TPG, Telstra etc and starting rolling out FTTN in ADSL2+ Edition. That certainly has to be cheaper than buying brand new from Alcatel Lucent.
Just when you think you've been royally screwed... here comes another.
I pray it won't come to this. But you have been warned.
But you have been warned.
Watch the Destruction happen, Watch the Liberals blame Labor for it. Watch the Liberals get away Scot free with everything (Thank their get out of Trouble / Jail card for that) and finally watch Australia sadly sink deeper and deeper :(
Liberals (Sarcasm response) "Oh we are the ones who made this mess and screwed it up royally but we wish to blame someone else for that and that someone to lay the blame on is Labor". Labor made the bad choice of rolling out FTTP and it totally screwed up things and the NBN should never have been rolled out like that. We have done a better job at it and had to fix Labors dog mess with the NBN because it was all WRONG WRONG WRONG!" /s
BS. BS. BS BS. High speed really? Why bother saying that when most on FTTN can only get up to 25/5 speeds and nothing past that unless you are super close to the node?
That's because he thinks Australians are idiots and havn't travelled the world to see what real broadband is.
His pitching his speech to uneducated bogans pretty much.
Watch the Destruction happen, Watch the Liberals blame Labor for it. Watch the Liberals get away Scot free with everything (Thank their get out of Trouble / Jail card for that) and finally watch Australia sadly sink deeper and deeper :(
Gina's pet Yowie was on Insiders this morning going on about "Inheriting Labor's mess" christ, what an awful buzzphrase they all just repeat ad nauseam. Complete fraudsters, the lot of them.
When the day comes that nbn� run out of government funds.
They'll just declare it finished and give it to Telstra for a song.
Although Telstra will probably only take the FTTP part.
They'll just declare it finished and give it to Telstra for a song.
Although Telstra will probably only take the FTTP part.
Telstra may not take it at all, remember they have an income stream from the rental parts of the agreements.
They also are getting paid to do the repairs.
They may not want to give up either stream.
Also the loss of maintenance income and being responsible themselves for future maintenance costs, would be a "double negative" on the balance sheet
Faster sooner and cheaper
has evolved into
As soon as possible and forget about the price tag.
What will it evolve into next.
Mission Impossible?
The iPhone 7's are getting close to being in the hands of many Australian.
With their increased and more powerful video and photo features over previous iPhones, the volume and size of iPhone 7 photos and videos is likely to increase once again.
With such a delay in the NBN/MTM and so very premises able to get fixed line upload speeds, the demand and value for higher than current ADSL and Telstra/Optus HFC upload speeds will only increase.
The unacceptable delays in providing higher upload speeds, will become even more noticeable for those that sync/backup and transfer and publish iPhone 7 photo and video content to the internet.
Telstra may not take it at all, remember they have an income stream from the rental parts of the agreements.
They also are getting paid to do the repairs.
They may not want to give up either stream.
Also the loss of maintenance income and being responsible themselves for future maintenance costs, would be a "double negative" on the balance sheet
Oh come on, you know how it'll go.
MT: Hey Telstra we just spent $54B building the NBN and now we're gonna get rid of it.
Telstra: Well you know it's only worth $20B cos of bla bla bla.
MT: Yeah I know so you gonna take it for $20B?
Telstra: Well if we did that then we lose all the money we're getting in our contracts for customer migration, duct rental, repair and all those high maintenance costs of the copper etc.
MT: Yeah I know we'll compensate you for that.
Telstra: Well over the 20 years left thats and estimated maintenance costs thats.... $35B
MT: Yep sounds about right so you gonna take it?
Telstra: Well we'll also need things changed so we can like you know change the CVC prices to whatever we want, not worry about ACCC etc etc.
MT: Yea yea whatever you want, so gonna take it?
Telstra: So for $20B you give us the NBN plus $35B compensation and whatever changes we want made?
MT: Yup thats right, where do we sign?
Then they'll do bugger all maintenance on the FTTN and HFC so it goes to crap like their ADSL and roll out their own Telstra Fibre network for just 2x... 3x the cost of everyones crappy and getting worse NBN connection which people have to change to now if they want something that is usable. And that 20% on NBN Fibre ... just jack up the CVC so either the NBN plans cost more then the Telstra network plans or are so unbearably slow that they all switch over to the Telstra network anyway. Now they have a monopoly again with 100% of the market and were paid billions to do it yay!
Hmmm after writing that and thinking about it, maybe it isn't as much /s as I thought o.O
Australia's politicians really should step up as it holds its citizens back and the country is forced to stay behind on efficiency, productivity and innovation.
FTFY ;)
�The 10 gigabit infrastructure will future proof Adelaide and enable the use of next-generation broadband that, overseas, has become a magnet for entrepreneurs, start-ups and folks working in tech-savvy and creative industries.�
hmm now where is that fool that was on here a week or so ago that fabricated the claim that we all wanted 10Gigabit for everyone and then went on to then tell us we were fools for wanting it?
Sad state of affairs our re-visionless leaders have left us in.
See what i did there? ;)
Telstra may not take it at all
But the Winner takes it all Thanks ABBA(ttP)
NBN we need to talk
About the things you�ve gone through
Though it's hurting me
Like Ross @ABC
Turnbull�s played his cards
And look at where it�s got him
PM everyday
Now he looks away
Who will take it all?
Which ISP�s will fall?
Where is FTTP?
It was our destiny
It was in the plans
Thinking we would get it
We figured it made sense
For owners and those with rents
Fibre to the home
To make Oz so much stronger
He played us all for fools
Breaking promises and rules
Node Lotto, throw the dice
Slow speeds, high pings, high price
Sooner and not too dear
Tell voters what they want to hear
Then Telstra took it all
Morrow and Ziggy took the fall
It's hard to try explain
For years we�ll feel the pain
We tried to keep it KISS
But then they went and stuffed it
Copper�s not the same
We know who to blame
Somewhere deep inside
They know they�re deep in trouble
What more can they say?
But lead the world one day
Whirlpool will decide
The fibre zealots cried
Posters in the know
Not going with the flow
This is not a game
Cos Fibre is the end
For business big and small
The winner is us all
NBN we�ve had our talk
It makes me sad to say this
Hope you understand
Heads buried in the sand
They won�t apologize
Even when they�ve done bad
Counting dollars, dimes and cents
Over confidence
They saw that Telstra took it all
Peak speeds slowed to a crawl
No more FTTP
And scrap some HFC
The Nodes so far away
SAT Pings too high to play
Whose idea CVC?
Suits News Corp�s strategy
And Optus EPL
Doesn�t look so swell
One day they�ll all say
I know we should have listened
To what they had to write
They put up quite a fight
To those that ran away
Or those who never bothered
To educate themselves
Looked after just themselves
Please vote with all your brain
Or it will happen all again
Could this have been a viable alternative to Labor's NBN?
Doing some minimal reading on the City of Whittlesea, I found this from 2004 ...
http://www.buddeblog.com.
The City of Whittlesea in conjunction with Casey, Cardinia, Wyndham and Melton Councils has developed a Melbourne growth council consortium to bring broadband to new development areas. The Municipal Association Victoria has been appointed to manage the consortium. The Consortium requires all new greenfield estates install a conduit network capable of accommodating optic fibre infrastructure to deliver a broad range of telephony, Internet, Video and other data services to local communities. The conduit network will be leased at a low cost to facilitate the entry of a telecommunications operator to establish a high bandwidth network.
NB: the area is on the outskirts of Melbourne and is almost entirely residential estates built in the past 10 years
It doesn't seem like they got too far with municipal FTTP back then, but it seems they did require developer to lay fibre suitable conduits and gift them to the local council, not Telstra. This seems to have made all the difference.
The recipe for success seems to be:
1) Open access conduits owned by local government
2) Mandatory Layer 2 structural separation
3) The big T (and nbn�) out of the picture.
It was only a matter of time before News Corp came out with an article like this. I've listed the negative to NBN parts of the article (most of it:).
The National Broadband Network is going to struggle to turn a profit even after the network is completed in 2020, with industry experts warning that the company building the network is being overly optimistic with its take-up numbers.
Veteran telecommunications company executive Bevan Slattery said that unless the cost of access to the wholesale mono�poly were revisited, customers would be left with arguably the most expensive broadband prices in the developed world.
�Stephen Conroy�s original numbers were completely wrong and since then the financial outcome has had to be reverse-engin�eered,� Mr Slattery said.
�At $35 billion you could have made a commercial return on the NBN but that looks very hard now. Can you imagine millions of users paying $90 a month for a 25 megabits per second service?�
Mr Slattery warned that the utilisation rate of the network was crucial to the long-term viability of the NBN and high access prices could force customers to stick with basic NBN plans or look for alternatives. �Without changing the pricing, NBN Co is killing its own future and at some point the financial model is going to fall over,� he said.
Telecoms analyst Ian Martin, of New Street Research, said the NBN would be �not very� �viable when it was built and warned that NBN Co was being �over-�optimistic� on average revenue per user � a key metric for telecommunications companies � and on �mobile-only take-up.
Almost half of current active users are on a tier-2 service, offering download speed of 25Mbps and upload speeds of 5Mbps.
NBN Co needs to considerably increase the number of premises with an active service to meet its forecasts, especially as the last tranche of the government�s $29.5bn equity contribution runs out at the end of fiscal 2017.
NBN Co needs up to $54bn to finish the project and is evaluating long-term funding options, but critics such as Mr Slattery say market forces may not be in its favour.
NBN Co thinks the CVC price � the charge internet service providers pay to NBN Co to offload traffic from the NBN�s network to their respective networks � will give �telcos flexibility to create their own value proposition.
The cynical tone of the articles closing sentence and choice of topic for the closing sentence (CVC) suggests that the editor/writers "think" that NBN Co's CVC pricing points in the direction of where the NBN is going to come unstuck.
What really stands out in this article
1. There is no reference to the $29.5B price tag that the LNP took for the 2013 election
2. There is no link to lower ARPU, lower take up and lower activation rates due to inferior services from FTTN v FTTP
3. No reference to how a chaotic connection and activation process might be slowing activation and takeup rates.
Also, an attempt to lay all the blame on Conroy/Labor, by not once mentioning Turnbull, the LNP or the strategic review/CBA assumptions in the article, has a strong whiff to it.
