The NBN (National Broadband Network)

[Blue]

"Labor’s plan was done on the back of an envelope."

So was Hewlett Packard's and Compaq Computers, then they combined.

So was the US and Australian Constitutions.


However, the work that went into them all, including the NBN, by people with detailed knowledge and expertise moving the "envelope" to reality was massive.

Yeah different is HP and Compaq had some pretty bloody intelligent people coming up with very implementable ideas and nothing went into production without a business case that would get ripped to pieces by committee after committee made up commercial people.

Lots of evidence that Rudd and Conroy went completely against any sane advice for absolutely no reasons other than political ones.

 

[Blue]

Let's say Turnbull is right, and its an $18bn difference overall if we started today. In the course of 20 years, that's less than a billion dollars a year to put ourselves at the top of the tree and stay there.
I think there is going to need to be a change in expectations for the rural sector. I've lived there, and sorry but you give up your access to certain services when you accept the fresh air and open spaces. I'd find it hard to go back, but as I get older I understand the limits of my mortal existence, so I could put up with that.

Yes but what is this tree? Up until now it's this fictitious thing that's going to be so great to have. We need to be on the lower branches, with the potential to climb. This simply does not call for fiber up my and your crack.

Look I am not disputing the need for better infrastructure. I for on can do with it in my business for sure.

But I don't need a gold plated, virtual blowjob giving, Moet and Chandon dripping shiny blingy glassy pipe thing. Very, very, very few of us will need this coming into our homes for a very long time. Businesses, hospitals and the like. Now that is a different story.

Please don't counter me with the build it and they will come bullshit argument. Plan scalable infrastructure through using the right experts. We don't need to be the great inventors. The size of the continent and out of whack size of the economy makes the thing complex.

It will be fine everyone, it really will.

We need better roads and trains in the short to medium term to increase productivity. It's about priorities (unfortunately the politics will kill this very simple and obvious logic like it has been since forever.)

I'm in a fucking bad mood today because the link to my Canadian server is too bloody slow Fiber under the sea! More fiber under the sea I say.

Anyway, this argument is definitely much better had over beer and steak.

 

[boyo]

I receive my internet via ADSL (which uses Telstra's copper).

I usually have to re-sync (turning it off and then on) my modem several times a day.

This indicates one or more faults with the Telstra copper.

Guess what? - they don't have to repair or replace it because my voice service (on the same Telstra copper) is serviceable.

This is the same Telstra copper that MT has ordered NBNCo to use for FTTN.

 

[boyo]

paying for your own fibre being laid from the node.

"paying for your own fibre being laid from the node."


So what's your position when the copper finally carks it? Does the household pay for its replacement? Will they replace copper with copper or fibre?

Once you engage your intellect and think these through, it becomes obvious that replacing the dead copper with even more copper on a unit by unit basis will be massively more expensive than doing the lot at once, up front. And as the major cost of running the last mile is the labour component, then why not run fibre as it costs approx the same as copper.



So thinking long term, doing it ALL up front, and fibre right to the premises is cheaper.

 

[fatprop]

"paying for your own fibre being laid from the node."


So what's your position when the copper finally carks it? Does the household pay for its replacement? Will they replace copper with copper or fibre?

Once you engage your intellect and think these through, it becomes obvious that replacing the dead copper with even more copper on a unit by unit basis will be massively more expensive than doing the lot at once, up front. And as the major cost of running the last mile is the labour component, then why not run fibre as it costs approx the same as copper.



So thinking long term, doing it ALL up front, and fibre right to the premises is cheaper.

When the copper is broken I expect to see the upgrade, but in a slower ad-hoc, more lets put off the cost as long as possible kind of way

 

[boyo]

We need better roads and trains in the short to medium term to increase productivity. It's about priorities (unfortunately the politics will kill this very simple and obvious logic like it has been since forever.)

According to the most recent and comprehensive study to date (Chalmers University, Ericcson, and Arthur D Little Foundation), done over a 3 year period across 33 OECD countries:

1. Doubling the broadband speed for an economy increases GDP by 0.3 percent. The 2014 GDP for Australia is estimated at USD$1.525 trillion. That is US$4.75 Billion/year in increased revenue as a base.

2. Additional doublings of speed can yield growth in excess of 0.3 percent. So double again COULD be as much as US$9.5 Billion/year.

3. The speed in Australia today is (on average) a little less than 6Mbps...this means that the speeds would be doubled 3 times with a huge amount of headroom.

So, the additional benefits of FTTP will almost certainly be many times the capital expenditure (capex) and operating expenditure (opex) combined.

 

[Blue]

Double the speed where?

To every house in every nook and cranny of the country? Or the backbone? throughput from node to node or download speed?

Measured where and normalised accross the sample how? Accounting for differences in the infrastructures of these 33 countries how?

