Politics The NBN vs Abbott's FTTN.

[Wonaeamirri33]

Let me know if anyone wants me to put spoilers in with the articles to make it easier to go through this page, and I'll go back and take care of that.

Basically what we're looking at here, on the available evidence with the NBN, is a project now being undermined which would have delivered bandwidth of 1 Gbps (downstream) and 400 Mbps (upstream) and beyond to all users, representing a dramatic advance in our overall communications infrastructure across the board, through a fibre-optic rollout guaranteed to operate effectively for at least the next five decades, with a cost estimate of approximately $40 billion.

Compared with a project - fibre-to-the-node - currently claimed to cost approximately $29 billion, even on estimates about the necessary number of nodes which have been shown to be highly fallacious, since any sober technical analysis shows that even achieving 25 Mbps through FTTN would require a node every 300-500m down any given street, at the most generous possible estimate.

The estimate of annual maintenance of this FTTN rollout is expected to come out at at least $1 billion a year. Most likely more.

And it's all dependent on a copper infrastructure rapidly deteriorating and in need of imminent replacement.

So an upgrade to the original fibre-to-the-premises (FTTP) rollout taking place through the NBN would have to occur regardless.

And the cost of that upgrade is estimated by many to be double the cost of a straight FTTP rollout.

Andy_Mac

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

Again, some articles explaining the details on this issue, starting with these...

Coalition's NBN pitch rests on a doubtful cost projection

April 11, 2013

Renai LeMay

If the Coalition was accurate in its claim that Labor's existing NBN will cost $94 billion, the case for pursuing Malcolm Turnbull's own $29.5 billion alternative would look a lot more attractive. But so far, the figure doesn't stand up to scrutiny, writes Renai LeMay.

The validity of the Coalition's rival National Broadband Network policy rests upon the accuracy of its controversial and unproven claim that Labor's existing policy will cost up to $60 billion more than current estimates say it will.

When then-prime minister Kevin Rudd first announced the current iteration of Labor's NBN policy in April 2009, he put a nice round cost on the project: $43 billion. It was a figure which Australians could come to grips with - it wasn't too large to fathom (like some Defence contracts) but it wasn't so small that people didn't see it as a realistic cost for such an ambitious infrastructure project.

Although the government at the time didn't conduct a cost-benefit analysis (as shadow communications minister Malcolm Turnbull has been at pains to point out since), testimony which Communications Minister Stephen Conroy gave to Senate Estimates hearings in May that year shows that substantial research went into the development of the policy, including input from Finance, Treasury and Defence, as well as outside industry technical experts and agencies such as the ACCC. The figure wasn't plucked out of thin air.

Consequently, it hasn't been a surprise to many technology industry observers that more detailed financial projections have continued to hover around the $40 billion mark since. NBN Co's first corporate plan, released in December 2010, went into great detail about the project's finances; and it was able to, given that NBN Co had by then signed a number of major contracts with key suppliers. At that stage, NBN Co estimated that it would require peak funding of between $36.5 billion and $44.6 billion to get the NBN finished.

That report was largely verified by consulting firm Greenhill Caliburn, which reported to the Government in February 2011 (PDF) that NBN Co's revenue and cost projections appeared "to be in line with a range of available domestic and international benchmarks" and that its corporate plan provided "a reasonable basis on which to make commercial decisions with respect to NBN Co".

NBN Co's next corporate plan, published in August 2012 (PDF), went into a great deal more detail, but still broadly backed the $40 billion(ish) figure. And one other important factor also remained consistent: NBN Co's projection that it will actually recoup all of the billions of dollars the Government will need to invest in it, as well as making a long-term profit on top of about 7 per cent over 30 years.

Over the NBN's lifetime since April 2009, no substantial body of evidence has emerged to truly challenge these projections. There are outlier commentators who have attempted to discredit NBN Co's modelling. But the supporting evidence so far has substantially backed NBN Co's figures rather than undercut them.

