National Broadband Network

GuruJane

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 18, 2003
Posts
15,537
Likes
1,680
Location
home of the mighty sa
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Hawthorn, Tottenham
The cost was directed at the coalition model. When you just conveniently leave out details of major costs like getting access to the various networks of Telstra and Optus then it just doesn't pass the sniff test. It's impossible to really judge whether the costings of Labor's model are reasonable since, as far as I can tell, the document just doesn't go into any real detail on it.
I would expect that revenue and cost expectations would not have been ignored by reputable companies? Can you please demonstrate that their assumptions are not in or appended to the report?

Honestly, commonsense dictates that given the relative networks have accepted billions to get rid of their networks altogether, both cable and copper, that a new deal negotiated to keep and use those networks would only cost marginally more or less than the current deal. Or are you saying Malcolm Turnbull is not experienced, capable of negotiating a proper deal?

You seem emotionally committed to Labor's FTTP Smarts - is this so? Being a tad of a Henny Penny, a Fraudband acolyte?

In terms of revenue it's the difference between the 2 that doesn't make sense. An inferior network, unable to deliver the speeds that generate the most revenue and having to compete with other wholesale providers is going to lose far more than 5% of their revenue across the nation. Whether they've taken an unrealistically low amount for Labor's plan or unrealistically high amount for the coalition's I don't know but again it doesn't pass the sniff test.
Gawd. A "der" moment. You'd expect that international companies would know all this. Possibly more than you do Smarts? Certainly more than moi:)

Does seem to me you are being a bit tendentiously silly here which is not like you. :(
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Sep 13, 2000
Posts
66,367
Likes
26,076
Location
Melbourne cricket ground. Australia
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Horks
Excellent. No point then in any government at any time commissioning reports from any sector because they will never be seen a independent nor will their reports be taken seriously on the grounds that you cite:



Smarts, do you expect business to ever take a prospective Labor/Left government seriously in foreseeable future when Left mounts these kinds of arguments? but wtf ... maybe you don't care ...



Come on Smarts - which costing and revenue projections are ludicrous in your mind?

And can you please itemise where in the report these ludicrous projections are made and show where (or where report did not) provide the assumptions on which projections were based?
Pretty good signs emerging that business is not the current govts number one fan either
 

Footy Smarts

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Posts
6,698
Likes
9,496
AFL Club
Geelong
Excellent. No point then in any government at any time commissioning reports from any sector because they will never be seen a independent nor will their reports be taken seriously on the grounds that you cite:

Smarts, do you expect business to ever take a prospective Labor/Left government seriously in foreseeable future when Left mounts these kinds of arguments? So ... maybe you don't care ...
Find me an incoming government running a review comparing their policy to a previous government's policy that doesn't make the new government's policy look far better than the old government's policy. Government's should get all sorts of advice. Part of that should be commissioning genuinely independent reports, preferably by people who weren't given their respective positions by either side of politics. Unfortunately this, along with a lot of government commissioned reports, is just an excercise in bashing the opposition soon after an election.

Notice that the government bandied this review about but refused to release the advice they received from NBN Co during the caretaker period. Thankfully it was leaked and you might want to read it here:

http://delimiter.com.au/nbndocs/Assessment of Coalition Policy.pdf

Noticeably most of the potential issues of FTTN simply weren't covered in the NBN's recent document.

Come on Smarts - which costing and revenue projections are ludicrous in your mind?

And can you please itemise where in the report these ludicrous projections are made and show where (or where report did not) provide the assumptions on which projections were based?
Read the report. I've gone over what I found to be ludicrous in this thread and it's all in there. I don't particularly want to repeat myself.
 

GuruJane

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 18, 2003
Posts
15,537
Likes
1,680
Location
home of the mighty sa
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Hawthorn, Tottenham
Find me an incoming government running a review comparing their policy to a previous government's policy that doesn't make the new government's policy look far better than the old government's policy. Government's should get all sorts of advice. Part of that should be commissioning genuinely independent reports, preferably by people who weren't given their respective positions by either side of politics. Unfortunately this, along with a lot of government commissioned reports, is just an excercise in bashing the opposition soon after an election.
So you are confirming my point that any reviews commissioned by any government can never be independent and therefore are always open to derision. And by extentsion business or any sector should have nothing to do with assisting govt in this country?

Never picked you before as a tendentious crap artist Smarts, but there we go - a change in govt reveals all. Suggest that you post quick smart the evidence from the report itself that backs up your strident assertions - you're the one who made them, you have the obligation to back them up.

