News & Discussion: National Broadband Network

[monotonehell]

Again I still can't google any actual stoush here. All I can find is the Lib's election campaign making claims, NBNco rejecting them and then the Lib's claiming more things without any evidence. Can you point me to some of this documentation?

type in Tunbull v Mckenna.

Google returned 6 results. I took out the "v" and found the same stuff as I read before. What is it I'm supposed to be looking for?

[Vee]

This report from the Australian Financial Review outlines Telstra's bid to grab a big slice of the pie in rolling out the Coalition's FTTN model and Turnbull's attitude/approach to greater Telstra involvement.

Telstra targets billion-dollar NBN construction deal
AFR

Telstra has built a test site using the Coalition’s preferred national broadband network technology as part of an aggressive strategy to win billions of dollars in construction contracts. The trials involve the construction of a fibre to the node test site by Telstra using equipment from Alcatel-Lucent.

The trials began in early September, just days after the Coalition’s federal election victory. Industry experts believe Telstra stands to win construction contracts worth between $5 billion and $6 billion if the Coalition agrees to let it build the NBN across Australia.

The entire board of NBN Co has offered to resign amid suggestions the new Coalition government does not have faith in them.

The trial represents Telstra’s bid to get back into the NBN construction game after it was dumped from the ­initial round of negotiations, partly because it was more expensive than rival bidders. The construction contracts are seen as an important incentive to encourage Telstra to hand over ownership of its copper network.

NBN Co’s $11 billion deal with the telco will need to be renegotiated because of the Coalition’s ­broadband policy.
Telstra missed out on contracts to build Labor’s NBN in 2011 despite its experience in rolling out networks and managing telecommunications ­construction projects.

But Mr Turnbull said in the weeks leading up to the election it was “bizarre” Telstra had been left out of the construction project and it would be good to get the company more involved in the Coalition’s roll-out.

Telstra has been preparing for the fibre to the node trial for several months, according to sources close to the program.
“It’s a node built in a street working in a controlled environment on ­Telstra’s network,” the sources said.

“It’s basically a green box the size of a bar fridge. They’re running various test lengths of copper from the node .?.?. and it’s there to demonstrate capabilities to the interested stakeholders.”

Where Labor’s NBN model aimed to connect fibre-optic cabling to 93 per cent of homes and businesses using a system called fibre to the premises [FTTP], the Coalition favours a cheaper approach.

The new government’s fibre to the node [FTTN] technology runs the fibre-optic cabling to street-side node ­cabinets, which then use Telstra’s ­existing copper phone lines to provide high-speed broadband.

FTTN offers slower internet speeds and is more reliant on Telstra’s copper network but is much faster and cheaper to roll out. However, NBN Co has already signed contracts to connect 1.8 million homes directly.
....

More:
http://www.afr.com/p/australia2-0/telst ... ossqGfpqMP

[monotonehell]

So we are going to allow Telstra to cement its monopoly (so much for letting the market decide), in exchange for giving back our old copper network (which Telstra has allowed to rot in the mean time), and who will end up paying the ongoing copper maintenance and replacement bill? Who will end up paying for the equipment, running costs and maintenance of these barfridge-sized nodes that will need to be installed all over the country?

Instead of infrastructure building this has become an exercise in redirecting taxpayer money to private hands and ensuring all consumers get screwed by a monopoly.

[Waewick]

So we are going to allow Telstra to cement its monopoly (so much for letting the market decide), in exchange for giving back our old copper network (which Telstra has allowed to rot in the mean time), and who will end up paying the ongoing copper maintenance and replacement bill? Who will end up paying for the equipment, running costs and maintenance of these barfridge-sized nodes that will need to be installed all over the country?

Instead of infrastructure building this has become an exercise in redirecting taxpayer money to private hands and ensuring all consumers get screwed by a monopoly.

well that was their policy, if you consume it, you pay for it.

[monotonehell]

So we are going to allow Telstra to cement its monopoly (so much for letting the market decide), in exchange for giving back our old copper network (which Telstra has allowed to rot in the mean time), and who will end up paying the ongoing copper maintenance and replacement bill? Who will end up paying for the equipment, running costs and maintenance of these barfridge-sized nodes that will need to be installed all over the country?

