Nbn Change.org Petition?

[Rhys9]

Hi Guys & Girls

I've had lots of discussion with people regarding the NBN debate, and i for one think that Labor's policy(not saying i like labor at all!!!) is good for the country not just the people for a number of reasons.

So if you agree please read and sign the petition! And bring on the comments/discussion!!

Please join this campaign: http://www.change.org/en-AU/petitions/liberal-party-of-australia-continue-with-a-fttp-national-broadband-network-if-elected-to-government-2?utm_campaign=mailto_link&utm_medium=email&utm_source=share_petition

[R31Nismoid]

The NBN is the biggest waste of Tax Payer dollars in a long, long time.

I said it would cost near on double when it was announced years ago, people said I was full of it - sure enough, looks what's happened.

Both Govt's have it wrong.

[Rhys9]

You don't think that infrastructure for the future is important??

And doing it now with the better technology is worth it?

Rhys

[Cowboy1600]

The NBN is the biggest waste of Tax Payer dollars in a long, long time.

I said it would cost near on double when it was announced years ago, people said I was full of it - sure enough, looks what's happened.

Both Govt's have it wrong.

Yet more total bullshit.

The bloody thing is going to provide a ROI FFS. How is that a waste? Our copper network is f**ked. That's all there is to it. It has to be replaced and fiber is the best thing to do it with.

It's not going to cost double. The Noalition would like you to believe it is, but they are arguing against facts using bullshit.

[Mayuri Krab]

Don't care about NBN neither way, the place I just moved into aren't even on the planning area for it.

Enjoying my shitty 1.5mbps ADSL...

I support who ever is not going through with that gay ass internet filter shit, (is that shit still going on? Haven't kept up to date with all the lastest net news).

Edited April 12, 2013 by Mayuri Krab

[Cowboy1600]

The filter died ages ago.

[iamhe77]

Yet more total bullshit.

The bloody thing is going to provide a ROI FFS. How is that a waste? Our copper network is f**ked. That's all there is to it. It has to be replaced and fiber is the best thing to do it with.

It's not going to cost double. The Noalition would like you to believe it is, but they are arguing against facts using bullshit.

Agree, although it will probably end up costing more than double just in wages due to how long it take

[Cowboy1600]

They've factored in the wages into the build time. It's going to be more or less complete within the time frame they said. Maybe it won't be 100%, but it'll be close. NBN Co are passing thousands of homes per day. The Noalition crap on about it being a year behind but that's simplifying a complex scenario. The main reason it's behind is because the Telstra deal and ACCC tick took the best part of a year longer than expected. The NBN is now in ramp up and will be passing (if it's not already) 6000 homes a day.

On top of that, wages aren't the big cost. The big cost is buying pit access ($11B) and the hardware required to do it.

What's funny about this is the same people I speak to who piss and moan about the government assing about instead of getting shit done are the same people crying that the government should do a shitty half assed FTTN rather than just doing it properly the first time.

$3B a year for the next 15 years to construct while at the same time being offset by increasing revenues (to the point where revenue will be larger than the cost) is simply f**k all in the grand scheme of things. Australia can afford it and afford it easily.

[*LOACH*]

The NBN is the biggest waste of Tax Payer dollars in a long, long time.

I said it would cost near on double when it was announced years ago, people said I was full of it - sure enough, looks what's happened.

Both Govt's have it wrong.

Yeah the Coalitions idea of buying back the copper network, which was originally owned by the taxpayer and sold off as part of privatisation is a much better idea. It is a little inefficient though, a much better idea is if the libs hire the Packers of the world Limo's which they can have driven past our houses and we just chuck our cash in through the open sunroof.

[R31Nismoid]

You don't think that infrastructure for the future is important??

And doing it now with the better technology is worth it?

Rhys

Nothing wrong with infrastructure at all. What is wrong is the gross underestimations, the end resulting cost - all for something that could very well be redundant before it's even finished.

Yet more total bullshit.

The bloody thing is going to provide a ROI FFS. How is that a waste? Our copper network is f**ked. That's all there is to it. It has to be replaced and fiber is the best thing to do it with.

It's not going to cost double. The Noalition would like you to believe it is, but they are arguing against facts using bullshit.

NOTE: I don't believe the Liberal $90 Bil claim yet.

In fact my entire opposition to the entire thing has no politics behind it, so all you Labour people can put it back in your pants - given in my first post I said:

Both Govt's have it wrong.

