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