Instead of infrastructure building this has become an exercise in redirecting taxpayer money to private hands and ensuring all consumers get screwed by a monopoly.

well that was their policy, if you consume it, you pay for it.

That's not what this is about. This is about handing over the entire market to Telstra. How is that about a free market and consumers paying market price? They've been blowing hard about small government and free market ideologies, but when it comes down to it they are all about setting up monopolies where consumers either put up and shut up or go without.

Why are you so happy to roll over on this?

[Waewick]

So we are going to allow Telstra to cement its monopoly (so much for letting the market decide), in exchange for giving back our old copper network (which Telstra has allowed to rot in the mean time), and who will end up paying the ongoing copper maintenance and replacement bill? Who will end up paying for the equipment, running costs and maintenance of these barfridge-sized nodes that will need to be installed all over the country?

Instead of infrastructure building this has become an exercise in redirecting taxpayer money to private hands and ensuring all consumers get screwed by a monopoly.

well that was their policy, if you consume it, you pay for it.

That's not what this is about. This is about handing over the entire market to Telstra. How is that about a free market and consumers paying market price? They've been blowing hard about small government and free market ideologies, but when it comes down to it they are all about setting up monopolies where consumers either put up and shut up or go without.

Why are you so happy to roll over on this?

In reality, it has zero impact on me, so I look at it from the POV that it just appears to be another subsidy I'll be paying for someone elses benefit.

something, living in SA, I am getting very sick of.

[monotonehell]

In reality, it has zero impact on me, so I look at it from the POV that it just appears to be another subsidy I'll be paying for someone elses benefit.

something, living in SA, I am getting very sick of.

Apathy, I can respect that.

[Waewick]

In reality, it has zero impact on me, so I look at it from the POV that it just appears to be another subsidy I'll be paying for someone elses benefit.

something, living in SA, I am getting very sick of.

Apathy, I can respect that.

see, I don't mind agreeing on some things

[zippySA]

Telstra missed out on contracts to build Labor’s NBN in 2011 despite its experience in rolling out networks and managing telecommunications ­construction projects.

I cannot see the issue - I would agree with Turnbull - it is "bizarre" that the largest Telco by far in Australia is not involved in construction of the damn thing! Whilst personally I don't use Telstra - it is a simple fact that they are uniquely positioned to deliver large chunks of this roll-out as it is core business for them (or at least used to be) - and the cheaper firms working on Labour's roll-out ain't exactly covered themselves with glory now, have they??

This issue is dead and buried - Libs won, they can roll-out their plan, and those who want to access it, will access it. When the time is right, another Gov will roll-out a different version and we can all debate the merits of that or not when the time comes.

[Archer]

Telstra missed out on contracts to build Labor’s NBN in 2011 despite its experience in rolling out networks and managing telecommunications ­construction projects.

I cannot see the issue - I would agree with Turnbull - it is "bizarre" that the largest Telco by far in Australia is not involved in construction of the damn thing! Whilst personally I don't use Telstra - it is a simple fact that they are uniquely positioned to deliver large chunks of this roll-out as it is core business for them (or at least used to be) - and the cheaper firms working on Labour's roll-out ain't exactly covered themselves with glory now, have they??

This issue is dead and buried - Libs won, they can roll-out their plan, and those who want to access it, will access it. When the time is right, another Gov will roll-out a different version and we can all debate the merits of that or not when the time comes.

Ah, Not Exactly, IIRC, Telstra were excluded because they wanted to play by their own rules instead of working within the framework and time lines provided for the tendering process by NBNCo. NBN Co Basically said if you can't abide by the process rules then you're not welcome. Now the question is if that was the right action to take or if there was something else NBN Co could have done to bring Telstra into line with the requirements of the process so that they could have been utilised. I can see if Telstra was paying hard ball that NBNCo might have thought excluding then might have made the whole process easier. Hindsight shows us the wisdom (or not) of that decision.

The NBN issue being dead and buried, ah no. Seriously, why do so many believe that simply because a party won an election, all of their policies are what people wanted. This rubbish about having a mandate because they won the election really annoys me. I don't recall having the option to specify which policies I wanted implemented when I went to vote, and given that there are a half dozen or more major issues taken to an election, to claim a victory gives you a mandate to implement them all is just stupid.