The claim of a potential $60 billion blowout was first aired in October 2012 by shadow treasurer Joe Hockey. At the time, it was largely ignored or even laughed off by many technology industry observers as yet another in a long line of outlandish Coalition claims about the NBN.

However, the Coalition has stuck with the figure over the past six months consistently, despite never having presented a body of evidence to back it. And today, in the wake of the Coalition's own NBN policy launch this week, it survives in the public consciousness almost wholly uncontested.

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4622176.html

Coalition NBN completed ‘six years faster’: False claims from Liberal MP

June 12, 2013

A Queensland Liberal MP who has been described as a “Malcolm Turnbull lieutenant” and a long-time critic of Labor’s popular National Broadband Network policy has written a controversial letter to his constituents making a number of false claims about the project, including the claim that the Coalition’s version could be completed “six years earlier”.

According to the letter seen by Delimiter, Steven Ciobo wrote to constituents in early June this year on the issue. The MP’s electorate of Moncrieff contains areas such as Surfers Paradise and the Gold Coast. “Access to fast broadband is no longer a want — it is rapidly becoming a need for Gold Coast households and businesses,” Ciobo wrote. “The National Broadband Network sounds promising when you read the headlines, however the reality for you is quite different.”

Ciobo told constituents that in their neighbourhood, NBN Co’s rollout website currently showed “no planned rollout”. “This means there will be no NBN or any broadband improvements in your neighbourhood for at least three years,” he wrote.

The Liberal MP added that when Labor first announced the NBN in 2007, it had said the project would be completed in by 2013 at a cost of around $4.7 billion. “Since then, Labor changed the forecast and said it would cost taxpayers $37 billion and be completed by 2021,” Ciobo added. “Now we know it is actually going to cost taxpayers around $94 billion and won’t be completed until 2025.” Ciobo wrote that Labor was “wasting even more taxpayers’ money by building over existing fast broadband networks like cable”, but was leaving many areas of the Gold Coast “without any service at all or with very limited speed”.

Under the Coalition’s rival proposal, Ciobo wrote, areas on the Gold Coast “like your suburb” with “the poorest broadband” would receive priority. “The Coalition plan will see the National Broadband Network completed six years earlier than Labor’s NBN, with monthly prices projected to be 29 percent cheaper, with minimum download speeds of 25Mbps, rising to 50Mbps by 2019,” he wrote. “Importantly, the Coalition’s plan will save taxpayers over $60 billion dollars.”

There are elements of truth to some of Ciobo’s statements to constituents. For example, it is true that many areas of Australia, including on the Gold Coast, are not slated to see network improvements under the NBN over the next three years, as the project under Labor will take much of the next decade to complete. In addition, Labor’s NBN project will see existing HFC cable networks shut down, and Labor did reform the project in 2010 from a $4.7 billion fibre to the node vision in cooperation with industry, to a $43 billion fibre to the premises project conducted by the Government alone.

However, other elements of Ciobo’s letter are demonstrably inaccurate, delivered without context, or could be considered highly contestable, in that they do not represent mainstream thinking in the telecommunications industry from the consensus of expert opinion.

For example, currrent projections place the cost of Labor’s NBN vision at around $40 billion, rather than the $94 billion Ciobo mentions. The only source of the $94 billion claim is the Coalition’s background briefing policy document on the NBN (PDF), which claims the real cost could be up to $94 billion.

In the document, the $94 billion figure represents a case where multiple variables go wrong. The Coalition states that for the $94 billion figure to eventuate, a number of conditions must all be met simultaneously: NBN Co’s revenue must grow much slower than currently forecast, construction costs must be significantly higher than currently forecast, more households must pick wireless alternatives than is currently forecast, and the NBN must take 50 per cent longer to build (an extra five years) than currently forecast. In addition, the Coalition’s policy document also contains a range of other estimates for the cost of Labor’s NBN, starting at around $45 billion and ranging upwards. The figure is not regarded as credible by the bulk of commentators on the NBN.