Also, an attempt to lay all the blame on Conroy/Labor, by not once mentioning Turnbull, the LNP
Re: my post from Last night
Watch the Destruction happen, Watch the Liberals blame Labor for it. Watch the Liberals get away Scot free with everything (Thank their get out of Trouble / Jail card for that) and finally watch Australia sadly sink deeper and deeper :(
Well it happened before and it's happening again and still is.
Liberal to Labor � Labor it's your fault NBN is terrible. Labor it's your fault that it's a FUD of a project. Labor it's your fault that this country was going to be in debt. Labor it's your fault that FTTP is terrible and is expensive. /s
News corp � It is Labors fault and will always be. The coalition have done an excellent job with the NBN so far and have fixed Labors dog mess with something way better and *Cheaper* that everyone will get a use out of. NBN no longer has any problems of any sort and is on a good stance compared to NBN under labor where mess and misinformation was everywhere /s
Remind me again why people trust the clowns in their suits again?
Also, an attempt to lay all the blame on Conroy/Labor, by not once mentioning Turnbull, the LNP or the strategic review/CBA assumptions in the article, has a strong whiff to it.
The "adults" are in charge acting like a petulant children again.
The LNP likes to dish it out but refuses to accept any consequences.
:0<
The cynical tone of the articles closing sentence and choice of topic for the closing sentence (CVC) suggests that the editor/writers "think" that NBN Co's CVC pricing points in the direction of where the NBN is going to come unstuck.
It's both tech and CVC.
On the tech front, FTTN and to a lesser degree HFC (v FTTP) removes the ability of RSPs and NBNCo over time to upsell to faster speeds ('oh, your internet is starting to feel slow hey? Well, you're only on 25/5 speeds, but we can with a flick of a switch get you 100/40 or 250/100 for $x more per month' is difficult or impossible). Gone are future revenue increase paths.
But then there's the awful CVC charging model that prices in scarcity when none exists. CVC pricing made sense for Telstra Wholesale 15 years ago when they did this for off-net ADSL call collection areas because its aim was to screw over competitors to Telstra Retail ('oh you actually want to deliver speeds similar to Telstra? Well, your customers will pay the same or more for ADSL as Telstra customers...').
It doesn't make sense for NBNCo to do this though as a pure wholesaler. Further, if people find their 100/40 (and in due course for those lucky enough to be blessed with the right technology 250/100) grind to a halt due to congestion, they'll switch to cheaper plans further weakening revenue. NBNCo is cutting off its nose to spite its face...
Yep. I remember Quigley's estimate being $1,100 � 1,400 so that fits. I wonder if the $699 is the full cost in Whittlesea or just the part the RSP has to pay.
My guess is that it's subsidised by a contract in the same way Optus/Telstra HFC installs used to be.
The National Broadband Network is going to struggle to turn a profit even after the network is completed in 2020
On further reflection todays Australian NBN daggers, only have one part sentence that gives any direct writer opinion statement.
1. That it will struggle to turn a profit.
2. That the network will be completed in 2020 just because nbn currently forecasts it will be completed then despite the SOE now having a completion date requirement of ASAP.
"Even if the network is completed" would have been 100% more accurate.
Almost half of current active users are on a tier-2 service, offering download speed of 25Mbps and upload speeds of 5Mbps.
Also, no mention that the 25/5 tier 2 download speeds are UP TO download speeds. The omission of the words UP TO is disgraceful.
So most of the article is just he said, she said "reporting". What a cushy job writing this.
The part of the job writing this article that appears to be to be hardest, is to get opinion out from the he's and she's experts, what to not include, what to leave out, and how to mislead and misrepresent and not step on too many toes.
Imagine how much cheaper the rollout would be if the builder and owner of the Network only had to deal direct with their own workforce or direct with contractors contracted directly to them, without all the costs of the middle man process.
and faster too, iirc Syntheo did SFA in Darwin and when NBN Co directly took over the roll-out there it was rolling out FTTP in record times! The subbies even got paid decent rates too!
The cynical tone of the articles closing sentence and choice of topic for the closing sentence (CVC) suggests that the editor/writers "think" that NBN Co's CVC pricing points in the direction of where the NBN is going to come unstuck.
I think the article is saying that whatever the technology mix the NBNCo won't make a profit unless it is very expensive to use. I agree with that opinion. Sure, FTTP can offer more widespread choice of speeds, but that is what covers the extra cost to roll out FTTP. It doesn't change the underlying point that the NBN will be too expensive.
Also, an attempt to lay all the blame on Conroy/Labor, by not once mentioning Turnbull, the LNP or the strategic review/CBA assumptions in the article, has a strong whiff to it.
I read that as a criticism of the concept of a profit making NBNCo that has existed from day one and continues today. I agree with that opinion too. The problem with the high ARPU required for the NBNCo to make a profit has existed from the start and has not been changed by Turnbull's fiddling with the technology mix. I think Slattery is absolutely right that the NBNCo's products and prices have been reverse engineered to deliver the required return.
1. That it will struggle to turn a profit.
I don't have access to the entire article but from what you've quoted that is the sole point of the article. It is not about the technology and it is not about political promises. It is just about the access prices being charged in order for the NBNCo to make the required return. I really don't see the problem with that. Not every article has to be about everything.
Oh come on, you know how it'll go.
oh, of course that is how it will go.
Telstra will be paid to take the MTM not Telstra paying to take it over
this will mean us Taxpayers will pay money 3 times for it.
- once for the initial build as it will have to be bought onto the budget books as there will be no income stream to pay the either the interest bill or the actual capital on the bonds
- the money to pay Telstra as "compensation" to take it over
- The massive increase in retail pricing due to the deal plus regulatory "holiday"
and then there is the massive incalculable loss of productivity in all areas of at the retail, small business (remember that "The NBN" was going to offer business grade services, not sure how any of those could be done on FTTN", and the provision of Government services, let alone health and ancillary services
What really stands out in this article
1. There is no reference to the $29.5B price tag that the LNP took for the 2013 election
well Bill did say to "forget about the cost"
this must be one of the current "talking points" distributed amongst the Liberals and their supporters
either keep saying "ignore the cost" or not mention "the increased cost" in articles
Not every article has to be about everything.
But every article seems to ignore the increased running costs and lower earning potential of FTTN compared with FTTP.
I don't have access to the entire article but from what you've quoted that is the sole point of the article. It is not about the technology and it is not about political promises. It is just about the access prices being charged in order for the NBNCo to make the required return. I really don't see the problem with that. Not every article has to be about everything.
It's a mixed article (just google "NBN Co faces uphill battle" and open it from there), mixture of blaming v1, MTM etc. Nothing to new for what some here have previously speculated on. Some selected key quotes
�Stephen Conroy�s original numbers were completely wrong and since then the financial outcome has had to be reverse-engin�eered,� Mr Slattery said. "At $35 billion you could have made a commercial return on the NBN but that looks very hard now. Can you imagine millions of users paying $90 a month for a 25 megabits per second service? Without changing the pricing, NBN Co is killing its own future and at some point the financial model is going to fall over,� he said.
Telecoms analyst Ian Martin, of New Street Research, said the NBN would be �not very� �viable when it was built and warned that NBN Co was being �over-�optimistic� on average revenue per user � a key metric for telecommunications companies � and on �mobile-only take-up.
Ovum analyst Craig Skinner is also confident NBN Co�s customer forecasts look reasonable. '�The main driver of take-up of fixed access, as in NBN access, versus mobile broadband, is really the usage of high-content bandwidth services like video,�� Mr Skinner said. �That�s something where we are seeing a lot of growth.��
NBN Co thinks the CVC price � the charge internet service providers pay to NBN Co to offload traffic from the NBN�s network to their respective networks � will give �telcos flexibility to create their own value proposition.
It doesn't change the underlying point that the NBN will be too expensive.
This is also true, although I would query whether other countries that offer 'cheaper' broadband have a state-run subsidy scheme that would need to be factored in.
Having said that though, if a FTTP network was built, NBN would have been a monopoly (with perhaps a few cherry-picked exceptions). But it was switched to FTTN, which is almost as expensive but not nearly as good. This has opened a door to competitors such as TPG with its FTTB offering and the plethora of WISPs to offer competitive services at much lower prices (because there is no need to fund an internal cross-subsidy to regional and remote areas) and leaving NBNCo to charge higher prices to fund the cross-subsidy.
(The fixed wireless space is especially interesting. While 802.11ac offers 30-40 down and 5-10 up (and can actually deliver 100 down and 60 up on consumer-grade equipment), it is claimed that the next generation 802.11ax will offer 10 times this throughput by 2019. The proof of the pudding will be in the eating of course but it could mean life gets messy for an FTTN-based NBN sooner rather than later; NBN may have to become the cheap option to compete.)
But every article seems to ignore the increased running costs and lower earning potential of FTTN compared with FTTP.
Yep, but I think the technology choice is a different issue to the one the article is raising. I think the point of the article applies to both the NBN and the MTM. That is, profitability requires high access prices which can create problems with take up.
It's a mixed article (just google "NBN Co faces uphill battle" and open it from there), mixture of blaming v1, MTM etc.
I don't think it's so much blaming v1 as saying the problem has been there from the beginning. It also acknowledges Turnbull's changes haven't fixed it.
Nothing to new for what some here have previously speculated on.
Yep. I think we'll be stuck with high access prices.
I read that as a criticism of the concept of a profit making NBNCo that has existed from day one and continues today
you would have to be mad to not EDIT think that a 93% FTTP footprint would not make money ?
It absolutely would, personally I wouldn't really be that keen on privatising that sort of cash coz down the line either ? why the hell would you ? people will always need/demand fast broadband access, unless you were selling it to fund some other huge infrastructure project.
but that's my personal view.
the problems started with the nbn when 14 POIs got changed to 121, they became exacerbated by drastically cutting the FTTP footprint, they became entrenched when the cheaper sooner network blew out spectacularly in both time costs and OpEx.
Now there really isn't much hope of a profit making nbn I would agree with that. theres not too much hope of having an asset worth selling either.
That is, profitability requires high access prices which can create problems with take up
But with 14 POIs and 93% FTTP footprint, Business would without doubt be buying nbn connections at high levels with business SLAs and business pricing.
I do work for a business that has paid over $5000 a month for a 4/4 connection.