Yet more total bullshit.

The bloody thing is going to provide a ROI FFS. How is that a waste? Our copper network is f**ked. That's all there is to it. It has to be replaced and fiber is the best thing to do it with.

It's not going to cost double. The Noalition would like you to believe it is, but they are arguing against facts using bullshit.

Initially it was set to cost what, $30 Bil.

That $30 Bil was based on EVERY household taking up a connection, which from the outset I think most can probably agree is a fairly unlikely scenario.

Estimates always sat around the $60 Bil mark as a more realistic figure.

The Copper network is farked, I totally agree there, and it doesnt come as a surprise at all.

Telstra stopped all the maintenance on it years ago once rumblings of the NBN were starting. Any smart business would've done exactly the same thing given they answer to shareholders now, and not the Govt - and before people jump up/down about privatisation - no Govt can possibly claim to be unaware of that occurring (once privatised and rumblings of their network becoming redundant).

My opposition to it all simply stems:

1. Cost will not be $30 Bil, regardless of what Govt you support.

2. The connections to Overseas are not being touched, this network only benefits (currently) Australia -to- Australia. So when are the O/S connections actually being upgraded, and at what costs is that going to be?

3. Why not invest $30 Bil (or the $60 Bil) into Wireless and other technology? Was it even looked into etc. Given 4G is faster than current ADSL2 for the majority of users - What technology is going to exist in 5 years time? Will FTTN even be viable? Given the trend to mobile useage - the uptake of NBN will also take a hit.

[iamhe77]

Wireless? Reliability has to factor into it surely. Wireless has too much interference (structural and natural) to be reliable enough.

[Leroy Peterson]

good talk by the founder of Internode
http://simonhackett.com/2013/04/09/cd-syd-2013-problem-with-fttn/

[R31Nismoid]

Wireless? Reliability has to factor into it surely. Wireless has too much interference (structural and natural) to be reliable enough.

Reliability sure, all sorts of issues there when it comes to the spectrum etc. Point was more that with such a take-up of wireless data/mobile use - surely both Govts are not expecting 100% take up which the figures are based on.

Given the NBN on paper, is meant to have paid itself back by 2035 or something based on 7%... Again assuming it makes its targets (which wont happen without 100% take up)... What happens if it doesn't? Could it be 2050 before it's paid back? Who foots the bills in the mean time?

Too much unknown here, too much potential for horrific blowout - NBN idea is great in theory, but not being put into practice at all well - by EITHER Govt

[Cowboy1600]

Nothing wrong with infrastructure at all. What is wrong is the gross underestimations, the end resulting cost - all for something that could very well be redundant before it's even finished.

NOTE: I don't believe the Liberal $90 Bil claim yet.

In fact my entire opposition to the entire thing has no politics behind it, so all you Labour people can put it back in your pants - given in my first post I said:

Initially it was set to cost what, $30 Bil.

That $30 Bil was based on EVERY household taking up a connection, which from the outset I think most can probably agree is a fairly unlikely scenario.

Estimates always sat around the $60 Bil mark as a more realistic figure.

The Copper network is farked, I totally agree there, and it doesnt come as a surprise at all.

Telstra stopped all the maintenance on it years ago once rumblings of the NBN were starting. Any smart business would've done exactly the same thing given they answer to shareholders now, and not the Govt - and before people jump up/down about privatisation - no Govt can possibly claim to be unaware of that occurring (once privatised and rumblings of their network becoming redundant).

My opposition to it all simply stems:

1. Cost will not be $30 Bil, regardless of what Govt you support.

2. The connections to Overseas are not being touched, this network only benefits (currently) Australia -to- Australia. So when are the O/S connections actually being upgraded, and at what costs is that going to be?

3. Why not invest $30 Bil (or the $60 Bil) into Wireless and other technology? Was it even looked into etc. Given 4G is faster than current ADSL2 for the majority of users - What technology is going to exist in 5 years time? Will FTTN even be viable? Given the trend to mobile useage - the uptake of NBN will also take a hit.

Well you've demonstrated is you have no idea.

It was originally slated to cost around $40B with $30ish coming from the government, the rest from investors. The government can borrow what they need at very low interest rates (>3%) thanks to a AAA/AAA/AAA credit rating and the fact it's for Capex expenditure.

It's risen to around $43B which is around 5% which, in a project of this scale, is simply f**k all. Even if it ends up costing $60B it'll still be chump change.