If you don't, why can't you?
 

Footy Smarts

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Posts
6,698
Likes
9,496
AFL Club
Geelong
The debate on whether this report is "independent" or not is pretty irrelevent. If you really think this report could be described as "independent" then you're more of a liberal fanboi than even I thought.

You seem emotionally committed to Labor's FTTP Smarts - is this so? Being a tad of a Henny Penny, a Fraudband acolyte?
You do know that even the NBN review said they would eventually need to go FTTP and gave a possible upgrade date of 2030 right?

I take it you also realise that the first person to use the term "fraudband" (a term that I've never used) in the Australian political context was the National's Fiona Nash to describe Rudd's initial FTTN proposal.

But let's get back on to the real point. Do you actually think the coalition plan, as outlined in the review, is an intelligent policy?
 

GuruJane

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 18, 2003
Posts
15,537
Likes
1,680
Location
home of the mighty sa
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Hawthorn, Tottenham
Suggest that you post quick smart the evidence from the report itself that backs up your strident assertions - you're the one who made them, you have the obligation to back them up.

If you don't, why can't you?
The debate on whether this report is "independent" or not is pretty irrelevent. If you really think this report could be described as "independent" then you're more of a liberal fanboi than even I thought.
??? And I used to take you seriously for all that time ... gawd ...

You do know that even the NBN review said they would eventually need to go FTTP and gave a possible upgrade date of 2030 right?

I take it you also realise that the first person to use the term "fraudband" (a term that I've never used) in the Australian political context was the National's Fiona Nash to describe Rudd's initial FTTN proposal.

But let's get back on to the real point. Do you actually think the coalition plan, as outlined in the review, is an intelligent policy?
Nah Smarts - as it stands no more seriously than northalives.

Again: if you want to be taken seriously, back up your strident assertions supposedly based on your reading of the report with specific references to the report. If you can't do that then you have been bullshyting for tendentious reasons, Smarts.
 

Footy Smarts

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Posts
6,698
Likes
9,496
AFL Club
Geelong
So you are confirming my point that any reviews commissioned by any government can never be independent and therefore are always open to derision. And by extentsion business or any sector should have nothing to do with assisting govt in this country?

Never picked you before as a tendentious crap artist Smarts, but there we go - a change in govt reveals all. Suggest that you post quick smart the evidence from the report itself that backs up your strident assertions - you're the one who made them, you have the obligation to back them up.

If you don't, why can't you?
Talk about turning a molehill into a mountain. It is absolutely possible that governments could receive impartial, intelligent advice. But that very, very rarely happens. And when you're relying primarily on people you've just appointed to their positions you're not going to get impartial advice. It's an issue for both sides of politics.

What assertions did I make? I asserted things weren't included in the report. If I've missed them please show me. As far as I can see the only other things I've referenced were from the revenue estimates on page 102 of the report showing a difference of only ~4.3% in revenues between the two scenarios.

But this is all pointless. I don't rate the report. You apparently do. Who cares. Let's just agree to disagree. The real question is:

Do you think the coalition plan, as outlined in that document, is good policy?
 

GuruJane

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 18, 2003
Posts
15,537
Likes
1,680
Location
home of the mighty sa
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Hawthorn, Tottenham
But this is all pointless. I don't rate the report. You apparently do. Who cares.


Are you saying nobody should care about an NBN strategic review involving the commitment of tens of billions of public money? That's what you're saying?

Truly the Labor/Left has seriously regressed from the Hawke years back to 1977 disaster in making, Smarts. But should I be surprised - you were probably still in pre-school when Hawke left office and not even born when the Left finished off Whitlam with the same anti business bilge you seem to be parroting here.

Let's just agree to disagree.
More gawd. Smack my hand.

The real question is:

Do you think the coalition plan, as outlined in that document, is good policy?
I would say its a policy informed by a strategic review involving the expenditure of tens of billions of public money on a government business made by reputable business consultants, Smarts.

When I look for a cost benefit analysis or anything similar performed by the Rudd government as a prudent examination of its proposal to commit billions of public money before it did so, I can find nothing. Can you?
 

TheMase

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jul 20, 2001
Posts
16,894
Likes
10,287
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Sydney Swans
Are Internet or variations of it likely to regress its takeover of our lives? I doubt it. Blind is not paying attention to trend and the blind bloody obvious. 44billion for marginal improvement with no view for the future (which will cost at significant more cost than doing it now).