With FTTP they would happily continue to pay that for a much improved service
they are not getting FTTP however, they 'may' supplement their SDSL connection with a residential class nbn 25/5 connection depending on the congestion issues. they may just stick to their current setup which isn't included in the 18month cut off.
Remarkable � Fibre on Demand for $699 � did anyone else look at their pricing for installation?
This is a real thing, not vaporware? :)
NBNCo reportedly has restrictions in the 2014 definitive agreements with Telstra and Optus, that prevent them from building their own fixed line broadband services to compete with NBNCo's fixed lined services. Preventing infrastructure competition and cherry picking to some large degree.
However, Liberal party policy is to be pro-competition, since competition is best and drives down prices. So they would obviously joyfully welcome maximum competition from the likes or Red Train and other private providers of FTTP. :D :)
you would have to be mad to not think that a 93% FTTP footprint would not make money ?
I think you've got more negatives in there than you intended. I think you mean I'm mad because I think the 93% FTTP NBN would only have made money if the access prices were very high. I think that's the only reason the CVC was created. If that makes me mad then so be it.
The MTM should require lower total funding to build, although Turnbull seems to have made a complete pig's ear of that. That is offset by higher operating costs and lower revenue for the MTM. I don't think that changes the premise of the article though. Access prices have to be very high to deliver a profit in either case.
A finish likely leaving the majority of Fixed Line customers stranded on FTTN,
But the Australian public are happy with FTTN, with it's strong average speed http://www.gizmodo.com.au/201
Calling it NBN is a problem too, why not 21N for 21st century network, since a lot of people still like their telephones, and it should have been made more clear to everyone that this is not just an internet network but a new, improved replacement for the telephone network. :)
I think you've got more negatives in there than you intended
yep, edited now but yes I did somehow ;)
what I am saying is that a 14 POI 93% FTTP network would have been profitable. CVC would have been more fluid and easier to adjust down because the ubiquitous nature of the network the high CVC is just about paying it back quicker. but it can be lowered and still be profit making business.
However now with 121 POIs and a small fraction of the FTTP footprint leaving the majority of the network unable to go anywhere from 100/40, and a large portion of those guys unable to achieve even that .. the network is not attractive to a business the CVC model falls down and really cant be used in anyway other than you describe because we don't have all those businesses jumping on board at business prices enriching the CVC pool with their unused bandwidth.
if you cant see that then maybe you are a little mad. ( hey being a ltitle mad is probably a good thing imo ;) )
what I am saying is that a 14 POI 93% FTTP network would have been profitable.
I'm not sure how the POI decision impacted the profitability of the NBNCo. I can see how it has affected smaller RSPs but the services should still be required by end customers and should still be delivered by the remaining RSPs. The big RSPs almost certainly have backhaul to the 121 POIs.
CVC would have been more fluid and easier to adjust down because the ubiquitous nature of the network the high CVC is just about paying it back quicker. but it can be lowered and still be profit making business.
I don't agree. The CVC was created to generate the revenue needed to deliver the 7% return to the government. It has no purpose other than to raise revenue. The CVC price was only going to be reduced if it raised too much revenue. The problem raised by the article is the impact of the CVC on demand and hence on revenue.
Even with the MTM the RSPs are going to have to buy more CVC capacity to deliver the 'peak time' throughput to deliver the advertised speeds as required by the ACCC. As it stands, they will have to do this before CVC prices are reduced. Either RSPs are going to have to cut their margins and hope CVC costs come down or retail prices are going to have to go up. History shows retail services delivering more for less. It remains to be seen if end customers will pay more for what they think they should already be getting.
if you cant see that then maybe you are a little mad
I just don't accept political bullshit only comes from one side.
NBN are still offering Business Services under MTM.
Thanks. Is the NBNCo offering these business services now or they still in the forward plan?
So is it fair to say there will be a mix of residential and business services in each area as the NBN is rolled out? That would mean ARPU at any time is a mix of business and residential services rather than being residential at the start with business coming later to deliver a boost to ARPU. Are business services going to reduce the CVC impost on residential services?
having contacted Telstra TPG and optus regarding NBN connections for business, none of them offered a proper business grade service on nbn
Yeah, that's why I was asking if the NBNCo offers business grade services now. The RSPs can't offer better SLAs than the NBNCo can deliver. tbh I wouldn't want to offer business grade retail services on the NBN/MTM at the moment.
edit:
Basically, what you said here whrl.pl/ReIeci
Now the serious businesses around town already have !:1 contention services on SDSL etc why would they move to a less stable service ?
I'm not a techie. I don't understand how FTTN is less reliable than copper from the exchange.
I'm not a techie. I don't understand how FTTN is less reliable than copper from the exchange.
I believe it's due to the higher frequencies of VDSL signals.
Also possibly because Telstra would usually (without much trouble) at the very least send a tech out to investigate faults on a residential line that dropped out as little as once or twice a day (my personal experience), whereas NBN will not until >5 dropouts per day. This alone would definitely contribute to the view that FTTN is less reliable than copper from the exchange.
I'm not a techie. I don't understand how FTTN is less reliable than copper from the exchange.
I'm not telecoms tech neither, but I'm guessing that FTTN, like ADSL, is just running OFDM over an existing copper pair, whereas SDSL involves running the service over MULTIPLE pairs, as many as the customer is willing to pay for to get the speeds required for their business use, and might even involve re-patching some extra pairs between the premises and the exchange and installing extra copper within the premises. So if NBN in your area is only FTTN, then it might not provide a suitable business service, and you would have to go with SDSL just as you would have done before your area was "NBN enabled".
Little thought I had but I was at a Meeting today for my NDIS pre � review and the person doing the pre-review said something along the lines of
"So the government goes to all this trouble to create the NDIS that's suppose to help people but they screw up peoples plans in the process / or they don't help them and lay the blame on the end user".
(I forget what it's called but she's works for one of those company's that is partnered with NDIS to help people)
But anyway Replace the above in NBN terms.
So the government goes to all this trouble to create alternate technologies in the NBN rollout and when problems appear they aren't interested in fixing or helping people but rather they are interested in blaming someone else for the mess and issues that rise with it. I.E blaming Labor for their NBN even tho Labors was mostly spot and that NBN 2.0 (Libs NBN) has been a massive failure.
So we kept NBN and rolled out FTTN because we don't like FTTP (Libs terms not mine) but we really aren't interested in anything else besides FTTN being there. Any problems are not mine but yours (Or your RSP)
but we really aren't interested in anything else besides FTTN being there.
That's not fair to say that.
It would have been far easier to mandate a shut down of internet via cable, and move all HFC users to FTTN on the new and superior next-generation NBN. :) If FTTN was the true and only goal that is what they would have done.
Instead they are kindly allowing people to keep their HFC services, modified to NBN, and even allowing the rest of these houses in these areas to connect NBN via HFC instead of telephone copper. That is rather kind of them, wouldn't you say?
NBN are still offering Business Services under MTM. Fine print though that the service provided to FTTP is higher than service for FTTN/FTTB, eg. fault rectification is quicker on FTTP than FTTN/FTTB
So on page 4 they state
Consistent End User experience
NEBS services receive a consistent set of minimum speeds, features and capabilities6.
And the note is
6 Some minimum speeds features and capabilities may not be available for fibre-based FTTN and fibre-based FTTB where the Line Rate of the service cannot accommodate this.
Also mentions the UP To speeds are 20Mbps on FTTN/B and 40Mbps on FTTP and 4x higher frame loss on FTTN/B.
Network Availability Targets
The nbn� network availability is a performance objective of 99.90% across all current access technologies.
I guess the regular drop outs of the FTTN aren't factored into this metric as the network on the fibre side of the node is still functioning and available.
At least the doc does a good job in showing how FTTP is superior in both operation and maintenance.
Thanks. Is the NBNCo offering these business services now or they still in the forward plan?
Though on reflection, the doc I posted isn't really business services, more enhancements for their standard product that I believe exist today. It seems to be standard offering within their product & pricing, but you would expect these to be targeted at businesses. Nor am I aware if there are any contractual or financial obligations on the targets which would also indicate business grade. Would have to dig further.
Thanks. Is the NBNCo offering these business services now or they still in the forward plan?
As far as I know, no they aren't. The current ETA from what I am hearing is the 1st of October though.
Sorry bit off-topic, but it looks like NBN's UK as a roll model is slowly slipping away -
As in a roll out model or a role model?
http://www.itnews.com.au/new
Are they serious? I don't believe this crap! Lets get new MP's who wont scrutinize our rollout of FTTN. Get F***ed
I'm not a techie. I don't understand how FTTN is less reliable than copper from the exchange
It works the copper hard by running much higher frequencies etc over it. FTTN also uses the least reliable part of the copper PSTN, the last mile were all the joints and problems are between the pillar and the premises.
I believe it's due to the higher frequencies of VDSL signals.
It works the copper hard by running much higher frequencies etc over it.
Thanks. It will be interesting to see if they can offer a business grade SLA on FTTN then. It will be equally interesting to see what it does to their business case if they can't. Ooops!
What are these businesses using now? If they're on copper from the exchange then surely they can move to FTTN. This is a massive issue if they can't. I would have expected to hear much more noise about it.
Businesses that cannot get fibre often use EFM. EFM bonds up to 8 pairs and uses an SHDSL carrier to provide a 20/20 service. There will be some on FTTN that are too far from the node to get the 20Mbps up that they currently get. However the problem with replacements for EFM are that NBN Co's current pricing structure means that it is 1.5-2x what they currently pay for a 1:1 connection.
I doubt that will be in any business grade SLA.
It will be interesting to see how that works out.
aiui ... The AVC connects the end customer to the POI. ULL connects the end customer to the exchange.
AVC connects the end customer to the POI with a layer 2 connection, a Telstra wholesale port connects the end customer to the POP with a layer 2 connection. ULL gives a continuous copper conductor between the customer and the exchange with no signals on it. Comparing ULL to AVC is apples and oranges.
RSPs will either have their own equipment in the exchange/POI or get wholesale access to someone else's.
RSPs will either have their own equipment in the POP or get wholesale access to someone else's for Telstra wholesale too. The TW port is the closer analogy in every way. Layer 2 connection from the premises to the POP/POI, then a pipe between TW/NBN and the end customer that is charged with AGVC/CVC.
