This is the thread where the coalition- the good economic managers have their economic management credentials examined.
Im going to start with nbn.
the original labor vision was for fttp (fibre to the premesis)to every high density household.
by the time fttp was finished rolling out, the process had become so efficient it was less thsn half the cost per house it started out at.
but unfortunately for australia this multibillion dollar rollout threatened rupert murdochs foxtel monopoly - netflix et al were a fraction of the price of fox, better quality, more shows and movies to watch, no ads and completely in demand. In short a far superior product.
something HAD TO BE DONE.
So the campaign against it started. No cost benefit analysis thundered the liberals - lAybOrS debt thundered the murdoch shitrags.
so we got a hodgepodge shitbox mixed tech nbn that was a ferrari for the folk in the lucky areas connected to fttp and a clapped out datsun 120y - often worse than the adsl it replaced in the unlucky areas for the suckers with fttn (fibre to the node).
EVERY SINGLE PERSON IN THE INDUSTRY told the liberal government that it was a waste of time and would be more expensive to do it this way. Every bit of evidence from overseas where other countries had tried fttn showed it was a poor choice that was replaced soon after.
yet they went ahead - with no cost benefit analysis mind you.
of course it was a shitshow. Cabling that had been underwater for decades, was corroded out and at the end of its life for the old technology it was currently supporting was, of course utterly unsuited for the much higher demands required of it by nbn.
HOWEVER WHAT IT DID ACHIEVE:
Rupert got to play catch up.
he has now got everything that was available via satellite now available via internet.- its still vastly overpriced -but its there …..
<<<NBN's CEO has explained in Senate estimates why they're ditching G.Fast (which pro-MTM NBN jerks hyped up as thE fUtURE) and upgrading FTTC connections to full fibre - "when we looked at it, we took the view that we're using G-Fast, there would still be things like copper remediation, there may be still some home wiring in the home, and it was also going to be IT system builds for us and the retailers, and a harder thing for retailers to manage because they'd have to explain what service they were getting. So we concluded that the best return on investment for those customers who wanted more than a 100Mbps was to provide a fibre lead-in". >>>
Yup nbn is going full fibre. - they are redoing all the work they did….
Tens of billions of dollars wasted so rupert could keep up. To justify that what they were doing would work despite industry telling them it wouldnt - they actually pulled new copper into areas where they copper was too far gone… COPPER IS ACTUALLY MORE EXPENSIVE THAN FIBRE…..
GOod EcOnoMiC mAnagErs
Im going to start with nbn.
the original labor vision was for fttp (fibre to the premesis)to every high density household.
by the time fttp was finished rolling out, the process had become so efficient it was less thsn half the cost per house it started out at.
but unfortunately for australia this multibillion dollar rollout threatened rupert murdochs foxtel monopoly - netflix et al were a fraction of the price of fox, better quality, more shows and movies to watch, no ads and completely in demand. In short a far superior product.
something HAD TO BE DONE.
So the campaign against it started. No cost benefit analysis thundered the liberals - lAybOrS debt thundered the murdoch shitrags.
so we got a hodgepodge shitbox mixed tech nbn that was a ferrari for the folk in the lucky areas connected to fttp and a clapped out datsun 120y - often worse than the adsl it replaced in the unlucky areas for the suckers with fttn (fibre to the node).
EVERY SINGLE PERSON IN THE INDUSTRY told the liberal government that it was a waste of time and would be more expensive to do it this way. Every bit of evidence from overseas where other countries had tried fttn showed it was a poor choice that was replaced soon after.
yet they went ahead - with no cost benefit analysis mind you.
of course it was a shitshow. Cabling that had been underwater for decades, was corroded out and at the end of its life for the old technology it was currently supporting was, of course utterly unsuited for the much higher demands required of it by nbn.
HOWEVER WHAT IT DID ACHIEVE:
Rupert got to play catch up.
he has now got everything that was available via satellite now available via internet.- its still vastly overpriced -but its there …..
<<<NBN's CEO has explained in Senate estimates why they're ditching G.Fast (which pro-MTM NBN jerks hyped up as thE fUtURE) and upgrading FTTC connections to full fibre - "when we looked at it, we took the view that we're using G-Fast, there would still be things like copper remediation, there may be still some home wiring in the home, and it was also going to be IT system builds for us and the retailers, and a harder thing for retailers to manage because they'd have to explain what service they were getting. So we concluded that the best return on investment for those customers who wanted more than a 100Mbps was to provide a fibre lead-in". >>>
Yup nbn is going full fibre. - they are redoing all the work they did….
Tens of billions of dollars wasted so rupert could keep up. To justify that what they were doing would work despite industry telling them it wouldnt - they actually pulled new copper into areas where they copper was too far gone… COPPER IS ACTUALLY MORE EXPENSIVE THAN FIBRE…..
GOod EcOnoMiC mAnagErs