Fibre is unlikely to be outdated in its lifetime.

In my opinion the opportunity lost will cost us much more than the project completion.

Shame.
 

yibbida

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 5, 2004
Posts
3,807
Likes
1,106
Location
In a House by the Sea
AFL Club
Carlton
http://www.sortius-is-a-geek.com/fudged-numbers-abound-review/

Sortius nails it again.

Without any justification this review doubles all costs associated with the rollout. Essentially there’s $13.7b in totally unjustified & unreasoned costs. That only got them half way to the $28.5b lie. The rest is made up by halving revenues, revising interest repayments up while revising interest on funds up. Yes, that ludicrous!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

PottSie2

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 5, 2007
Posts
6,598
Likes
1,091
Location
Victoria
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Are Internet or variations of it likely to regress its takeover of our lives? I doubt it. Blind is not paying attention to trend and the blind bloody obvious. 44billion for marginal improvement with no view for the future (which will cost at significant more cost than doing it now).

Fibre is unlikely to be outdated in its lifetime.

In my opinion the opportunity lost will cost us much more than the project completion.

Shame.
Loaded statement is loaded statement.

50Mbps minimum is not just a marginal improvement.

Sent from my phone to Annoy Noddy
 

TheMase

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jul 20, 2001
Posts
16,894
Likes
10,287
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Sydney Swans
Loaded statement is loaded statement.

50Mbps minimum is not just a marginal improvement.

Sent from my phone to Annoy Noddy
40 odd billion for improvement but very little future capacity and a shit load of question marks and an additional 30bil for technology that will last us at least 50 years and will allow us to compete internationally...

Why do baby steps when we can take a quantum leap.

And this rubbish about going to the home being useless, CONSUMERS live in homes, BUSINESS communicates with consumers.
It is really not that hard to graspe. Once again, some are viewing the Internet in its current form.
 

Footy Smarts

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Posts
6,698
Likes
9,496
AFL Club
Geelong
So this is how you describe spending $41B on a mix of 1st, 2nd and 3rd rate technologies:

I would say its a policy informed by a strategic review involving the expenditure of tens of billions of public money on a government business made by reputable business consultants, Smarts.
Yet the initial plan to spend $43B on FTTP, with similar reviews with independent auditting (annual reports, corporate plans, etc) you described as:

There just aren't enough uber geeks to warrant the taxpayer forking out 43 billion. It's ludicrous.
What's that? Surely you aren't describing "independent" projections as ludicrous!! How dare you "trash business big and small". Please "back up your strident assertions". If you can't do that then you have been bullshyting for tendentious reasons, GJ:rolleyes:

When I look for a cost benefit analysis or anything similar performed by the Rudd government as a prudent examination of its proposal to commit billions of public money before it did so, I can find nothing. Can you?
You do realise this is in no way a cost-benefit analysis. Right?

Let's get to the point here. Your opinion previously was that spending $43B for FTTP based on "independent" reports was ludicrous. But now spending $41B for a far lower product that needs to be replaced after just over 5 years, based on an "independent" report, is "informed". Sorry but that proves you're nothing more than a partisan hack. Good day GJ.
 

GuruJane

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 18, 2003
Posts
15,537
Likes
1,680
Location
home of the mighty sa
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Hawthorn, Tottenham
So this is how you describe spending $41B on a mix of 1st, 2nd and 3rd rate technologies:



Yet the initial plan to spend $43B on FTTP, with similar reviews with independent auditting (annual reports, corporate plans, etc) you described as:



What's that? Surely you aren't describing "independent" projections as ludicrous!! How dare you "trash business big and small". Please "back up your strident assertions". If you can't do that then you have been bullshyting for tendentious reasons, GJ:rolleyes:



You do realise this is in no way a cost-benefit analysis. Right?

Let's get to the point here. Your opinion previously was that spending $43B for FTTP based on "independent" reports was ludicrous. But now spending $41B for a far lower product that needs to be replaced after just over 5 years, based on an "independent" report, is "informed". Sorry but that proves you're nothing more than a partisan hack. Good day GJ.
Hmmmn, true self revealed, Smarts. Better late than never, I guess.

Funny you should bring up the cost of the coalition's proposal matching the cost of Rudd's original bullshyte costing.

You don't seem to realise how that revelation just confirms that the NBN was a financial disaster in the making from the beginning. Especially as it is London to a brick that the costs will blow out even further, just as the previous govt's would also blow out north of 70 billion.