Either way the AVC only provides that link just the same as ULL.
My addition is superfluous but just to make it clear, AVC is a layer 2 link, ULL is a physical bearer. There was some talk a number of years ago about after network completion the possibility of NBN Co offering unbundled wavelength services, if that service ever eventuates, that will be the same as ULL.
there is no bandwidth guarantees on nbn business like there are on current business grade internet connections.
Thats not exactly true, an RSP can buy TC-2 AVC and TC-2 CVC which is a higher traffic class than regular data (TC-4) which is prioritised over everything but voip (TC-1). The problem is to build an equivalent service to an EFM 1:1 connection is $100 or $200 depending if you use TC-4 for the former and TC-2 for the latter to build the 1:1 20/20 service.
I don't understand how FTTN is less reliable than copper from the exchange.
I'll answer this in 2 parts. Firstly, the higher frequencies degrade quicker, both in terms of distance and with damage to the cable. External factors such as water ingress are going to induce more problems than before because of this. The second part, is probably the most important. This one does cause problems on some exchange based services too though. Naked DSL and NBN FTTN share a similar problem. Lack of the exchange based voltage on the line. The lack of a whetting current. This current provides some charge to break down and prevent the formation of corrosion on the surface of the conductor. Corrosion on Cu causes degradation and stability problems especially for those closer to the node because the surface of the conductor which is where the signal lives is slowly degrading if exposed to certain conditions.
However the problem with replacements for EFM are that NBN Co's current pricing structure means that it is 1.5-2x what they currently pay for a 1:1 connection.
The quotes we were getting for shdsl 20/20 were in the $600+ per month range
quotes we were getting for shdsl 20/20 were in the $600+ per month range
They should go somewhere else then ;) the people I know on EFM 20/20 are paying $299+GST
They should go somewhere else then ;) the people I know on EFM 20/20 are paying $299+GST
it depends on which part of the country you are from I have been given quotes of 7 grand a month for a 20/20
an RSP can buy TC-2 AVC and TC-2 CVC
If you read the NBN special services white papers links from here, they all pretty much say to use the existing services with TC-2, etc.
eg. page 5 of the Megalink and Wholesale Transmission white paper.
AVC Bandwidth options
NEBS gives Service Providers the
bandwidth capacity and flexibility
to control their End User�s traffic
profiles. Each AVC automatically
supports a TC-4 subscription,
which is a �best- efforts� bandwidth
allocation. At order time, Service
Providers may choose an AVC profile
that allows it to carry an amount of
TC-2 traffic to support the provision
of high-bandwidth, business-critical
interactive multimedia applications.
The TC-2 bandwidth capability of up
to 20 Mbps on fibre- based FTTN/B,
or up to 40 Mbps (planned to soon
be up to 100 Mbps) on fibre-based
FTTP, can be used to construct
retail services that match or exceed
the upper end of speeds which
many DSL- based retail Ethernet
services available in the Australian
market today could achieve. nbn
also provides differing modes
of addressing the Traffic Class 2
AVCs at the UNI, including Default-
Mapped, DSCP, Priority-Tagged and
Tagged options.
http://www.nbnco.com.au/cont
Great article from Mark on the latest accc review for mobile roaming.
http://www.innovationaus.com
It covers the NBN mobile backhaul and tower sharing experiments too.
So The question I have, and to be honest I'm surprised no-one else is asking it, is: why aren't all gov funded or partially funded cell towers not open access? Why is any company allowed to profit, at the exclusion of all others, from towers they would not have built without government funding?
If any company takes funding to build a tower, that tower imo should be automatically available for all providers customers to roam onto.
So we kept NBN and rolled out FTTN because we don't like FTTP (Libs terms not mine) but we really aren't interested in anything else besides FTTN being there.
Because FTTP is evil since we didn't think of it first, so we then figured we might get away with touting FTTN as the vital future upgrade if we, like, you know, threw up enough three-word slogans about it.
All this despite the immutable and tragic fact that, more than a decade ago, the coalition was rightly describing FTTN as fraudband.
It covers the NBN mobile backhaul and tower sharing experiments too.
It's all in the article, and I agree a long time coming.
The MVNO market has failed to materialise in this country, perhaps it's now time to look at more regulated roaming in regards to the mobile networks to give (all three of them) a nudge along!!
I've often wondered about the NZ approach to the wireless rollout, as compared to ours.
I've always been of the opinion that the blackspot program, road coverage, NBN wireless rollout and emergency services rationalisation should be revisited a lot sooner than later.
I think im going to write some emails to google and such, its all we can do at this point. Don't look to the NBN for fibre guys, lets try and get others attention neede
Google is going the way of the Coalition MTM and is pulling back on Fiber and going Wireless.
This is the what the Coalition done by making wholesale changes to the maps by switching areas from FTTP to Wireless since it's a lot cheaper, Google is going the same way.
Google will not roll out Fiber in Australia since they are pulling back in USA and the MTM is here to stay.
Google parent company Alphabet is shaking things up at its gigabit internet division, according to a report today from The Information. The unit, previously known as Google Fiber and now called Access, is shifting its focus to wireless technology, and not ultra-fast internet delivered through fiber-optic cables. More pressing, however, is a demand issued by Alphabet CEO Larry Page to reduce customer acquisition costs to one tenth their current level while asking Fiber chief Craig Barratt to cut the unit�s workforce in half, from 1,000 people to 500.
http://www.theverge.com/2016
Genetic Modified Zealot writes...
Google is going the way of the Coalition MTM and is pulling back on Fiber and going Wireless.
And that is why i included and such regardless, means other companies too
Genetic Modified Zealot writes...
Google is going the way of the Coalition MTM and is pulling back on Fiber
Again very selective quoting there Raoul.
Alphabet CFO Ruth Porat has been a staunch defender of the Fiber team, telling Page that its business model is viable and needs more time. However, both Page and Brin have expressed discontent with both Fiber�s overly aggressive rollout strategy and the high cost of deploying fiber optic networks. That's supposedly led to the shift toward wireless delivery.
Earlier this month, The Wall Street Journal reported that Google Fiber would start relying on wireless transmitters to start delivering internet from fiber lines to homes in cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, and Dallas
Still, it's unclear whether the unit can achieve the same gigabit internet speeds with wireless tech that it produces with fiber.
So, even the CFO of the company thinks that the FTTP rollout is viable to continue, but the CEO wants a fast return for shareholders. ie, not thinkiing about long term prospects, just the next shareholder meeting. A bit like the politicians, not caring about what is best for Australia, but what will gain traction at the next election.
Genetic Modified Zealot writes...
Google will not roll out Fiber in Australia
I agree with you.
and the MTM is here to stay.
Until the public realise they have been dudded .
Genetic Modified Zealot writes...
This is the what the Coalition done by making wholesale changes to the maps by switching areas from FTTP to Wireless since it's a lot cheaper,
Show me proof.
Genetic Modified Zealot writes...
This is the what the Coalition done by making wholesale changes to the maps by switching areas from FTTP to Wireless since it's a lot cheaper, Google is going the same way.
Total and utter fantasy there. Any change from FTTP (apart from a few select rural locations) has been to #nodelotto
PS how do you explain their "failure" to use nodes? Since they are all for copying glorious leader Malcolm's MTM?
Genetic Modified Zealot writes...
This is the what the Coalition done by making wholesale changes to the maps by switching areas from FTTP to Wireless since it's a lot cheaper, Google is going the same way.
What the coalition did was to move fttp to fttn.
It's not cheaper and never will be.
MTM has been shown to be the 100+ billion white elephant.
Genetic Modified Zealot writes...
... the MTM is here to stay.
Where's the money to build it going to come from?
but the CEO wants a fast return for shareholders. ie, not thinkiing about long term prospects, just the next shareholder meeting. A bit like the politicians, not caring about what is best for Australia, but what will gain traction at the next election.
That's kind of what the MTM supporters are saying � the difference is that they are saying this is a good thing .... that they should make money now ...
Don't forget that things must be done in the half-arsed, delayed, Australian way.
How long after America and Europe was it before television was allowed in Australia?
How long was it after the rest of the world before FM radio was allowed?
How long was if after America and Europe before we were allowed to have colour TV?
The answer is many years, in all cases. Any tech that the gov has a hand in is left to lag behind the rest of the world. Our politicians and bureaucrats don't want to lead the world in anything, ever, [unless it's environmental and can take the moral high ground].
The idea that Australia could keep pace, or even worse, lead in a fibre to the home roll out would be to upset years of bureaucratic and political practice and lead to the end of civilisation as we know it. ("We have always done things this way and will not change it now.")
It is not permissible that people should be treated as masters of their own fates; the 'authorities' must keep up the practice that every benefit must be delayed and eventually hesitantly doled out as a favour to the plebs; but not too fast and not too generously; we don't want people to get carried away with excess.
The idea that Australia should bypass the HFC-FTTN-wireless intermediate stage of communications and go straight on to ftth simply could not be allowed to happen. There must be a mandatory delay of about twenty years before they will look at fibre to the home.
Genetic Modified Zealot writes...
Google is going the way of the Coalition MTM and is pulling back on Fiber and going Wireless.
This is also partly because the incumbent monopolies are stalling and denying/delaying access to utility poles.
http://arstechnica.com
http://ar
Don't forget that things must be done in the half-arsed, delayed, Australian way.
Hmm, some countries don't have internet at all, nor do they have free speech or personal freedom or any kind of access to uncensored information under their dictatorship. Surely Australia is not so bad. :)
"She'll be right mate" :)
Genetic Modified Zealot writes...
This is the what the Coalition done by making wholesale changes to the maps by switching areas from FTTP to Wireless since it's a lot cheaper
Err no.
In NBN MK1 there was the FTTP, and the huge big satellite to do the rest of the job.
The wireless network was always about filling the "gap".
I predicted that the fixed wireless network was always underestimated.
NBN MK2 have increased it by 25%, I still expect that figure to increase.
It's got nothing to do with FTTP v's MTM, just economics, practicalities and technology advancements in general.
Hmm, some countries don't have internet at all, nor do they have free speech or personal freedom or any kind of access to uncensored information under their dictatorship. Surely Australia is not so bad. :)
"She'll be right mate" :)
I really decry this attitude, like somehow being better than just one other country releases us from the ambition to be better. No country has every become truly great by sitting on it's laurels and proclaiming how great they are, progress moves ever forward.