How advanced are these 33 economies to leverage the increase? I bet you it varied like night and day.

Stats pulled out of context for a purpose always sound great.

In principle the report sounds bloody fantastic but it still does NOT mean we need the Rolls Royce of all Rolls Royces.

Let's double the speed wit room to spare. Sounds good to me. Let's build an infrastructure that allows us to hook fiber into business where it makes sense in the short term, lay fiber in new developments, replace the old copper with Fiber when needed, scale up the backbone, increasing peering speeds when needed.

Planned, costed, justified, sensible.

 

[Pfitzy]

There is a new development just across the creek from me. If you bought the right house, you'll have NBN. The house next door might not.

What is REALLY interesting is the house without the option might actually sit between the other and the nearest conduit.

 

[Blue]

There is a new development just across the creek from me. If you bought the right house, you'll have NBN. The house next door might not.

What is REALLY interesting is the house without the option might actually sit between the other and the nearest conduit.

Someone needs to be kicked in the balls for that sort of planning.

 

[boyo]

Yeah different is HP and Compaq had some pretty bloody intelligent people coming up with very implementable ideas and nothing went into production without a business case that would get ripped to pieces by committee after committee made up commercial people.

Lots of evidence that Rudd and Conroy went completely against any sane advice for absolutely no reasons other than political ones.

The decision to act was on the back of an envelope. But the economic and technical arguments for FTTH have been around a long time before that point. And many studies were done after that point also. The decision to act was a quick one. But the action taken was based on decades of information from both here and abroad.

 

[boyo]

The boost to business has been measured (by IBM) at $1 trillion over the next few decades while last year a Deloitte study stated that the digital economy will increase from $50bn to $70bn per year in the next five years due to expectations from the NBN. Also a Nielsen study found that 93 per cent "of Australian businesses believe that participation in the digital economy is important to their on-going business strategy" and 75 per cent said "National broadband infrastructure will increase their ability to engage in the digital economy."


Meanwhile the OECD (and others) believe that the NBN will increase GDP by at least one per cent ($15bn per year). That's before cost savings and revenue from the system itself. As such the NBN would cover the cost of capital in just two years.

 

[I like to watch]

I read another study where they estimated that GDP would increase by 0.3 of 1%.
Bearing in mind that is GDP not Gov revenue.

 

[Blue]

All completely valid points. No question.

But we do not need a diamond studded rocketship.

Nobody disputes the need for an NBN. What is being questioned and rightly so is the strategy and the solution.

There is no need to cross subsidise fiber all over the show.

PS no offence Boyo but "studies" done by technology companies like IBM and Erikson and auditors are only designed to get governments too increase capex which is what these companies need to survive. They have too much vested interest to be taken as gospel. IBM is particularly good at his.

 

[boyo]

GDP may not be Gov revenue directly, but it's often company revenue (which usually increases tax revenue), and it often increases employment (which increases tax revenue).

 

[boyo]

Extremely short-sighted.

No long-term vision.

No vision beyond the electoral cycle.


Government low-balling us on second-rate NBN
http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/...ing-us-on-secondrate-nbn-20140829-109vvg.html
Exactly.

 

[boyo]

Do what I say, not do what I do:-

Ultra-fast deal for all federal MPs
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-deal-for-all-federal-mps-20130219-2epm3.html

 

[Pfitzy]

I've tweeted Tone and Mal about it. let's see what they come back with. Its only been about 6 hours.

 

[boyo]

Don't hold your breath.

 

[boyo]

MT condemns Australia to FTTN/Mtm, yet he puts his money in a company that's rolling out FTTP in France.

Another example of "Do what I say, not do what I do".

Meanwhile, Australia languishes near the bottom of the OECD ladder for broadband quality.

FttP – Rest of the world is wrong but Australia is right?

http://www.buddeblog.com.au/frompaulsdesk/fttp-rest-world-wrong-australia-right/

 

[Blue]

A moot point. France's infrastructure is way ahead of Australia's in terms of fiber and cabling in the ground. They also embraced wireless in their rural areas many many years ago because they figured out they can't drop cable anywhere because of wait for it, cost. France Telecom saw the wireless opportunity before most and developed their own technology which they have sold into many African countries for instance.

It also helps that they have a slightly bigger population and more people in urban environments than we have people full stop. There it is again. That dreaded economies of scale thing. Little fucker just won't go away no matter how you shake it. Put the fiber where you can justify its cost and that happens to be a lot of places in France and the rest of the Euro zone.

Comparing us to France or any other European country is either naive, ill informed, stupid or all of the above.

Buddleblog Now there's some gospel for you.

Sometimes I regret we have the Interweb. Every buddling fool can have a blog. It's not always a good thing. Some people's opinions are best left broadcasted.

Buddle buddle.