Secondly, it is debatable whether the NBN will in fact “cost taxpayers” anything. NBN Co’s current projections (PDF) show that the project will in fact make a return on investment of about 7.1 percent over the long-term, repaying the Government’s investments in NBN Co and them some. Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull has stated that he expects the Coalition’s version of the NBN, which predominantly uses fibre to the node technology rather than the more pervasive fibre vision favoured by Labor, to also make a return on investment.

http://delimiter.com.au/2013/06/12/...ix-years-faster-false-claims-from-liberal-mp/

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

The top 10 benefits of the NBN

David Braue

July 18, 2011

Leaving aside the hype and political brouhahas that surround it, what exactly can the NBN do for ordinary Australians? Here's a list of the top benefits...

http://apcmag.com/life-in-the-nbns-world.htm

Australia, what do you think of the NBN?

September 4, 2013

We’ve sampled and analysed public attitudes to, and perceptions of, the NBN through the eyes of end-users who will be the ultimate arbiters of its value, and through the lens of the media who are, at this point in the roll-out, an important source of public information about the NBN.

To do this, we conducted a national online survey of more than 2,000 people to identify broad trends in public attitudes to the NBN, and the factors shaping these attitudes. The survey was open to all people, regardless of whether they had the NBN connected or not.

We followed this quantitative work with in-depth follow-up interviews, and sampled the popular media landscape, undertaking a content analysis to ascertain the type of media coverage that may be influencing public perception.

Our respondents had an overwhelmingly positive attitude to the NBN in general terms. In round figures:

64% were positive or very positive
20% negative or very negative
15% undecided.

http://theconversation.com/australia-what-do-you-think-of-the-nbn-17647

More evidence that Turnbull can’t deliver on 25Mbps minimum

Sortius

July 27, 2013

Telstra’s own design documentation stating that in urban areas 0.40mm & 0.32mm copper are the most common used. 0.64 copper is most widely used in “Rural & Remote” areas: read, covered by Wireless under the NBN.

This would mean that in areas with 0.40mm & 0.32mm copper you’d need a cabinet every 300m to 500m (MAX) down the cable run, along a street this could be as close as every 100m depending on the cable run. This would mean millions of cabinets, yes, millions, with only a few lines attached. We’re talking in the region of 4 to 10 lines per cabinet. Once the cost of the cabinet & ISAM are factored in, this takes the cost of deploying FTTN way over the Coalition’s claimed ~$30b build target.

The other option is to rip up all the 0.40mm & 0.32mm copper & replace it with 0.64mm copper right? Well, not if Mal is to be believed when he states that the LNP will not need to touch as much pit & pipe.

Bringing cable up to spec for VDSL2 is something Telstra would only do in the “rare circumstances where transmission performance cannot be met otherwise”, not as part & parcel of deploying an FTTN network. The main reason is cost, the bigger the cable, the more kg/km, the bigger the pit & pipe, the more work required to get it into the ground.

Sure, Mal has said he’d do remediation on copper that’s not up to scratch, however he hasn’t explained how he’ll fit 0.64mm copper down pipe designed for 0.40mm or 0.32mm copper. In an 100 pair cable (most pillars have a few of these feeding streets) the differences can be in the order of centimetres when you include the larger insulation, bigger twists (all pairs are twisted) & the bigger shielding jacket required for thicker gauge wires.

For Turnbull to claim he can achieve 25Mbps within 3 years is laughable, both the speed & the time-frame are unachievable as it stands: the copper is shot & most current NBN contracts will go for another 3 years. For anyone to think VDSL/FTTN are anything but a money pit is a damning indictment on Australian politics.

http://www.sortius-is-a-geek.com/more-evidence-that-turnbull-cant-deliver-on-25mbps-minimum/

Tassie NBN “will take 80 years”, claims Abbott

July 29, 2013

“It will take 80 years before the whole of Tasmania has broadband rolled out under this government,” Abbott told the audience, adding that the Coalition’s version of the NBN could be rolled out faster and cheaper.