Was intending to make that very point, but hadn't got around to it.

But what to do? Politically the coalition can't abandon the whole thing.

btw - the language of your opening sentence:

So this is how you describe spending $41B on a mix of 1st, 2nd and 3rd rate technologies:
betrays utter tendentiousness on the issue. In mitigation, you seem totally ignorant of how these 1st,2nd and 3rd rate technologies are being rolled out in every comparable economy to ours and in countries where you'd think the population density would make a FTTP much more cost effective than ours.
 

Footy Smarts

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Posts
6,698
Likes
9,496
AFL Club
Geelong
Hmmmn, true self revealed, Smarts. Better late than never, I guess.

Funny you should bring up the cost of the coalition's proposal matching the cost of Rudd's original bullshyte costing.

You don't seem to realise how that revelation just confirms that the NBN was a financial disaster in the making from the beginning. Especially as it is London to a brick that the costs will blow out even further, just as the previous govt's would also blow out north of 70 billion.

Was intending to make that very point, but hadn't got around to it.

But what to do? Politically the coalition can't abandon the whole thing.

btw - the language of your opening sentence:

betrays utter tendentiousness on the issue. In mitigation, you seem totally ignorant of how these 1st,2nd and 3rd rate technologies are being rolled out in every comparable economy to ours and in countries where you'd think the population density would make a FTTP much more cost effective than ours.
For somebody so offended by criticism of an NBN report you sure seem to be happy criticising NBN reports. SOrry I forgot that with you it's:

NBN report under Liberals = Unquestionably independent.
NBN report under Labor = "bullshyte".

Sorry GJ but there's a reason I try to steer clear of debating with people such as yourself. You're so partisan that everything the Liberals do is good and everything that Labor does is bad. So much so that you're now promoting a Liberal policy predicted to cost $41B, delivering lower outcomes, when you spent much of the last 5 years lambasting a Labor policy predicted to cost $43B because of what you saw as unjustifiable costs. If you can't see how laughably incosistent your position on this is then there's simply no point discussing the topic with you.
 

yibbida

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 5, 2004
Posts
3,807
Likes
1,106
Location
In a House by the Sea
AFL Club
Carlton
http://www.zdnet.com/au/nbn-co-sneaks-out-gigabit-speeds-7000024374/

NBN Co delivered on its promise of making 1 gigabit per second (Gbps) download speed services available on the National Broadband Network (NBN) fibre network before the end of 2013, but the company did not announce the availability of the service until questioned about it by a Senate Select committee.

The 1Gbps down, 400Mbps up service sells at a wholesale price of AU$150 per month, excluding the connectivity virtual circuit capacity charge. NBN Co executive chairman Dr Ziggy Switkowski revealed that NBN Co had met its April promise to have the plans in the market by the end of 2013. He said the services were made available to retail service providers this week, but that he had not made any announcement to the public.
 
Joined
Sep 13, 2000
Posts
66,367
Likes
26,076
Location
Melbourne cricket ground. Australia
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Horks
I found this interesting in that it didnt menion the 3 million or so currentl passed by cable, one million of whommare connected, like me. So out of the 11 million homes discussed, 3 million. Already have a half decent alternative, and could be de prioritised in the fibre roll out.
Theres so much mischief in every press release, is anyone impartial ?

In response to hours of questioning from committee chair and former Communications Minister Stephen Conroy on the decision to write down a forecast brownfields target for June 2014 from 450,000 premises down to at least 357,000 premises, Switkowski fired back, stating that the former minister's vision for 93 percent of premises to be passed by fibre was not realistic.

"The reality is that trying to get to 93 percent of the population in a reasonable time was always a really big stretch," he said.

"At the end of this year, the fibre rollout will have passed 260,000 fibre premises. We have 1 million out of 13 million passed by the end of 2014; 1 million of the remaining are meant to be in the satellite and fixed footprint. That still leaves 11 million premises to be passed.

"[Over] 10 years, that's 1.1 million premises passed per year. That's 100,000 premises per month. How is that going to happen from where we are today?"

It is not possible to meet a run rate that high, he said.

"It's not going to happen. It was never going to happen."

Despite his pessimism, the executive chairman said he hopes to return to the committee early in the new year, and report that more premises could be passed by fibre by the end of June. He said that much of this will depend on NBN Co negotiating with some of the existing construction partners where he believes the relationship has been damaged.
So make it fifteen or twenty years roll out, and implement something with a fifty year lifespan like the copper we have now
 
Top Bottom