I think the results of the election show people were simply more sick of the antics of the Labour party and wanted a change in that respect, given that we operate a 2 party preferred system, the Liberals really almost won by default. The fact that there was a bigger overall swing to independents and "Other" Parties than there was to the Liberal party should speak volumes to that in my opinion.

I also believe that a majority of Australian's prefer the FTTH model of the Labour party over the Liberals FTTN solution, which is why there is so much noise being made about it now, post election. I think (and hope) that Malcolm Turnball's cost benefit analysis of all this is going to show up the coalition plan for the short sighted failure it is and they are forced to go FTTH anyway. We can only hope.

In the meantime, the more noise that can be made about this issue the better in my opinion, let the lobbying continue.

[Waewick]

the problem is, so far the Libs have said they aren't deviating from what they were elected to do.

[zippySA]

I agree with you on the mandate concept - utter nonsense and a new, unfortunate angle that is likely to stick around until one party or the other comes up against their own mandate one day and dies a painful death because of it.

I refer to it as dead and buried because of the cost savings that have been banked, and far more compelling than a mandate is the other issue of not breaking promises....that is one that they cannot walk away from at the moment no matter what Turnbull may personally wish to implement. We are getting FTTN and that's the only thing I know for sure (and anyone who has seen my position on NBN, I really don't care as I am not one who needs ultra fast at home).

[monotonehell]

Telstra missed out on contracts to build Labor’s NBN in 2011 despite its experience in rolling out networks and managing telecommunications ­construction projects.

I cannot see the issue - I would agree with Turnbull - it is "bizarre" that the largest Telco by far in Australia is not involved in construction of the damn thing! Whilst personally I don't use Telstra - it is a simple fact that they are uniquely positioned to deliver large chunks of this roll-out as it is core business for them (or at least used to be) - and the cheaper firms working on Labour's roll-out ain't exactly covered themselves with glory now, have they??

It's not bizarre, Telstra went into the tender too cocky and too expensive...

The trial represents Telstra’s bid to get back into the NBN construction game after it was dumped from the ­initial round of negotiations, partly because it was more expensive than rival bidders.

...if NBNco accepted that offer, then the would probably have been accused of wasting money.

This issue is dead and buried - Libs won, they can roll-out their plan, and those who want to access it, will access it. When the time is right, another Gov will roll-out a different version and we can all debate the merits of that or not when the time comes.

The issue is far from dead and buried. We had an election not a referendum.

If you want to view the election as a referendum then...
"Yes, the Coalition won the election. Labor's NBN won it too, with an even larger margin..."
FTTP 55.6% v FTTN 39.9%
http://i.imgur.com/U2lLBcO.png
http://stevej-on-nbn.blogspot.com.au/20 ... te-or.html

I'd rather they did nothing instead of the cash drain and monopoly that FTTN will be.

[Archer]

I agree with you on the mandate concept - utter nonsense and a new, unfortunate angle that is likely to stick around until one party or the other comes up against their own mandate one day and dies a painful death because of it.

I refer to it as dead and buried because of the cost savings that have been banked, and far more compelling than a mandate is the other issue of not breaking promises....that is one that they cannot walk away from at the moment no matter what Turnbull may personally wish to implement. We are getting FTTN and that's the only thing I know for sure (and anyone who has seen my position on NBN, I really don't care as I am not one who needs ultra fast at home).

Which cost savings have been banked? I am yet to be convinced that the overall cost of the FTTN solution will be cheaper than the FTTH solution. As such, I don't believe that there are any savings to be had by going to FTTN. In Fact I join with others in saying that the FTTN solution's overall cost will be greater than FTTH, and then further on top of that, will need to be spent to upgrade it again when it dies a fiery death a few years after completion because it's not up to the task.

[monotonehell]

Which cost savings have been banked? I am yet to be convinced that the overall cost of the FTTN solution will be cheaper than the FTTH solution. As such, I don't believe that there are any savings to be had by going to FTTN. In Fact I join with others in saying that the FTTN solution's overall cost will be greater than FTTH, and then further on top of that, will need to be spent to upgrade it again when it dies a fiery death a few years after completion because it's not up to the task.

FTTN will cost the taxpayer MUCH more (cost of maint on nodes and copper), but will also divert Tax payer revenue to a monopolised private sector.
FTTP was set up to return revenue to the tax payer as well as provide a level playing field for a competitive reseller market.

The Libs need to just stop their lie before it ends up costing us all.