No we're not the worst, but we're also not the best, and we can always, always be better.
The idea that Australia could keep pace, or even worse, lead in a fibre to the home roll out would be to upset years of bureaucratic and political practice and lead to the end of civilisation as we know it. ("We have always done things this way and will not change it now.")
Turnbull likes to portray himself as I am mr. free market liberal transform government bureaucracy guy.
Yet he ironically destroyed the least bureaucratic exercise our government has probably ever done since federation.
As I've said elsewhere these days I look to the Scandinavians and how they design their societies for inspiration about how to transform bureaucracy, embrace the free market, entrepreneurship and innovation.
They have a lot to teach us in Australia.
Both Labor and Liberal.
a bit off topic but I loved it how the government blamed labor today when they ran out of legislation to talk about.
They could have spent that time constructively talking about the plebiscite that no one wants, or the state of the nbn and how they expect to upgrade the network that they claim to have contracts in for every last bit.
a bit off topic
We love off topic talk in this thread, it's the venting/have a go ya mug thread!!
Genetic Modified Zealot writes...
the MTM is here to stay.
So very glad I got my FTTP connection thatnks to Labors foresight then. Its here to stay thank goodness! The way that NBN Co is desperately winding back their offerings and going for the cheap arse solutions at every chance means that poor grade broadband is here to stay for most people as well. That is those who get something. NBN Co only have 9 more months to come up with more cash and then its firesale time! Their business case doesnt stack up. The predictions are the MTM is going to be effectively worthless in 2020 and wot be able to turn a profit if it is still in existence.
How much of your cash are you willing to invest in it Raoul?
How much of your cash are you willing to invest in it Raoul?
About $250 a month, but I suspect I'm of the minority!!
EDIT: I'm not Raoul BTW.
Looks like the Libs are succeeding in put even more secrecy around the MTM.
Leader of the House Christopher Pyne will today move that a committee made up of both senators and House of Representatives MPs be established to report to each house on the NBN's progress annually until it is built and fully operational.
http://www.itne
So now the public get to hear once a year about what is happening inside NBN Co? Wow! Thanks. Better than nothing at all right? No doubt Keisler and Co will be spruiking how lucky we are for that privilege.
It just goes from bad to worse. $29.5 billion of taxpayer funds will be gone by the time the first report is delivered, and for the last 3 � years, we know less and less about where it actually went.
Turnbulls folly was supposed to be a two thirds cheaper. Where has all the money gone?
So now the public get to hear once a year about what is happening inside NBN Co?
IMO, most Aussies will changeover, with a bit of help from their ISP of choice, check their bill, and move on?
NBN is about delivering cheap residential internet for the masses.
Anyone who doesn't understand that needs a holiday.
Leave the details to the likes of Quigley and Morrow.
Leader of the House Christopher Pyne will today move that a committee made up of both senators and House of Representatives MPs be established to report to each house on the NBN's progress annually until it is built and fully operational.
How will this get through the Senate?
I hope it needs their vote or we are all stuffed!
NBN is about delivering cheap residential internet for the masses.
Anyone who doesn't understand that needs a holiday.
So you think it is worth 56 ( 54) billion?
So you think it is worth 56 ( 54) billion?
I'm surprised the bill is this low?
The latest figures (now we have a million connections in place) are starting to show the cost's of this decade long process.
EDIT: I lost interest when they duplicated the fibre between Perth and Geraldton. can't recall the year.
the TRUE cost's are beginning to be realised.
EDIT2: Yes, I do think it's worth it.
Genetic Modified Zealot writes...
MTM is here to stay.
Not a valid indication of its adequacy.
Hmm, some countries don't have internet at all
Not a valid reason not to upgrade to FTTH in Australia.
How will this get through the Senate?
I hope it needs their vote or we are all stuffed!
Well apparently...
http://www.comp
so yeah.
EDIT2: Yes, I do think it's worth it.
And many of us don't. They had a price a timeframe and they couldn't even achieve it. I'd rather have waited a couple of years longer and at least got internet that could be scaled up when needed, not this up to bullshit.
Yes, I do think it's worth it.
Wait, let me get this right.
You think the cost is worth it for building a second rate network using basically obsolete hardware?
Not a valid indication of its adequacy.
Allow me to book you into a corporate seat one day!! Just for the grand final of course.
A weekend of wonder and glory.
And many of us don't.
I get that.
I'd rather have waited a couple of years longer and at least got internet that could be scaled up when needed, not this up to bullshit
My personal opinion is that the NBN should never have been started. I've made that known here and elsewhere.
Give a project manager a goal, what you think is irrelevant.
If's he's good, he'll get the job done, regardless.
You think the cost is worth it for building a second rate network using basically obsolete hardware?
I'm from a radio background, I respect copper AND fibre having a good go at it!!
NBN is about delivering cheap residential internet for the masses.
The MTM has little chance of achieving that in its present form, as many analysts are saying.
Anyone who doesn't understand that needs a holiday.
Anyone who isn't concerned about how billions of taxpayers are spent with little formal oversight should take a holiday, and stay away.
Leave the details to the likes of Quigley and Morrow.
No issue if Quigley was still in charge. Morrow is another kettle of fish. Quigley was trustworthy, Morrow is the opposite.
I hope it needs their vote or we are all stuffed!
Its already been passed apparently.
If's he's good, he'll get the job done, regardless.
Agree with this comment. (As an ex large program manager).
....
However, if you really don't agree with the goal, than bail out early.
I still think this is a waste of the country's resources and also a huge limitation going forward.
No issue if Quigley was still in charge.
I'm not going to look for my Whirlpool post, but I've suggested this.
A few years to reflect from a remarkable guy would be a good move forward.
the TRUE cost's are beginning to be realised.
The TRUE cost of the MTM is a looooooong way from being realised. It will leave an expensive legacy that will take decades to fix. There are many many more billions required to fix this mess.
The MTM has little chance of achieving that in its present form
It really doesn't matter ATM. The residential market demands least cost products.
NBN MK1 got this wrong.
The vast majority of corporate accounts won't use NBN infrastructure for many years yet. Thats the way things are.
Post NBN completion, they might see the $, both NBN and business.
If's he's good, he'll get the job done, regardless.
Except in both cases, they clearly didnt meant project requirements. Changing your requirement and pushing it to a later date and claiming they are on track is the exact opposite of a good project manager.
It will leave an expensive legacy that will take decades to fix.
Hahahah.
Never heard of the leapfrog effect?
Changing your requirement and pushing it to a later date
Hmm. Maybe.
NBN project managers have their job to do.
I suspect picked out on a 6-12 month time period. Not so much different to the real world.
Even if we still had the NBN MK1, would the project managers be a part of the wallpaper, I suspect not.
Even Quigley wouldn't have been that nice.
Geographically large area to cover with low density population centres.
I really wish that example would not be used.
https://aifs.gov.au/publicat
Scroll to the population density map. I doubt much has changed
I really wish that example would not be used.
I agree, if its possible to send someone to the moon, its possible to build a national broadband network in this country.
Sick of the defeatist attitude on why we can't have a proper none of this FTTN bollocks national broadband network.
A likely Telstra shareholder representing Sydney? has decreed that
1. MTM is a white elephant
2. That the MTM is a financial disaster for the Australian taxpayer
3. That the elephant should be donated to the Telstra Zoo
4. That Telstra should be allowed to run the MTM technologies as monopolies
http://fyre.it/jUYeBk.4
Sydney 1 DAY AGO
Just gift the whole white elephant to Telstra and let them run it as a monopoly. That is the only way to get this financial disaster off the back of the poor Australian taxpayer.
4. That Telstra should be allowed to run the MTM technologies as monopolies
Feel like ground hog day element.
IMO, most Aussies will changeover, with a bit of help from their ISP of choice, check their bill, and move on?
yep, but the reason is because they have no choice. Doesn't mean they are happy about it or think it was worth it. It just means they have no other options. I know of several that have just droped their fixed line services and plumped for mobile because the price / contract lengths and stability are not worth it.
NBN is about delivering cheap residential internet for the masses
it wasn't about that, it was about delivering ubiquitous internet to the entire nation, business AND residential not just 'the masses' and quite apart from that fact, the current nbn ISNT cheap, its MORE expensive than the mark 1 plan and delivering much poorer service and performance.
Anyone who doesn't understand that needs more than a holiday
I'm surprised the bill is this low?
its still more than it would have been for a full 93% FTTP network , so it could have been lower, with a better result, why are you so happy with the current result ? it wasn't sooner or cheaper, it was less effective ?
My personal opinion is that the NBN should never have been started
But, you think the current incarnation is "worth it"
Give a project manager a goal, what you think is irrelevant
yes, the goal was "ubiquitous scalable network" and Quigley was delivering that.
then they changed the goal to "25/5 for all asap" .. and apparently that's what we are getting .....
It really doesn't matter ATM. The residential market demands least cost products
and its not what they are getting
NBN MK1 got this wrong
When you compare it to NBN MK2 it in fact didn't get this wrong, it did a better job of it, for less, in the same time frame.
The vast majority of corporate accounts won't use NBN infrastructure for many years yet. Thats the way things are
that's because the NBN infrastructure wont be the best option anymore, had they all had FTTP there would be no reason to use any other tech, its the best delivery method for data, and business plans would have demanded much higher premiums and helped revenue and performance .... As it is there are better options than an nbn connection for a business that wants fast reliable internet.
Never heard of the leapfrog effect
yes, that was what NBN MK1 was doing .. leapfrogging outdated tech straight to a modern tech.
refuse to believe brownfields fibre is $4k+.
its not, not even by the current nbns reckoning
eople in this thread still believe in project fox and refuse to believe brownfields fibre is $4k+.
That's actually slightly dishonest, $4k+ is the current figure including PSAA and Lead-in lease payments, the FTTN and HFC prices not only exclude those figures, are quoted as estimated average at 2020. You are comparing 2 entirely different metrics and including payments that are hidden in opex for the other technologies
That's actually slightly dishonest, $4k+ is the current figure including PSAA and Lead-in lease payments, the FTTN and HFC prices not only exclude those figures, are quoted as estimated average at 2020. You are comparing 2 entirely different metrics and including payments that are hidden in opex for the other technologies
I believe this, but how is this confirmed?? Is there some fine print in the Corp Plan I've missed?