On top of that it's an asset which can be sold to recoup most if not all the cost. On top of that it's going to provide a return through subscribers.

That $30B cost was the cost to build, I'm not sure why the subscription rate matters. What that does affect is the revenue. With the deal the government has struck up with Telstra, every household WILL be on it 18 months after it's available, whether they like it or not. The net result will be cheaper telecommunications for the household (it cost $30 just to have a fixed line, before calls or internet, which most housholds still have whereas $60 will get you all local and national calls and 20/20 of 12/1 internet) and revenue for NBN Co.

As for the copper network, it's f**ked beyond your wildest dreams. Maintenance was ceased the day it was privatised, long before the NBN was mentioned. I know this for fact - my father-in-law was one of the people responsible for rolling our ADSL in Australia. He knows better than anyone the state of the copper, and it's rooted.

There is MASSIVE investment going on in undersea cables at the moment - yet more evidence you haven't got a clue about this - http://www.cablemap.info/

Since '07 there's been a 6.4Tb link ti Singapore and a 1.92Tb link to Guam, which is a central hub in the Pacific and links to just about every continent. There's also Telstra Endevour and there's a shit load more bandwidth planned.

Wireless can NEVER match fiber for bandwidth, dollar for dollar, not even close. That said, it IS being looked into. It's being used to cover the 7% of people for whom it simply is not economically feasible to run fiber to. Seriously, suggesting wireless is a competitor for fiber is so phenomenally ignorant.

There is no technology on the horizon which is going to get anywhere near fiber for bandwidth. All research at the moment is going into how to make fiber run faster which is more or less the terminals at either end, not the fiber itself. Physics is the limiting factor here. Data travels at near enough the speed of light, going faster is simply impossible. And 4G is f**ked. Are you on the 4G network? I have been since the Velocity was released which was the first 4G product you could buy and I've gone from ~40Mb down, ~40Mb up to around 6Mb down, 10Mb up on a good day. Wireless suffers congestion and the only way around it is more towers which means more money.

Seriously dude, facts. Look at the facts. You claim to be non-partisan about this but what you've actually demonstrated is ignorance. I am heavily partisan but I've also taken the time to learn about what's on offer and the ALP offering is leagues ahead of the Noalition or any other possibilities.

[Cowboy1600]

Reliability sure, all sorts of issues there when it comes to the spectrum etc. Point was more that with such a take-up of wireless data/mobile use - surely both Govts are not expecting 100% take up which the figures are based on.

Given the NBN on paper, is meant to have paid itself back by 2035 or something based on 7%... Again assuming it makes its targets (which wont happen without 100% take up)... What happens if it doesn't? Could it be 2050 before it's paid back? Who foots the bills in the mean time?

Too much unknown here, too much potential for horrific blowout - NBN idea is great in theory, but not being put into practice at all well - by EITHER Govt

Ye gads! Look overseas for examples of why this idea is folly. The US is case in point. A number of carriers over there tried and failed at using LTE for fixed broadband replacement. It's now been re-repositioned as a complimentary technology, not as a substitute for fixed. I believe there is now only one carrier in the US trying to sell wireless as a fixed replacement. People are NOT giving up fixed broadband for mobile. They are using them together to remain connected everywhere and to have the required bandwidth to do more than browse Facebook.

The NBN will be covering it's operation costs and begin paying back the borrowings with interest in the not too distant future. They actually underestimated the number of people electing for higher tiered connections which means more money to them. As for when it's paid back, who cares? It's like a negatively, and then positively geared investment. Sure, it's costing money now but soon rent will increase to the point it overtakes the expense and it will become "positively geared". On top of that it's a mega asset that can be liquidated in the future if required to more than cover the cost.

There is NOT unknown. We KNOW wireless cannot compete with fiber as a value proposition nor for pure bandwidth.

Facts. Why is it so difficult for people to deal in facts these days?

[R31Nismoid]

Well you've demonstrated is you have no idea.

It was originally slated to cost around $40B with $30ish coming from the government, the rest from investors. The government can borrow what they need at very low interest rates (>3%) thanks to a AAA/AAA/AAA credit rating and the fact it's for Capex expenditure.

It's risen to around $43B which is around 5% which, in a project of this scale, is simply f**k all. Even if it ends up costing $60B it'll still be chump change.

On top of that it's an asset which can be sold to recoup most if not all the cost. On top of that it's going to provide a return through subscribers.

