FTTN-OPEL exhumed under Lib NBN-kill plan

Michael, it is not about ICT landscape, it is all to do with money!
Borrowed money! NBN can always be built, but not by government!
It reminds me of tipping and lotto schemes that people want to sell...why on earth would you sell a scheme to others that makes you money?

If NBN is such a strong commercial prospect in this country, how come none of the major commercial players buit it years ago it's all about money!

The only mugs that are putting up one cent are the tax payers.

With only 16% take up in Tassie, and the chance to send Conroy "the message" at the election.

GAME ON

@Raymond: So far not all ISPs have been greenlighted so the early take up figures are just that. Early. Not an indication of actual take up. A month after the 'first' customer was connected, one ISP CEO said they were about to connect their first and were suprised at all the red tape to get there.

Scrapping the NBN in its current form (You can call anything an NBN, this being version 2 by my count) is short sighted. By saying it's all about the money, you are neglecting all the income the govt will derive back from this. GST, Taxes. Their stake in it. Over the lifetime of the NBN how much would this be? More than 43B. And we would not have to do this in 10 years time, wasting all the work that would be done on FTTN.

A couple of years ago it seemed that Telstra were lobbying heavily to get their FTTN proposal accepted, since that would have allowed them to cut the exchange/node copper links and strand all their competitors.

Apart from that, posters Michael, IO and Justin above have got it right. FTTN is quickly becoming an obsolescent technology and the limitations inherent in it would have been showing up even before the buildout was completed.

It's true that an FTTP NBN will cost more and take longer to build, but with upgrades it should then be viable for several decades.

@Raymond,

Sure it is a lot of money and represents a kind of renationalisation of our communications but at the same time it will become a valuable asset. If I remember correctly Telstra was privatized for 40 billion dollars, why did we sell a scheme that made us money back then? (Due to some shortsightedness and desire to look good on paper)

It's not like the government hasn't built this type of infrastructure before.

Something like NBN would not be built by the private sector because as you said it's about money not service(at least not in this country). Smaller players simply don't have the capital to lay cable like Telstra and Optus. Telstra barely has any incentive to upgrade it's network because it's a virtual monopoly. For years Australians have had their service expectations deliberately lowered.

As for Tasmania it's only the first phase, companies buying bandwidth are already matching their adsl2 plans. Eventually the fibre will replace the fixed line service as well.

@Mick
The concept you are looking for is Natural monopoly.
In australia restrictive abusive monopolies are regulated against and this provides a better marketplace

or would you like to go back to 3GB a month for 100$

@Tacticus
Not sure on your angle mate? No one wants a monopoly in any industry?

My point is that Tel$tra wont build a FTTP network because of the regulations that are put in place to create a fair playing field for everyone. ... basically it makes little sense to spend billions of dollars so your competition can compete on the same level.

As far as im concerned having the NBN manage the FTTP network makes perfect sense. That is, an entity that allows for open access to its network for all ISPs on the same level.

ps - how the fark where you paying $100 a month for 3GB?? ive been dialing onto the Internet for over 10 years now and have never paid anything near that??

@Chris.....

The reason why that wouldnt happen is because its sheer dammed stupidity, the service offer would be terrible, which is why it would be cheaper also.

As for Raymond he has been corrected 6 times so far about his la la land 16% take up rate claim for Tassie, but he never listens and never changes his drum message, but then trolls have no ears to hear with.

Still waiting for your acceptance of the bet challenge you gave me, still waiting for your comments on losing your first bet to, and seeing as you said putting money where your mouth is, your words at the time, it would also appear you are also lacking the balls to stand by your own views, but then as a shill why would you.

BAH mobile not moible, me to keyboard interface still needs more coffee.

Bravo, Mr_Clue ... you sir are a genius!

The money argument is ridiculous IMO. While I supported the Liberals for many years, why were they giving us tax back and selling off government assets when all the money they had could have been spent it on upgrading and creating infrastructure.

Going into debt for infrastructure is not a bad thing. Otherwise people wouldn't buy their own house would they. Going into debt because we keep giving away money to people to waste is a bad thing.

The Libs are still saying no to the structural separation of Telstra? I guess they're still in denial over the fact that the privatisation of Telstra (without separation) was one of the biggest policy blunders of the Howard government (right along with Work Choices), and in their sheer arrogance they simply refuse to own up and do something helpful.

I guess it just goes to show that while humility and the capacity to admit to and remedy past mistakes may be truly admirable qualities in human beings, in the sub-human beast we call the politician they are considered liabilities.

The Liberals can jam this idea where the sun don't shine!

It was a crap proposal when it was thought up and it still is a crap proposal now.

Once again it shows the technical inexperience of the Liberal Party and it also highlights their determination to deliver a lesser quality service to those in regional/rural areas.

At least the Labor Party were about creating an equal and fair access network, whereas the Liberals are up to their old tricks of delivering lower standards to regional/rural areas whilst investing better quality infrastructure to the cities.

How the National Party can sit back and let the Liberal's put forward such a pathetic and second rate idea baffles the mind, for it is the National's constituents that will be worse off under this proposed plan.

I wish the Internet Censorship policy was dead, buried and cremated, as then I could have voted labor.

Now I am stuck with the greens in the senate and libs in the house.

@Raymond, did you stop and then look at what you wrote, the last part makes no sense, if someone cant use it shortly, then dont build it.
And where did you pull the date 2020 from exactly, same place you pulled the 16% tassie take up rate, which was pure spin B/S of the highest order.

And yes you can buld something on an endless credit card if it has income AND expenditure, my household been doing it for years with my mortage/credit card account.

So as per normal, contridiction is your style, hang on, you havn't written any promises down on paper lately have you, maybe on a radio show, could this be another personna to add to you already long forum ID list.

At the risk of upsetting both sides here;
a) its always about the money and what you can do with it; but
b) it is a false distinction to say "we could spend it on communications infrastructure or we can spend it on health".

Given the way we are going demographically with an ageing and very dispersed population I can think of nothing that would benefit our ability to deliver better health outcomes for all than a communicaitons network that would enable remote consultations, diagnosis and even expert guided surgical assistance via HD video to regional hospitals.

If are worried about sky-rocketing costs of health, then think of this as your best bet to cut 'em.

This may come as a shock to certain pontifcating imbeciles, the government in Tasmania is a Labor one! so LOL off!

@#32 good for you Raymond.

Like you, I could desperately try to make some lame excuse and say, but, but but, I meant this or that...

However, no...I'll let you have your 15 minutes, LOL...because, after all this, you finally got something right and I have erred.

That's right the Libs had their hands on power, but then there was a deal done and they missed out (crushing, you I'm sure)!

As such and unlike you who is NOT man enough to admit a slip up, I was wrong and I apologise.

You see Raymond this is what "real people" do when they have been incorrect. Instead of using another name and making up pretend yachts.

However, it still doesn't alter the fact that the Tas Libs support the NBN while federally they do not.

As a fully paid Liberal member, please explain...

# 34 35 well named take your hand off! # 34 what a grovelling piece, get an opinion, then get a life,Imbecile!

@#36, now that we have you out of the way...

Explain why Federal Liberal and Tas Liberal have completely different takes on the NBN (yes, the NBN that will never be built, LOL...)

I'm your avg punter who doesn't want a phone line but wants fast broadband so NBN for me means lower prices and better service, it's great for my work too as I would be able to access work over the VPN like i'm sitting at my desk.

Oh I hope this is an FTTH where I still get to plug in my router which will have a WAN (fiber) port and the Ethernet Switch ports for routing though.
Going to be a pretty expensive router I assume?

Greetings from Tasmania, the NBN Isle! I'm here to report that the 16% takeup figure is not based on reality, but is in fact a figure suggested by the Tasmanian State Govt in their projections for a STAND ALONE Tasmanian Broadband Network.

The actual, real, honest number of households who have had the NBN cable installed is somewhere around 48%. I can't tell you how many have signed up to a service provider as the network is not officially live, but I imagine these figures will continue to grow over the next 6-12 months.

Now, I'd like to share a couple of quotes:

"The National Broadband Network (NBN) has the potential to be the one of the greatest tools for business and the general community throughout Tasmania." (Steve Titmus, Federal Liberal Candidate for Bass (Nth Tas) Nov 2009).

"The Liberals have proposed that proper consideration be given to making changes to the rollout that would ensure that all homes and businesses are provided with a fibre-optic cable “drop”." (Michael Ferguson, State Liberal MP for Bass, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Science and Technology, Jun 2010).

Do not for a second kid yourself that the Liberal party is unanimous in believing the NBN is a bad thing. In fact, the sad fact is they have wedged themselves into a role of opposition for the sake of opposition on this project.

In fact, as shown by the second quote, the State Liberals are so in favour of the NBN, they want to change the laws to make it COMPULSORY for the NBN Co to come and connect a cable to your house. In other words, if the state Liberals have their way, you won't be able to NOT be part of the NBN, even if you don't use it.

HANG ON one flaming minute, Raymond you have the audacity to comment on Warrens post when you were the one spreading the utter rubbish about it earlier, you sir are a complete lying polictical paid troll of the highest order.

Yes Warren did give ammo to a village moron and imbecile.

Refer to #45...

Rest assured Chris that I am in no way politically motivated.

But I do love to play with, big mouthed, empty headed, lying, political stooges.

Again refer #45

Also refer #51...

LOL!!!!!!

@jason L. its hardly a case of the liberals making a plan, its more bringing an old plan back to life as they have no real new policy of their own.
OPEL was a bloody awful plan, and given a new coat of paint and some air in the tyres, still makes it a tarted up sh*theap of a plan.
However all is not lost as maybe they can get $2,000 for the old clunker of an idea of Gillard.

It was a outdated and outmoded plan, what nearly 10 years ago, and it hasnt got any prettier with age.