Interesting to see when the pilot is done the cost of trialing new FTTH deployment technology.
I believe this, but how is this confirmed
For the costs as now vs 2020 MrMac is the better source as he is the one that pointed that out, as for the Telstra payments, in some of the leaked documents where technology costs are compared there's a note that OpEx is lower due to less payments being made with the longer time to completion, it's also been stated in estimates/select committee and the fist CP where the $4400 figure first appeared that it was done by amortising all off the Telstra/Optus payments into the CPP for FTTP
http://www.channelnews.com.a
NBN Co boss Bill Morrow has said the benefits of the NBN far outweigh the $49 billion price tag.
�By 2020, we�ll be the first country of our size to make broadband access universal,� Morrow said.
Is that a goal, a stretch target, or an even more Heroic prediction or assumption?
Of our size?
Population, or geographic size?
What does he mean by universal broadband?
What is the definition of universal broadband (if there is even an agreed one?)
That's a bit like Samsung claiming that in 4 years time they will have the best phone on the market.
It might be a goal, or a vision, but nothing can be promised or foreseen. And one that there is a high likelihood that won't be achieved.
I'd like to see what happens if anyone suggested including that in the prospectus or marketing material accompanying the sale or privatisation of NBN/MTM or some of its Assets.
Morrow must just be referring to his Wholesale company (NBNCo) making peak speed up to 25Mbps MTM products of one kind or another available to 100% of Australians, if they can afford it, via RSP's retailing it.
Note: UP TO speeds, and only peak speeds, not minimum speeds and no guarantee or conditions on the retailers who actually sell and deliver the final product will deliver a service that delivers even 25Mbps download speeds as a minimum, with the latency, consistency and reliability you or your household or business requires, during critical times that you need to use your broadband.
When you can attempt to just cover all the stragglers by Satellite, (with its slow data usage limits, high latency issues, and congestion during peak periods) Morrow's clearly deluded prophetic self-award in advance for his Organisation, speaks for itself. IF the Satellite option fails or has limitations, they'll no doubt be a range of fixed wireless or mobile broadband options they can conjure up to meet their universal access claims.
For premise that are not getting the minimum speeds or the minimum speeds they need, how long before RSP's will be actively marketing the addition of mobile broadband to your network in times to top up the speeds required to give you more consistent and higher bandwidth on your network when you want it and need it?
Talk about business and FTTN before?
WHam.
Morrow is the typical snake oil salesman. He must think that everyone is an absolute mug to buy his lies.
Cannot believe these shysters are still allowed to continue.
Talk about business and FTTN before?
Another victim of fraudband.
Not surprised.
Note: UP TO speeds, and only peak speeds, not minimum speeds and no guarantee or conditions on the retailers who actually sell and deliver the final product will deliver a service that delivers even 25Mbps download speeds as a minimum, with the latency, consistency and reliability you or your household or business requires, during critical times that you need to use your broadband.
Kept on a just over ADSL2+ network for how many years?
Any news on when the optical fill in will start :)
All that copper will be replaced with new optical sometime soon?
Any policy news on real network upgrades?
Another victim of fraudband.
and What do NBN do about it?
An NBN spokesman said its on-site testing on August 31 found there was no fault with the NBN network.
Sorry we're just the wholesaler, nothing wrong here!
*wipes hands with it*
Sorry we're just the wholesaler, nothing wrong here!
*wipes hands with it*
NBNco has become the arrogant corporation.
No ethics no responsibility.
The Coalition/LNP has made NBNco an odious entity.
It really doesn't matter ATM. The residential market demands least cost products.
NBN MK1 got this wrong.
I must disagree, if it's $1600 per premise for FTTN vs an investment of $2900 per premise for FTTH, you will still earn a strong 2 or 3% p/a return (at least) on the latter! :)
2% annual return is $58 annual profit from the $2900 investment, after costs, and that seems more than doable.
As a wholesaler to make $58 profit per customer per annum, when they are charging at least $35 per customer per month to RSPs... seems MORE than doable. :) Hell they could even make 4% or 5% on their FTTH investments!?
Do MTM costs even factor in costs of repairing old copper and old HFC?
For the costs as now vs 2020 MrMac is the better source as he is the one that pointed that out, as for the Telstra payments, in some of the leaked documents where technology costs are compared there's a note that OpEx is lower due to less payments being made with the longer time to completion
All CPP should be inclusive of lease payments. Unfortunately NBNCo excluded the detail from the Corp Plan 2017, so we can't confirm if it remains the same as Corp Plan 2016 where the lease across fixed line was $700 and wireless was $800.
Edit: To be clear of CPP in Corp Plan 2017
FTTP BF $4,400
FTTP GF $2,100
FTTN $2,300
HFC $2,300
WF $4,600
From a financial accounting perspective, all lease payments are categorised in the OPEX (as they should be). So when reviewing the financial report due this month, and also the HFC leak, they are included in the OPEX fee. So in case of Optus HFC overbuild, later delivery means lower OPEX over the same time period.
Additional info for interest:
As you stated, CPP is based on weighted average over the length of the build to 2021, so I don't believe we can do a fair comparison between FTTP BF, which is finished and actuals @ $4400, to FTTN being a forecast in mass @ $2300.
FTTP GF is currently running @ $2600 actuals, but forecasted average to be $2100, suggesting an ongoing efficiency of $700+ (once you factor existing higher average). These same efficiency's are NOT included in the FTTP BF CPP, but if they were then you would also expected them to be significantly lower. I also believe it hasn't had a significant impact reduction of actuals based on excluding large MDU's from FTTP rollout with FTTB for example.
CPP also excludes common CAPEX, such as IT systems and transit network. We know that the requirement to include FTTN/HFC/FTTB has blown out the IT Systems spend by $1b+. I'm not aware of cost impact for transit network to FTTN as I have looked in detail at it vs FTTP. Also excludes any net losses, so where FTTN take up is slower than FTTP and OPEX costs are higher, this is not included either. CPP also excludes initial trial arrangements, but we don't know the exact scope. The formal trials were of smaller scope under FTTP than the "trials" of FTTN, for which we also don't know the exact cost.
CPP also excludes any costs incurred post deployment, eg. capacity. (edited for emphasis). It certainly excludes any costs for upgrades such as G.Fast, additional transit capacity, additional nodes in the future etc.
To top it all off, without the clear breakdown we can not be certain on what costs are included under which categorisation. We can assume that all activation costs should be capitalized and included in the CPP, but we also know that the activation process and way of billing would be very different between FTTP and FTTN.
TL;DR Take CPP and comparison of them with a large dose of cynicism. It's political rather than good financials.
NBNco has become the arrogant corporation.
No ethics no responsibility.
and no plan, just like their "masters".
They both claim to have a plan, but cannot describe it in detail and all those "plans" seem to involve is cutting costs NOW and disregarding the extra spending that will need to be done in the future as a result of the cost cuts
The Coalition/LNP has made NBNco an odious entity.
just like themselves, parent/child
All CPP should be inclusive of lease payments.
I am curious about not just the lease payments, but have nbn� also placed the costs for, the backhaul links, the FANs, the POIs etc, in other words all the initial build to establish "The NBN" onto the FTTH part and not factored any of that onto the FTTN/HFC parts of the build.
I wonder if there is any way to actually know
The residential market demands least cost products.
...measured over the lifetime of the products?
Do MTM costs even factor in costs of repairing old copper and old HFC?
The old Strategic Review 2013 did hint at the Operating Expenditure in the bn's for the different HFC, copper network scenarios on page 17.
Any really new expected 2020 numbers in public after the copper fill in policy?
I wonder if there is any way to actually know
NBN state that cost of transit networks is excluded from CPP, so that should include up to the FAN's. But they also state the below
While the initial footprint is largely complete, the shift to the multi-technology mix presents new footprint, capability and capacity requirements and therefore the transit program continues to adapt its plan to support each technology.
So again, we don't know the exact cost increase that FTTN/HFC has generated in this area
Do MTM costs even factor in costs of repairing old copper and old HFC?
They are not included in CPP, but should be included in future OPEX and Common CAPEX
Edit: Actually will slightly recant that. Costs incurred during deployment (such as HFC repairs/replacements) should be included in CPP. Cost incurred post deployment, eg. ongoing repairs & maintenance, would not be included in CPP.
But again, we don't know if NBNCo are including costs such as replacement of copper/removal of bridge taps in activation's. I assume once your service is activated, then any ongoing costs including rectification of said activation, would not be included in CPP
But again, we don't know if NBNCo are including costs such as replacement of copper/removal of bridge taps in activation's. I assume once your service is activated, then any ongoing costs including rectification of said activation, would not be included in CPP
So HFC design and fill in costs or copper nodes in the same area for new builds, later sub divisions?
The obvious self-interest aside, Netflix's talk of abolishing monthly caps seems laughable in Australia considering that we've been plagued by measly download limits from the very beginning of consumer broadband � particularly at the hands of Telstra � while most Americans have enjoyed unlimited downloads from day one
There are no speed guarantees for end users on the NBN, so it remains to be seen what some fibre to the node customers will get stuck with.
�At the absolute best, that�s not very often, it gets to 40 but it can be down around five,� Mr Chambers said. �It�s just a complete disaster.�
But NBN said it had investigated and found no faults on its infrastructure and any problems needed to be �resolved with his provider.
Mr Chambers said he had no issue with his provider iinet, which had logged 200 ��touches� trying to help increase the speeds and ensure consistency, but he believed the issue was NBN fibre-to-the-node piggy-backing off old copper networks and the local telecommunications pit.
�It�s like putting a Formula 1 engine in a 1970s Torana and expecting fantastic results,� he said.
�When I first moved I couldn�t get a connection at all. With the (lower plans) it would drop out altogether and I was forced to go to the top.
�Everyone is on ADSL and they�re scared to change �because they�ve been fighting for years to get ADSL working and you can�t get back on (if you switch to NBN).
�I�d be better off paying $50 a month for 12Mbps than $130 a month for the NBN, at least it would be consistent.�
I'm going to put another tin foil hat on today and make a prediction as bold as Morrows Australia leading the world when it comes to providing Universal Broadband Access by 2020.