Abbott’s comments appear to be based on the fact that Labor’s NBN project is substantially behind schedule, owing both to issues such as delays in detailed negotiations to gain access to Telstra’s existing infrastructure and customer base, a well as extensive problems in the rollout of the infrastructure itself. NBN Co announced in July that it had only finished constructing its fibre network to some 207,500 premises at the end of June.

Although there are substantial differences between the two projects, as well as in the geographies of the two countries, British incumbent telco BT revealed last week that its fibre to the node network has passed more than 16 million premises since the network rollout was commenced in 2009, with more than 1.7 million customers having signed up for active connections to the infrastructure. The Coalition has regularly used the BT example to argue that Labor’s NBN vision is taking too long to deliver.

However, all infrastructure projects start off slow when it comes to their construction, as initial major contracts are signed and underlying project planning put in place. There is a growing body of evidence that NBN Co’s rollout speeds are currently dramatically increasing, compared with the slow speeds which the project has been experiencing over the past several years. The NBN project is currently on track to be completed around the 2021 timeframe.

http://delimiter.com.au/2013/07/29/tassie-nbn-will-take-80-years-claims-abbott/

Can Australia afford the Coalition’s NBN?

August 28, 2013

Unlike FTTN deployments elsewhere in the world, the Coalition’s business model requires that a full commercial price be paid for access to the copper network. The Coalition hopes it will obtain access for the same amount (A$11 billion) NBNCo has agreed to pay for access to Telstra’s ducts and pits.

That comes to approximately A$1,000 per premises, and pushes the Coalition’s NBN cost up to about A$29.7 billion, or about A$2,320 per premises. It will likely be the most expensive FTTN deployment anywhere in the world.

What will the Coalition get in return for its A$11 billion? It certainly won’t be a shiny new Ferrari – rather, a rusty FJ Holden that requires constant maintenance, love and attention to keep it running.

Telstra has not disclosed the details, but there is anecdotal evidence maintenance costs for the ageing copper network could be as high as A$1 billion a year. Added to that, parts of the copper network will require remediation because very high bit-rate DSL (VDSL) technology – which will be used in the Coalition’s network to send data over the telephone wires from the node to the premises – does not always work well over an aged copper network, with problems such as:

- intermittent degradation due to water ingress
- poor wiring
- old technology fixes such as bridge taps and pair gains, which degrade performance.

While no-one (including Telstra) knows how much it will cost to remediate the copper network to make it VDSL-capable, the cost is likely to be a significant hit on top of the A$1 billion a year ongoing maintenance costs.

http://theconversation.com/can-australia-afford-the-coalitions-nbn-17494

FTTN is a short-term, “stop gap”, using old technology

FTTN is not a new technology, having been rolled out in many areas of the World for over 5 years. Indeed, Telstra proposed this technology for Australia way back in 2005, but their pricing and competition model was rejected by the ACCC, and they decided not to proceed. If they had decided to proceed, there’s no doubt that the urgent need for the NBN would be greatly reduced. FTTN was certainly excellent technology for 2005.

But we are now in 2011. The short effective life of FTTN is becoming apparent, and countries which previously installed FTTN systems (like Germany, New Zealand and the UK) are now gradually replacing their networks with Fibre to the Premises (FTTP).

So Malcolm Turnbull is effectively suggesting that we roll out a cheaper, short-term network instead of leap-frogging it for the NBN. He’s suggesting we roll out a network that other countries have already decided is inadequate, and are replacing. And that is the first crux of the FTTN debate: It is unarguably a stop-gap solution. Even manufacturers of FTTN equipment say this, admitting they expect FTTP to be the standard within 10-15 years.

Given that it will take 10 years to roll out FTTP in Australia, to step backwards to FTTN at this stage would be an incredible waste of time and money.

In New Zealand, their relatively new FTTN network only delivers an average peak speed of 13Mbps for its users. This is only 40% higher than the current average speed available in Australia, and a fraction of the initial speeds available over a full FTTP network.