That $30B cost was the cost to build, I'm not sure why the subscription rate matters. What that does affect is the revenue. With the deal the government has struck up with Telstra, every household WILL be on it 18 months after it's available, whether they like it or not. The net result will be cheaper telecommunications for the household (it cost $30 just to have a fixed line, before calls or internet, which most housholds still have whereas $60 will get you all local and national calls and 20/20 of 12/1 internet) and revenue for NBN Co.

As for the copper network, it's f**ked beyond your wildest dreams. Maintenance was ceased the day it was privatised, long before the NBN was mentioned. I know this for fact - my father-in-law was one of the people responsible for rolling our ADSL in Australia. He knows better than anyone the state of the copper, and it's rooted.

There is MASSIVE investment going on in undersea cables at the moment - yet more evidence you haven't got a clue about this - http://www.cablemap.info/

Since '07 there's been a 6.4Tb link ti Singapore and a 1.92Tb link to Guam, which is a central hub in the Pacific and links to just about every continent. There's also Telstra Endevour and there's a shit load more bandwidth planned.

Wireless can NEVER match fiber for bandwidth, dollar for dollar, not even close. That said, it IS being looked into. It's being used to cover the 7% of people for whom it simply is not economically feasible to run fiber to. Seriously, suggesting wireless is a competitor for fiber is so phenomenally ignorant.

There is no technology on the horizon which is going to get anywhere near fiber for bandwidth. All research at the moment is going into how to make fiber run faster which is more or less the terminals at either end, not the fiber itself. Physics is the limiting factor here. Data travels at near enough the speed of light, going faster is simply impossible. And 4G is f**ked. Are you on the 4G network? I have been since the Velocity was released which was the first 4G product you could buy and I've gone from ~40Mb down, ~40Mb up to around 6Mb down, 10Mb up on a good day. Wireless suffers congestion and the only way around it is more towers which means more money.

Seriously dude, facts. Look at the facts. You claim to be non-partisan about this but what you've actually demonstrated is ignorance. I am heavily partisan but I've also taken the time to learn about what's on offer and the ALP offering is leagues ahead of the Noalition or any other possibilities.

5% and it's barely even started, yet somehow it's going to be finished by 30th June 2016 (the NBN website says 2015, but is carefully worded to allow an extra year, funny about that).

It won't be anywhere near that, even if you make it 2017 to account for the delays with the deal/Telstra etc. So since 2009, what has been achieved thus far? Not a hell of a lot and it's at the half way point.

Stuffed beyond MY wildest dreams? I forget, where did I say it was in good order... Oh that's right, i didn't. Nor did I say we should be using it as another option.

Again, read the comments about wireless that I made. General comments and rhetoric, not requiring a wild waffle.

lstra said years ago their home phone rental was on the decline and given everyone goes through them - numbers are falling, I don't even have a home phone, and I barely use a land based connection these days having just given it a bit of thought (depressing in some ways, I've not had any gaming time since Jan). Although I'm using one now for the first time in weeks, yet I'm running a 7 fig business yet have bugger all need for a land based connection.

Whilst NBN Co have said they've allowed in their numbers for less take up based on other options (eg wireless, people using etc). Where are those numbers! Because far as my digging could go a few months back, such numbers have not publicly posted, just stated they were "accounted for" which allows for zero ratification... And when someone wont let things be checked.. Well...

The rent vs expense argument is all well and good, if you know what the final expense & completion is "soon" is just not good enough, nor is an unknown expense. One group says "X", the other says "Y", the question is who to believe? Based on experience thus far, neither as both are blatant liars and presenting incorrect FACTS!

Facts are good, as long as they are real.

[Cowboy1600]

5% and it's barely even started, yet somehow it's going to be finished by 30th June 2016 (the NBN website says 2015, but is carefully worded to allow an extra year, funny about that).

It won't be anywhere near that, even if you make it 2017 to account for the delays with the deal/Telstra etc. So since 2009, what has been achieved thus far? Not a hell of a lot and it's at the half way point.

Stuffed beyond MY wildest dreams? I forget, where did I say it was in good order... Oh that's right, i didn't. Nor did I say we should be using it as another option.

Again, read the comments about wireless that I made. General comments and rhetoric, not requiring a wild waffle.

lstra said years ago their home phone rental was on the decline and given everyone goes through them - numbers are falling, I don't even have a home phone, and I barely use a land based connection these days having just given it a bit of thought (depressing in some ways, I've not had any gaming time since Jan). Although I'm using one now for the first time in weeks, yet I'm running a 7 fig business yet have bugger all need for a land based connection.

Whilst NBN Co have said they've allowed in their numbers for less take up based on other options (eg wireless, people using etc). Where are those numbers! Because far as my digging could go a few months back, such numbers have not publicly posted, just stated they were "accounted for" which allows for zero ratification... And when someone wont let things be checked.. Well...

The rent vs expense argument is all well and good, if you know what the final expense & completion is "soon" is just not good enough, nor is an unknown expense. One group says "X", the other says "Y", the question is who to believe? Based on experience thus far, neither as both are blatant liars and presenting incorrect FACTS!

Facts are good, as long as they are real.

WTF? It's barely started? Are you insane? You run a business yet cannot fathom the task of setting up a company from scratch which has been tasked with rolling out a $50B fiber network across a land mass the size of North America? That's selective (nay, pure ignorance) at best, intentionally misleading at worst. On top of that it took 9+ months longer than planned to nut out a deal with Telstra. ACCC also held up proceedings while they went over the deal. All that's gone now and NBN Co are in "ramp up" and have already exceeded their original "homes per day" target and are hitting over 6,000 homes per day now. Facts.

There are still over 10,000,000 fixed voice service in AUS. Down from ~11.5 a few years ago, but the trend is somewhat steady. With the roll out of the NBN I would expect fixed line subscription to go up again. Without looking into it I would assume that cost is the main factor behind the small decline in fixed line services. After all, $30 just to have the line in is a rort, not to mention the relatively exorbitant call costs (which is a ploy by Telstra to get people OFF their copper network as it's such a shambles). So there's still massive call for fixed phone services.

I don't know what business you're in, but to suggest that we don't need fixed broadband cause you have been able to get by without it is stupid.

On, and 8.2.4 and beyond - Oooh look, more facts! Demand for higher tier speeds is greater but they have left forecasting where it was in the original plan. This is likely so they can be pleasantly surprised by revenue later on down the track, i reckon. It's a inbuilt good news story. The information is out there, you just have to find it (I recommend starting at the NBN Corporate Plan, you know, the one which was updated in August last year).

And what is it with this 2015 end time BS? They are planning on having ~3.5 million homes passed by then. That's not the end of it. They have over 10 million premises to connect. The build will continue until at least 2021. You don't even know the basic facts of the build. Why can't you discuss facts?

Again, what is this unknown expense bullshit. Seriously, NBN Co have stated the cost and so far it's tracking pretty friggin' close to it in the grand scheme of things. I'm sure it will increase over time, but so far there is NOTHING to suggest that it will "blow out" to $60B or anything even approaching that. Facts dude, facts. Use the data available to form your argument, not some bullshit innuendo like the crap that dribbles out of Turnfail and Flabbot and their bunch of merry f**kwits. Mike Quigley is FAR more authoritative on the matters of the NBN than the Noalition. Look what he has had to say on the matter.

[Rhys9]

Wow you guys are polar opposites!!!

Good debate thou!

R31Nismoid: The only part of your argument i really disagree with is your comment about it "could be redundant by the time it's complete" Fiber is a completely different medium to copper and has only been used for communications for 1/3 the time of copper so there is still a long way to go with development. With greatly reduced maintenance cost.

[iseekool]

Politics aside.

Fiber is a far better medium for heavy data traffic and more reliable than wireless. Who ever thinks differently should be shot.

Fiber > Copper > Wireless

I'm sure our links overseas will also get bigger pipes - but that will be for a different project and usually be left till last - from memory I think there was a project a few years ago, where a private company have already (or at least in the process) of upgrading our links to Asia something to the tune of 6 terabits per second.

[R31Nismoid]

Plan does make for good reading. Lots of "expectation, assumptions" and similar words - yet it doesn't tell anyone where those assumptions are coming from, or what they are based upon! Such things are not facts.

A Corp Plan posted online, does not make it fact. They are nothing more than estimations and claims really.

The revised Corp plan says by June 30, 286,000 homes will be connected... Guess we have to wait until after June 30 to see what the actual fact is on that one, given most reports suggest it's going to be missed - yet Mike has said nothing about it yet, and he is in the best position to know, given he is CEO of NBN Co. Doesn't mean what he says is truthful or accurate, or the point he is saying nothing at all.

286,000 home won't be connected, as estimated, makes one wonder about the other estimations.