At some stage, NBNCo or the LNP, will start to attribute low take of higher speed tiers and low or delayed MTM activation rates on the media, social media and online forums for this issue, for discussing, publicising and reporting the MTM speed and other performance issues, and disruption and risks during activation/migrations.
Maybe at some stage the LNP will actually use the failed NBN/MTM wholesale/retail model as the justification for creating geographic MTM vertically integrated monopolies and claim they have solved the blame game and found a better model.
Not much point in having a choice of retail RSP's when they are all serving the same poor quality product.
Adam Turner's warnings you can expect to pay more under the NBN than with your ADSL, will do wonders for the NBN activation rates.
These days many Australian Internet Service Providers are offering cheap 1TB and unlimited plans, but only due to the fierce competition to win over customers before the NBN reaches them. ISPs are playing a high stakes game of musical chairs, knowing that when the NBN reaches your door and the music stops you'll probably stick with your existing provider. Once you get off DSL, expect to pay more in order to stay on the same deal via the NBN.
In my opinion ALL countries already have universal broadband.
It's called geostationary satellite internet. The NBN includes a geostationary satellite internet component. So in that sense it isn't providing us anything new.
We have had universal broadband since at least the year 2000.
ISPs are playing a high stakes game of musical chairs, knowing that when the NBN reaches your door and the music stops you'll probably stick with your existing provider. Once you get off DSL, expect to pay more in order to stay on the same deal via the NBN.
Adam doesn't provide us with any evidence for his claims but we will see.
I personally think that network neutrality is a very important thing for a free and open internet.
We have had universal broadband since at least the year 2000.
There is no worldwide agreement on what universal broadband is.
Anyone claiming that they will be Numero Uno in something that is neither agreed on, or clearly defined, is taking a material reputational and professional risk.
Particularly for something as fast evolving as broadband and the digital evolution.
Shh don't mention upload.
The NBN model basing itself on the UK model of le`fail uploads.
In my opinion ALL countries already have universal broadband.
In some countries it is illegal to use satellite dishes.
How would you be sure that In all countries where it is legal to use satellite dishes, that broadband internet is available (even at a high price)?
Particularly for something as fast evolving as broadband and the digital evolution.
Particularly when you are not rolling out the fastest/ best technology available and others around the world are.
At some stage, NBNCo or the LNP, will start to attribute low take of higher speed tiers ... on the media, social media and online forums for this issue, for discussing, publicising and reporting the MTM speed and other performance issues, and disruption and risks during activation/migrations.
Got it! I was looking for an attribute to instead of an attribute on. Nice Kevin Rudd style sentence, he sure is a wordsmith cramming two paragraphs of information into one sentence. ;) :)
Nice Kevin Rudd style sentence
Damn. My Ghost writer has been outed! :)
Node* :)
Sssh, don't tell anyone that. It is the next generation faster, cheaper, better national telecommunications network that is future proof and offers exceptional performance, remember. :)
Damn. My Ghost writer has been outed! :)
:D :)
and What do NBN do about it?
An NBN spokesman said its on-site testing on August 31 found there was no fault with the NBN network.
Sorry we're just the wholesaler, nothing wrong here!
*wipes hands with it*
At least when you were on ADSL (which many, many people still are) you could initially establish through your provider that he fault did not lie on your side of the connection to your house and your provider could log a fault with Telstra to look into the problem.
As you say Rocky with this mess that is MTM nbn�, as the wholesaler, have full authorisation to effectively do nothing. DISGRACEFUL Malcolm, just disgraceful!
In some countries it is illegal to use satellite dishes.
They could just MacGyver a coat hanger though couldn't they?
NBN state that cost of transit networks is excluded from CPP, so that should include up to the FAN's. But they also state the below
While the initial footprint is largely complete, the shift to the multi-technology mix presents new footprint, capability and capacity requirements and therefore the transit program continues to adapt its plan to support each technology.
I take it this means the HFC CMTS sites are not always co-located with the originally planned FAN sites?
I take it this means the HFC CMTS sites are not always co-located with the originally planned FAN sites?
problem is who will know outside nbn�?
they have a record of saying one thing in an answer and then months later announce the very thing they denied.
Be this FTTN or HFC overbuild or anything else.
I am afraid I also have doubts about their claims of no "FAN back" costs being incorporated into FTTP per premises costs.
With the transparent nature of their books no real scrutiny can be done. We rely on "final presented numbers" and even then it seems that anomalies are picked up which makes me doubt the rest of their data and claims
It seems that combining old and new tech is something the LNP have fallen in love with...
http://abc.net.au/news/2016-
The money shot is...
"So the plan is for us to buy a nuclear submarine design and then convert it to a piston submarine," he said.
"Now no-one has ever done that in the world and in fact when I talk to submarine experts they say it is so ridiculous, so we're being conned."
It seems that going against technical advice is what their superpower skill is!
It seems that combining old and new tech is something the LNP have fallen in love with...
http://abc.net.au/news/2016
Mr Smith said if the Government's real agenda was to use nuclear technology, it should be up front about it.
So what's the Government's real agenda with their NBN/MTM child?
South Australia Premier Jay Weatherill hit out at Mr Smith on Twitter, calling the businessman a "sad old man".
"Looked like it [the advert] was scribbled on the back of a serviette after a long lunch � #sadoldmen," Mr Weatherill tweeted.
A back of the serviette play from the NBN dissing handbook.
A group of prominent businessmen, including Dick Smith and John Singleton, have taken out a full-page ad in The Australian newspaper, suggesting the public is being conned over the submarine project.
How long before a prominent group of businessmen take out a full-page ad in The Australian, suggesting the public is being conned over the NBN/MTM Project?
Any such group won't include Malone or Hackett.
It is much better to equip them with a cheaper diesel engine, and then upgrade them to nuclear in the future when they really need the extra power and endurance. </s>
Faster, cheaper subs sooner.
It is much better to equip them with a cheaper diesel engine, and then upgrade them to nuclear in the future when they really need the extra power and endurance. </s>
Faster, cheaper subs sooner.
plus much less room for crew, equipment and weapons = more cost savings
plus much less room for crew, equipment and weapons = more cost savings
They could also remote pilot them over the FTTN network. Unless it rains or during peak usage times.
"So the plan is for us to buy a nuclear submarine design and then convert it to a piston submarine," he said.
At the 2013 election Libs showed how enthusiastic they are for recycling.
- Buying decades old junk copper and reusing it.
- And anyone remember their plan to buy leaky old boats off people-smugglers?
They are more in love with recycling than the Greens.
I predicted that the fixed wireless network was always underestimated.
NBN MK2 have increased it by 25%, I still expect that figure to increase.
It's got nothing to do with FTTP v's MTM, just economics, practicalities and technology advancements in general.
Absolute rubbish. It was never 'underestimated'. It was very much a calculated quantity designed to serve a particular purpose of economics of scale verses performance. Under NBNv1, that is.
Under the MTM, its purely over used to try and justify poor decisions of the current governments poor policy on UN-communications.
My personal opinion is that the NBN should never have been started. I've made that known here and elsewhere.
And with this statement you also make it known that your comments are biased to this tone.
But blind Fredy could see that. If one is that short sighted or unable to see that the NBN was, is, and has always been a required infrastructure build, then one also does not possess the sense it takes to know WHICH form the NBN is best implemented in.
And with this statement you also make it known that your comments are biased to this tone.
As always.
A likely Telstra shareholder representing Sydney? has decreed that
Not at all; that was apparently co-authored by young Anna, who along with her former associate Mitch has been trolling for News Corp giving us the benefit of her NBN/MTM inexperience for a while now.
It may be too much to expect MSM reporters to comprehend technical issues, but there should be at least some minimal level of industry understanding, and objectivity, if they are going to be portentously introduced as 'Communications Writers'.
They could also remote pilot them over the FTTN network. Unless it rains or during peak usage times.
Perhaps they can pay a levy to cross-subsidize CVC charges while remote piloting on NBN FTTN. With that $50 billion they got.
It seems that going against technical advice is what their superpower skill is!
I think they are more concerned with appeasing doners...
They would do whatever the technical advice said if it came from people who gave them lots of money.
Faster, cheaper subs sooner.
Now why does that sound so familiar?
Oh, I know, it's exactly the same old line of tarradiddle that was 'created' to deny the bleedin' obvious (FTTP the only fit spec from now right up to the end of the century) while trying to assert the impossible (the MTM will be Faster!, Cheaper! and Sooner!).
So the same thinking, from the same people, who have committed RAN sailors to using obsolete diesel subs against every potential foe, who by then will be entirely equipped with nuclear powered boats.
And exactly as with the MTM, don't even think of asking about the (real) cost of such political idiocy.
Faster, cheaper subs sooner.
They offered the public a "Pup" and they tumbled into it.
News Corp and Telstra have slayed em.
At least when you were on ADSL (which many, many people still are) you could initially establish through your provider that he fault did not lie on your side of the connection to your house and your provider could log a fault with Telstra to look into the problem.
As you say Rocky with this mess that is MTM nbn�, as the wholesaler, have full authorisation to effectively do nothing. DISGRACEFUL Malcolm, just disgraceful!
It won't be long until users frustrations are taken out on the big green targets. Just watch it.
What a farce, I did dare MTMco to hurry up and roll out more nodes. It just self exposes how crap it really is. If they don't, well there goes the revenue. If they do, more anger.
Damn if you do, damn if you don't. I have the popcorn ready. Its sad really our tax payer dollars will pay for this crap. But to me the 56 billion dollars is gone, its a white elephant write off.
If Bill morrows or Malcolm thinks the younger generation will swallow his bullshit, then his really mistaken. We will remember this farce for our lifetime and the LNP will pay in each and every election in the future. Sure you got away in 2013, 2016. When the old flaps that don't understand technology and networks and die off, the young ones will remember. No LNP votes for me, state, local or federal ever again.
So the LNP/MTMco better hurry up and at least satisfy the "Sooner" requirement.
We will remember this farce for our lifetime and the LNP will pay in each and every election in the future.
Please do. Some of us, older types, have spent a lifetime helping to build all of this cool computer stuff we now enjoy and they've gone and purposefully wrecked one of our more important infrastructure projects for this century. Then they justify it all with what are effectively straight out lies. Its incredibly depressing and they're getting away with it. For the time being.
We will remember this farce for our lifetime and the LNP will pay in each and every election in the future
In Europe -Nearly all players consider that FTTH is the end game!