Any investment in FTTN would be largely wasted when the inevitable upgrade to FTTP is required

FTTN isn’t really a pathway to later upgrades to FTTP. Most of the systems deployed for FTTN will not be reused, and so would be wasted. FTTP doesn’t need street cabinets, because the GPON nodes are small enough to fit in pits and don’t require electrical power. All of the DSL systems that go along with FTTN are also wasted.

All of the considerable labour costs of rolling out FTTN, such as fibre installation, cabinet installation, electrical labour, fibre splicing, copper upgrades etc are all wasted when moving to FTTP. Worse, it will cost more money to remove the redundant FTTN architecture and electrical systems when FTTP is rolled out.

The only portion of an FTTN network that could potentially be reused would be sections of the fibre run to the nodes. But even this would have to be cut, added to, re-spliced and extensively modified to upgrade to an FTTP system.

In other words, FTTN will cost money to roll out, have a short useful life, and cost more money to remove and replace. Of the estimated network cost of FTTN of about $15 billion, almost none adds any value or reduces the expense of a future “upgrade” to an FTTP system, so it’s money down the drain.

To quote Mark Newton from Internode:

“FTTN doesn’t bring FTTP any closer, but it does push it several billion dollars further away….there’s no upgrade path from one to the other. This notion that FTTN is a “stepping stone” to something else is pure fantasy. If an FTTN network is built you’d better like it, because it’ll be around for a long, long time to come.”

In practise, FTTN would be almost as expensive to implement as FTTP

While in theory FTTN is a cheaper option, that only applies if it’s done by the incumbent telecommunications provider. In other words, Telstra. Without Telstra’s co-operation, an FTTN network would likely cost almost as much as the NBN.

According to The Australian Government, assorted communications consultants, and former Telstra executives interviewed for a 4 Corners programme on the NBN, the total cost of an FTTN network covering ~95% of Australia would have been $30-35 Billion dollars. This comprised $15 billion for the network construction, plus a further $15-20 billion for compensation to Telstra for taking their copper network.

http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/why-not-fttn/

 

[Tulip]

Don't know much about it, but I don't like Turnbull's attitude. He essentially thinks that, because the government was voted in, all of their policies have the full support of the majority.

 

[Viney]

Don't know much about it, but I don't like Turnbull's attitude. He essentially thinks that, because the government was voted in, all of their policies have the full support of the majority.

Yeah how dare a government that wins in a landslide believe they were voted in on their policy platform

 

[Tulip]

Yeah how dare a government that wins in a landslide believe they were voted in on their policy platform

Oh please. I voted for the Liberals. Parties are not voted in on every policy they believe in. The NBN is a clear winner here for me. Where is the advantage of FTTN?

 

[Viney]

Oh please. I voted for the Liberals. Parties are not voted in on every policy they believe in. The NBN is a clear winner here for me. Where is the advantage of FTTN?

Quoted you for irony

Think about what you said

 

[Tulip]

Quoted you for irony

Think about what you said

That I don't know much about it?

Yeah, it's certainly true.

I know about the default, and that is the fact that the world is moving away from FTTN technology and towards the NBN.

The cost difference is actually $1b. $29b vs $28b.

 

[Viney]

That I don't know much about it?

Yeah, it's certainly true.

I know about the default, and that is the fact that the world is moving away from FTTN technology and towards the NBN.

The cost difference is actually $1b. $29b vs $28b.

Never mind mate

Nothing to do with the nbn

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

Yeah how dare a government that wins in a landslide believe they were voted in on their policy platform

Indeed.

Since they weren't exactly upfront with the public about their policy platform, particularly not about anything to do with how it'd be implemented, weren't honest in their policy statements, being caught out in falsehoods on the issues time and time again, and since public opinion remains decidedly against them regarding so many of their plans, including their desire to derail the NBN, no, they don't have much right to assert that they were voted in based on their policy platform.

The reality, as far as I'm aware and all the polling I've seen suggests, is that they were voted in because the majority of Australians personally disliked Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd, and disliked the disunity within the ALP over the last 3 years. Absolutely nothing to do with Coalition policies.

The Coalition didn't even campaign on policy most of the time throughout these years, they didn't even campaign much on Abbott as a person, his character etc. Their campaign focus was virtually exclusively on claims they made about the ALP and their policies, and about Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd.

 

[Viney]

Yeah I'm out

Talking politics can be like convincing me to support another club

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

Oh please. I voted for the Liberals. Parties are not voted in on every policy they believe in. The NBN is a clear winner here for me. Where is the advantage of FTTN?

Very well said mate.

I know we're often at odds about a lot of these subjects, and I'm sure we'll continue to be, but I couldn't agree with you more on this

Given the issue-based polling, it's clear you're far from isolated as a Liberal voter supporting the NBN. The evidence suggests a large proportion of Liberal and National Party voters support it.

 

[Tulip]

Why do you keep quoting the same post?

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

Why do you keep quoting the same post?

Moved it to the bottom to get the thread back on track initially, then got RB to merge the other posts into the general thread, but that post got merged over as well, so I brought it back!

 

[theboxmike]

Yep the libs pretty well ****ed it with the NBN. You can form your own opinions about parties and other policies but it's pretty clear the libs have ****ed up big time here and Australia will suffer (at least technology wise) because of it.

And to think I was going to have the proper NBN installed in my house within the year

 

[Andy_Mac]

Who cares, it was just another poorly managed project by the Labour Party.

 

[Wonaeamirri33]

Compelling and rich as that response was mate, it does kinda leave the reader feeling unfulfilled.

Specify how it was supposedly poorly managed, and why it supposedly doesn't matter.

 

[____]

It's sad that the best policy that Labor came up with (the NBN) was the policy that lost them the election. It's sad how many people just fall for Rupert's propaganda.

Neither of the major parties deserved to win, but the NBN was one really good policy that Labor had, along with allowing a concious vote on marriage equality, that is one and a half more good policies than what the Liberals had.

Anyway this sums up the Coalition's Fibre to the node scheme nicely:

Right wing nutjobs will go on about how this is "freedom".

Anyway I'm posting here because the politics board are full of brainwashed right wing extremists.

 

[Hot Pocket]

Yeah how dare a government that wins in a landslide believe they were voted in on their policy platform

They don't really have any policies. All the key items they fought the election on have turned out to be bs already:

The boats - They didn't "stop them" (not that stopping them is even a good idea anyway), they simply made it a military operation so they no longer have to report on it.

The economy/debt - 6 billion dollars difference over 4 years, and Hockey is way out of his depth - again, Australia's debt was never an issue in the first place, it just made a good soundbite

The NBN - The LNP policy is more expensive over the medium and long term, and a much worse service. At least Turnbull is smart enough not to kill his leadership ambitions by proceeding with this turkey. They will eventually go with Labor's policy simply because it was a lot better.

 

[Hot Pocket]

Anyway, on the NBN, there's a pretty easy way to get fibre to your property.

Wait til the Lib rollout is completed, then steal the copper wiring to your house. The Libs have stated that they will use fibre to replace faulty or missing connections in the future i.e. you can get free fibre by removing your copper once they've got their FTTN installed.

 

[____]

The NBN - The LNP policy is more expensive over the medium and long term, and a much worse service. At least Turnbull is smart enough not to kill his leadership ambitions by proceeding with this turkey. They will eventually go with Labor's policy simply because it was a lot better.

How I hope you're right.

As much as I hate Tony Abbott and the modern day Liberal Party, I'd gain so much respect for them if they troll Rupert Murdoch like that and bring in the NBN, considering the NBN (or lack of) was the main reason the Murdoch rags were going for the Libs.

 

[Hot Pocket]

The main reason was the media ownership laws imo.