Vodafone Group expands gigabit fibre-to-the-home networks across Europe
Vodafone Group expands gigabit fibre-to-the-home networks across Europe
Wonder what Vodafone execs make of Morrow now?
Some of us, older types, have spent a lifetime helping to build all of this cool computer stuff we now enjoy and they've gone and purposefully wrecked one of our more important infrastructure projects for this century.
All I can say is guys...
read my post
whrl.pl/ReIdPC
See how the Scandinavians do things. How they try to bring society along with these things.
We gotta start referring to the outside world and talk about how things work elsewhere. If we want change.
Change might not happen as fast as we want but you can make change happen. Obama said.
Look at what Sanders got as concessions with Hillary and you will realize we can change things.
The Scandinavians have very entreprenuerial mindsets and technological societies. We all should start researching and learning about them.
That way we don't give up this lifetime work of guys like bassomatic to bad use.
Or even guys like Malone or Hackett. If they still browse these forums I hope they read it too.
Things need to start changing for the better.
In Europe -Nearly all players consider that FTTH is the end game!
They're all very silly wasting all that money. Turnbull & Morrow said no one needs it, copper will do just fine ;-)
And we are sitting at 40th for FTTH global ranking. We ain't going up that chart anytime soon !!! :-((
It's a combination of the following:
Creating a new company from scratch
How does that affect the FTTP rollout cost but not the FTTN one? Nope, fail.
and a GBE at that (meaning higher levels of incompetence).
And becasue it's a GBE it has to be incompetent? Nope, fail.
High labour costs.
Looks at NZ, Singapore. Nope, fail.
Prime contractor model with sub sub sub sub subcontractors
sub sub sub heh? got any proof? Or is this a case of inventing bullcrap to support a spurious argument?
Excessive amounts of red tape.
Again, somehow this magically affects the FTTP rollout but none of the other tech choices??
Geographically large area to cover
Fail. The actual rollouts happen in discrete urban areas. I'll let you in on a little secret. Australia is one of the most highly urbanised countries in the world. Pro tip there for you.
low density population centres.
Again, no different to urban rollouts in the US.
When the old flaps that don't understand technology and networks and die off, the young ones will remember. No LNP votes for me, state, local or federal ever again.
Funny how views formed now could last a lifetime.
Nearly 50 years ago, I formed the same view of the LNP over the Vietnam war and conscription of 20 year olds who did not have a vote at the time, and they still haven't ever received my vote as a result of that.
BTW, it is not just old flaps who dont understand technology and networks, and conversely there are plenty of old flaps who probably know more about technology and networks than a lot of the young flaps on these forums as well.
I would suggest it is not an age thing.
Fairfax's Matthew Knott generously awards Turnbull a 6/10 for the Communications subject on his Year 1 report card today. (See my NBN report card far below)
Hits: The rollout of the NBN has continued to speed up since Mitch Fifield took over from Malcolm Turnbull as Communications Minister. The number of premises able to connect to the NBN more than doubled from 1.2 million to 2.9 million and the number of premises with an active NBN service doubled. The government argued, with much evidence, that NBN Co is running more efficiently than it was under Labor in its early years. Mercifully, the culture wars against the ABC � which ran hot under Tony Abbott � have subsided under Turnbull. No more Q&A boycotts or complaints of leftie lynch mobs. The government gave the ABC a welcome $13.5 million in the May budget. This allowed it to keep investigative journalists employed and run its digital services.
Misses: During the election, the AFP staged dramatic raids of the office of Labor senator Stephen Conroy and the home of a Labor staffer to hunt down the leaker of documents from NBN Co. The AFP ran the operation independently of government but it reflected badly on Turnbull by suggesting he had something to hide and gave a second life to reports of problems with the rollout. It got worse when NBN Chairman Ziggy Switkowski wilfully breached the election caretaker conventions by weighing into public debate.
Verdict, challenges ahead: 6 out of 10. The NBN rollout is moving quickly but the trickiest part is about to ramp up: the controversial fibre-to-the-node (FTTN) rollout using existing copper wires. The government's critics will be quick to seize upon any examples of problems with FTTN, given it is Turnbull's pet technology.
For the NBN, I'd only give Turnbull a 1/10, given the wide range of NBN/MTM problems not mentioned in the Fairfax report card, including:
(a) blowout in costs,
(b) delays with announcing what is going to happen with the Optus HFC footprint and reaching any contractual agreement with Optus on design/build of the Optus HFC part of the HFC
(c.) negative changes to the MTM mix (less HFC/FTTP/FTtB and more FTTN/Satellite)
(d) peak hour congestion
(e) disruptions to phone and broadband service continuity
(f) view that the NBN/MTM in it's current form can no longer make a profit without
(i) a hike in wholesale prices for entry level Tiers, and/or
(ii) RSP's increasing their CVC purchases, and passing the increased cost on to their retail customers
both of which will likely only delay activation rates further, and result in even more people ditching their fixed line for mobile broadband or using other Fixed and Wireless non-NBN supplied Broadband solutions (if available at their premises).
(g) no revision to the 3 year Construction rollout made publicly available
(h) grandiose claims from Morrow on Australia becoming a world leader with the NBN by 2020
(i) NBN RSP's having no NBN Co contractual restrictions, on them marketing NBN plans based on Data usage, hiding the speed tier options, cajoling retail customers onto only the bottom 2 speed tiers, and not offering the 50Mbps download speed tiers.
(j) Optus reportedly forcing some of it's Optus HFC customers off Optus HFC on 90 days notice over a year earlier than what was meant to be an 18 month window to migrate (this may be a positive, but the lack of transparency on it is a negative)
(k) Declaring HFC RFS prematurely, with Telstra not offering NBN HFC yet in declared RFS NBN HFC areas
(l) NBNCo performance at the Senate Estimates
(m) delays in Business Grade Service offerings
(n) giving high priority to underserved areas
(o) Technology Change (deterrant) program failure/success
(p) design of FTTN
Fairfax's Matthew Knott generously awards Turnbull a 6/10 for the Communications subject on his Year 1 report card today
I actually think that's a fair call, so long as you judge Turnbull by the low standards of a politician. They've kept a lid on NBN expectations within the general public pretty well.
If you were Turnbull and knew what you'd done, getting a public 6/10 from the Fairfax media would seem like an excellent result.
They've kept a lid on NBN expectations within the general public pretty well.
That is until last week Morrow
1. Reminded the general public about the cost blowouts and the price tag, by pleading with everyone to forget about the price .
2. Was doing himself, NBNCo and the Federal Government absolutely no favours and massively over promising, and exaggerating on the NBN with the following quote.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2
Mr Morrow said that, when the NBN is completed n 2020, Australia will be a world leader in broadband. "We're making so much momentum and well on track to be the first continent to have a fully connected universal broadband that has 25 megabits a second or better," he argued.
"On the speed, 40 per cent of the nation when we're done will have access to a gigabit per second, and that's better than better than any other nation will be at that year 2020."
The NBN rollout is moving quickly but the trickiest part is about to ramp up: the controversial fibre-to-the-node (FTTN) rollout using existing copper wires. The government's critics will be quick to seize upon any examples of problems with FTTN, given it is Turnbull's pet technology.
To be fair(ish) this reads about right. They've got a fairly ambitious ramp up ahead of them, which the revisions to the Statement of Expectations seem to suggest they're worried about meeting.
They've also got the pressing and monumental task of convincing someone to fund this mess for an eye watering amount of money.
If (when) it all comes crashing down it'll be on Turnbull's head.
by pleading with everyone to forget about the price .
Completely different tune before the election eh -
such as reinstating Labor�s previous fibre-to-the-premise policy � would result in significant writedowns for the $49 billion project.
Bringing fibre much closer to consumers� homes can be more expensive to deploy
�But why would you spend another $400? It would have to be if the demand for speed was greater than what FTTN could provide and people would be willing to pay for that. That�s when you can overcome that $400 cost difference,� Mr Morrow said.
It would have to be if the demand for speed was greater than what FTTN could provide
But how would they really know demand given that it is supply driven market?
I'm not going to pay for more speed when the crappy copper cable is not physically capable of providing that speed and/or the backhaul / CVC is insufficient to keep up the speed.
What do they take us for?
I'm not going to pay for more speed when the crappy copper cable is not physically capable of providing that speed and/or the backhaul / CVC is insufficient to keep up the speed.
What do they take us for?
the overriding problem is that the "crappy copper" can mask poor CVC purchasing decisions by RSPs.
Also given that most RSPs are supplying modems for FTTH/B that show very little data on the connection itself, the RSPs can blame 'crappy copper" for congestion in their own segments, be that lack of CVC or other backhaul
It is amazing to watch some of the RSPs on an almost weekly basis announce capacity upgrades to some POIs, more customers maybe, more use by individual customers maybe or a combination of both probably.
Bur others will just hide behind the old "sorry, that is all your copper can deliver" as you struggle to get a throughput of 12/0.4 on your 25/5 connection, one that you initially signed up to for the "up to 100/40" connection but have since downgraded
- Geographically large area to cover with low density population centres.
FTTP is better than FTTN -precisely- because of this point. FTTN suits high density where copper runs are short.
That's not what we have in Australia.
If (when) it all comes crashing down it'll be on Turnbull's head.
No, when it all comes crashing down (as it is designed to do) they can all shout "LOOK, WE TOLD YOU IT WAS A BAD IDEA! LABORS FAULT!"
A Federal Coalition goal under Abbott was to destroy the reputation of both Labor over the NBN.
With the good showing of Labor in the upper and lower house at the 2016 Federal Election, and the marginal result that a Turnbull led LNP got, it looks like it will be way easier to destroy Malcolm Turnbull's reputation over the NBN than destroy Labor's reputation because of it.
https://delimiter.com.au/201
The committee, or any subcommittee, has the power to call for witnesses to attend hearings and for documents to be produced; to conduct proceedings wherever it deems appropriate; and to sit either in public or in private.
It further has the power to �consider and make use of� the evidence and records of the NBN committee if appointed during a previous Parliament.
What is the point now? We all know that a bunch of nbn� execs just turn up to say "Commercial in Confidence" and "We'll take that on notice".
No justification, no reason, no business case, and in about a year... no money.
What do they take us for?
Australians.
An American who knows best for our country.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét