Welcome to FraudBand

[icytailmark]

well as everyone knows abbott won. This means no more NBN (Fibre to the home). Abbott wants to use the current copper network. Whatever the highest speed is on the copper network that is all your getting until labor gets back in.

[acropolite]

I've still got my fingers crossed, the fibre is 500 metres away down the street, the conduits have been rodded ready for pulling in the fibre. Hopefully it won't be an instantaneous cutoff.

[LewisM]

Got a friend who is head of one of the major contractors doing it. He said it makes no difference whatsoever who got in, as it's NOT going to complete anyway. I am on a copper rim, and there were no plans - even under Labor - to remedy that for another 5 years at least.

NBN has been an expensive farce from day 1.

[mithrandir]

We're planning to move from here with ADSL2+ at 13MB/s to a place 5Km away with no DSL. I don't want bloatpuddle cable for my internet but will have no choice - Optus haven't cabled the street.

NBN fibre is supposed to be there within 12 months. Fingers crossed.

[lazjen]

Thankfully it looks like the senate is not controlled by the coalition, so there's a chance that some aspects of the NBN can be saved if it requires legislation to alter the current path.

[GrahamL]

They were talking about this the other night Phil, If Malcom T was
talking straight existing roll out contracts will be honoured and continue for now, being so far along with your area you'd think they'd
likely still complete it, so don't dust off the shovel yet :)

[Saturn%5]

Good news for you Phil you will get it :P

[multiweb]

I've had fibre optic in the joiner box in front of my house on Telstra conduits for the past 4 years now. It's just sitting there not connected. Last time the Telstra maintenance guys was doing some maintenance he showed me all the connectors in the hole and said, that's yours, that's your neighbour here, that's this house there, etc... It's already wired to the exchange in Miller 5km away. When I said why isn't it switched on? He said well Telstra paid for it with their own money so... It's all in the hands of the pollies now. So maybe when labor comes back in they connect it?.... not. Anyway fast internet is not a priority. There are more other important things to fix right now.

[hotspur]

It appears the newspaper owners were rather worried about this NBN,and apparently would cause newspapers/print media to be finished,it appears the newspaper coverage was rather tilted to 'colour up' the LNP,so that Labour would not get in and keep going on NBN.If that's the case-well Australia has been short changed -again.

[LewisM]

Same SH**, different day, different politics.

[Peter.M]

Most of the people complaining about the NBN complain about the wrong things.

I have no problem with abbots 25mbps to every home with fiber to the node at the end of the street and then copper to your house. I don't think anyone could argue that they as a personal user would need more than 25mbps (currently). And regardless of if you had 100mpbs that extra bandwidth would only be useable within our country because of our southern cross link with America being at maximum.

Now don't get me wrong I do not support the coalitions plan, but for different reasons. The NBN should be implemented because it future proofs us. Notice above I put currently in brackets, in the future we have no idea what our bandwidth needs will be. I sure as hell didn't think I would be uploading 100mb tiffs online 10 years ago.

What will happen is that technology will advance and 25mbps will no longer cut it, and then the government in power will choose to extend the fiber to the home anyway. This is why I am against it, because the nodes will be wasted money and it will likely cost us more when someone finishes the job later.

[gary]

Before 1901, Australia was not a nation.

Instead there were six independent British colonies still subject to British law.

In the mid and late 1800's an enormous effort was undertaken to
deploy overland telegraph systems within and between the various colonies.

By late 1871, two undersea cables were completed to reach Java, one coming
from Darwin and the other from Roebuck Bay. Existing telegraph systems then
connected Java with the rest of the world.

Despite the high cost and the blood, sweat and tears involved in deploying them,
the new telegraph systems provided an enormous economic boom to the colonies.

Farmers and traders would come to telegraph stations to contact buyers and sellers.
Commodities such as wool and wheat became viable to trade and export.
Towns arose around the major telegraph stations and new economic activity flourished.

The commerce between the independent colonies that the telegraph systems helped bring
about was hampered however by tariffs between them.

Sir Henry Parkes of New South Wales raised the notion of federation, that is the idea
of a unified country called "Australia", in 1880. The tariffs would be removed.
After a series of referenda in the colonies, Australia was declared a nation on
January 1 1901.

So continent-wide communications systems had been instrumental in the enormous
increase in commerce between the colonies and had played a crucial role in
the idea that the nation of Australia should be formed.

In the 21st century, modern high-speed communication systems are not merely some indulgence
but a vital piece of infrastructure to assist the nation in continuing to grow and prosper.

They are an absolute priority, even more so in the fast moving, highly connected
global marketplace that is the reality of the times in which we live.

Information has become the currency of the 21st century.


Best Regards

Gary Kopff
Managing Director
Wildcard Innovations Pty. Ltd.
20 Kilmory Place, Mount Kuring-Gai
NSW. 2080. Australia
Phone +61-2-9457-9049
Fax +61-2-9457-9593
sales@wildcard-innovations.com.au
http://www.wildcard-innovations.com.au

[multiweb]

Fast internet for the masses will come in time. Bigger things to take care of right now. Get faster internet tomorrow and it'll be clogged by social media and crap going faster from A to B within the year, then we'll be back to square one. If fast transfer rates is critical to businesses then so be it. Start here. Anyone who has a PTY/LTD or ABN and has genuine reasons to state it's mission critical then get a node access to optics network. Leave all the tweet and BS on the copper network.

[gary]

Hi Matt,

Thanks for the post and I can answer that for you.

In 2012-13, social security and welfare, health, public order and safety and
housing and community amenities account for just over $203 billion of federal
spending, equivalent to 54% of the total budget.

It is wonderful to live in a country that can pay for these things and it would be even
more wonderful if we could spread the net further.

However, to do that, we need revenue and we do that as a nation by producing
goods, commodities and services.

Spending on communications and transport infrastructure has a multiplier effect
in that enables individuals and businesses to generate even more income that can
be used not only to pay for that infrastructure but to provide a social safety net.

To put that into some perspective, in 2012 $5 billion was spent on transport and
communications infrastructure in the federal budget, just over 1%.

What's more the expenditure on the NBN was a loan which was to be re-paid by
the profits it was to make.

Many confuse the NBN concept as being "fast internet at home". It is that and
a lot more. It is the overhaul of the entire nations communications infrastructure.

As an individual running a business that exports, I proud to be able to say I am
amongst those who have brought in more foreign revenue than I have consumed
personally myself by way of overseas purchases. I am also proud of the fact that
the taxation revenue from that has made a contribution to the country's social safety net.

Plus we employ Australian workers who in turn pay tax that also play their
small part in contributing to social welfare.

But I don't know of a way I can just pull money out of thin air. :)
Like most Australian businesses we need infrastructure such as viable
communications systems to bring that about.

Businesses borrow and invest in themselves all of the time in order to grow.
Now and then, when it comes to infrastructure such as communications
and transport, governments have a vital role to play.

Best Regards

Gary Kopff
Managing Director
Wildcard Innovations Pty. Ltd.
20 Kilmory Place, Mount Kuring-Gai
NSW. 2080. Australia
Phone +61-2-9457-9049
Fax +61-2-9457-9593
sales@wildcard-innovations.com.au
http://www.wildcard-innovations.com.au

[multiweb]

Right now we need to lower taxes so people have more money in their pocket and in turn spend it in Australia not overseas online, boost production and export, cut down on gvt size, lay-off small businesses and local retail cases and give them a break. Long hard road and unpopular decisions to be taken. Internet is #999 on a list of 1000 thing to do.

[Peter.M]

You are both arguing the same point. If the countries business makes more money through the communications infrastructure then we can afford to make tax cuts to the small guys because the total revenue will stay unchanged. You are saying that the money spent on NBN would be better spent on people, Gary is saying that the increase in revenue from the NBN expenditure would cover itself in the long run and cause more revenue to be generated to help people.

I guess we will have to wait and see what happens.

[multiweb]

Certainly in the long run. But not in the short term. My business is putting small businesses online. 99% of them are retail so I have my finger on the pulse of things. It's gone down since 2007 and skydived more dramatically in 2010. TBH I don't need faster internet and I'm in the biz. If it's good enough for my business to function properly then it's more than enough for the average joe to tweet. Speed and reliability is more than adequate as it is. The NBN cost cannot be carried by the small population in Oz. That's a fact. Let's not talk about more borrowing into the future of Australia. We've been there... It has to be a progressive thing. It will happen over time by necessity. Right now it will make no difference. Nada. To the local economy and domestic spending. The immediate concern is to get all those retail guys heads out of the water asap by restoring consumer confidence and stopping bleeding money O/S otherwise there won't be any locals left and people will buy online O/S. Faster internet will only compound to the problem at this point in time. We need to get our priorities right. Gary is in a black spot In Mt Kuring-gai and I have no doubt transfer and connectivity issues are an hindrance to his business so he's an avid supporter of the NBN. In a perfect world we're all are. But there's a bigger picture.

[Ausrock]

It's an infitinely complex issue.............lowering taxes, getting fibre optics to everyone, etc., etc., blah, blah...........these things alone won't do diddly squat to rectify the currently existing problems.

If you believe "the news" re the NBN, it is already being stated that there's a ridiculous number of connection problems that are already going to have to be repaired................unfortunate ly, it's reminiscent of the insulation debacle. A great idea on paper rushed into for reasons more political than practical.

There's going to have to be some hard and unpopular decisions made if we as a country are going to continue going forward..........this is a fact regardless of anyone's political bias.

Like it or lump it, believe it or not.;)

[LewisM]

As simplistic as it sounds, I agree with you 100% Matt. The NBN was not even a consideration in my voting. We have ADSL 1 where we live. Do we need faster? Nope. Why do I need it.

The NBN should extend primarily to schools first and foremost, business sector (banking etc), hospitals. Householders do NOT NEED fast internet. Nice to have, utterly non-essential. We made do with dial up for pities sake.

Fix the roads, fix the aged, fixed the disabled and homeless. Create jobs. Then, MAYBE, consider making downloading porn faster.

Flame away. Fire proof undies on.

[Barrykgerdes]

I am on the anti NBN side because it is not really going to produce the commercial gains that many are touting.and the cost is not justified against the assumed gains. I am sure that businesses that can profit by really high speed internet will be able to pay for it without being susidised by the rest of the population.

I have a 30% ADSL2 connection and that is good enough to download 1GB files in about 20 minutes. I don't need to do this often as most of my internet is simple communication that still runs at about the same effective speed as my original dial up. I am not interested in streaming video. Besides while downloading I always have something else in progress

However if I get access to the full NBN via a fibre link I will most certainly connect and be able to download the file in a minute or so and/or I will be quite happy to have a full ADSL via a hub and copper. (our street has copper that is only 15 years old) and a spare duct belonging to optus with nothing in it.

There is other infrastructure that should have a higher priority than internet. Tony wants to build roads. I prefer rail for interstate freight but road freight will always be cheaper when it is subsidised by other road users.

Barry
　

[LewisM]

NBN was a typical Labor vote-buying election promise that I believe even they knew would not complete in the time scale given, IF EVER.

Why is the world so in demand of NOW NOW NOW.

Fix Australia first - and that does NOT mean a priority on how Australia connects to the WWW.

[Larryp]

Lewis, I often drive from my home in Padstow to Bankstown, during morning peak hour traffic-a journey of about 7 Km and takes 30 minutes sometimes.
At these times, I am definitely NOT thinking about the benefits of high speed broadband.;)

[strongmanmike]

:doh:...my lip is bleeding :innocent: :lol:

[multiweb]

So.... what's Greg C. up to lately? ;)

[strongmanmike]

Nup :bashcomp: :hi:

[astroron]

The type of thinking that kept the horse and cart going for so long:screwy:
Cheers:thumbsup:

[multiweb]

The horse was facing the cart. Now it's back the right way round. :)

[strongmanmike]

:scared2:

[multiweb]

lol

[strongmanmike]

Hmm? ahh, no, more like this :tasdevil:

[multiweb]

:eyepop::lol:

[strongmanmike]

Ah Ok, ok...this could go on for a while huh? :rolleyes: :lol:

I hope all the roads that are supposed to have been earmarked for Nation Building instead aren't made single lane to get it done (maybe) a bit faster and (maybe) a bit cheaper :rolleyes:

That's not a bite by the way :whistle:... just an accidental comment :P

[cybereye]

A megabyte even! :P

[multiweb]

Up to you :P


Ha... the expensive ill planned loose gravel roads done on the cheap left behind to be surfaced and fixed at great expenses. Yeah they were good at starting things. Not so at following through.


All good mate. Watch out for all those loose surface. Slippery

Off to do some processing now. :)

[strongmanmike]

My lip is bleeding again...



Good! :nerd:

[gary]

Gary has also been thinking about these very things since at least 1979 when
it became self evident to him that the advent of high performance, low priced,
microprocessors when linked to the world's communications systems, would bring
about an economic and social revolution.

But this was also self evident to the computing and communications engineering
fraternity at large and the professional literature at the time clearly foretold that the
future would be digital.

I can still remember that sense of marvel in the early 80's when we were first able to
email between universities a few km apart here in Sydney and soon after communicate
to the University of California in Berkeley.

The data rates were slow, only initially kilobits/second, but it began to provide
a free-flow of ideas including the ability to transmit new software for the projects
we were working on the time, namely nascent CAD software for integrated circuit deign.

By 1987, I was heavily involved in integrated circuit design. Though I was able
to email modest sized messages to the design foundry in Silicon Valley, the foundries
design libraries and the final data for the chips were too large to transit via the Internet.
Instead I would book a ticket on a QANTAS 747 and literally carry the 90MB
cartridge tapes across the Pacific as precious hand-luggage in a brief case.

In other words, to convey that set of 90MB cartridge tapes would literally take
around 14 hours of flying time. You had to get visas, book into hotel rooms,
arrange hire cars, fill out travel allowances and so on.

At that same period in the late 80's, I would estimate the total digital bandwidth
requirements of the average household would have been around zero.

Today household plans providing multiple gigabytes of data allowances per month
are commonplace and the trend curves show that increasing rapidly
over the years and decades ahead.

There would be few engineers or computer scientists back in 1987 who would
have naively predicted that their 1987 vintage computers would continue to
meet all their computing requirements by the year 2013.

But I suspect some of the lay public, if asked the same question at the time,
would have predicted that their own 1987 personal computers would still be adequate
today.

In a similar vain, if you were to ask many of the lay public to predict what the
bandwidth requirements of households will be in the first-world 25 years from now,
many would fall short of the mark.

What's not entirely fair is that many of us in the engineering community have been
able to hone our predictions from being able to see what emerging applications are
being showcased.

I will provide one example. Every few months the major semiconductor manufacturers,
companies such as Freescale and Texas Instruments, will pass through cities
such as Sydney and provide presentations to electrical engineers on their latest
generations of silicon offerings and emerging market opportunities and trends.

One emerging market is related to the fact that in countries such as Australia,
the United States and Japan, the demographics show we are collectively ageing.
The advent of compulsory superannuation was one response to this. There simply
won't be enough revenue from everyone else younger than us to pay for our pensions
and there won't be enough of them to each care for us one on one twenty-four seven.

They will need some smart leveraging.

As I mentioned in a previous post, over 50% of the budget goes into social
welfare, health and housing.

An enormous amount of money.

So if a country can delay the average time from when someone needs to go from
being able to live in their own house to having to move into a nursing home by even
months, then the savings are enormous.

What the semiconductor vendors have been showcasing for several years now
are an array of new products that can help provide health care monitoring to
those who would prefer to live in their own homes as long as possible as they
grow old.

These products connect to the net and rely on a communications infrastructure
where bandwidth is readily available and cheap. High definition video monitoring,
low cost blood pressure and heart monitoring machines and network connected
wearable monitoring appliances are just some examples. The schematics and
bills of materials for many of the devices are available today and reference designs
built. What the industry has been waiting on here is the NBN as the missing
piece of the puzzle. Everyone is geared to go. This market alone is predicted to
be valued at billions of dollars globally.

Imagine in the not too distant future you are 89 years old and living on your
own. You are perfectly happy, willing and capable to largely look after yourself
and in fact you would prefer to live in your own house that you had spent a good
part of your life paying for. But you need a little assistance and you do need someone
to keep an eye on you and monitor your vital signs. You could move to that
nursing home but don't relish the thought.

You glance up and in the kitchen is a HD camera that has been streaming video to
a care monitoring service. You give a wave. You are OK.
You look at the watch on your wrist that has been streaming your vital signs.
First sign of trouble and an ambulance is on the way.

Now and then the doctor wants you to check your blood pressure.
You hate having to go across town and wait in the doctor's office with all those
people with pesky coughs and colds. Instead you teleconference with a medical
practitioner who asks you to put on the blood pressure machine and they check
you out in real time.

Whilst this is all going on you ponder what the bandwidth requirements for just you
are at that moment and then you think of the millions for others like you within
Australia that are similarly networked. You are not watching a video, just walking
and breathing, but your digital bandwidth requirements are significant.

And you might think back 25 years ago and it then becomes evident
that those clever engineers that predicted we would need fiber to home got it
right and that lo and behold, it was no luxury, it was essential.

And this is just one example of what the future holds.

So with respect Marc, you say you are seeing "a bigger picture" and I see your picture
but I am seeing an even bigger one that surrounds yours again. :) But that's what engineers do.

Best Regards

Gary Kopff
Managing Director
Wildcard Innovations Pty. Ltd.
20 Kilmory Place, Mount Kuring-Gai
NSW. 2080. Australia
Phone +61-2-9457-9049
Fax +61-2-9457-9593
sales@wildcard-innovations.com.au
http://www.wildcard-innovations.com.au

[multiweb]

I agree with most of what you say Gary.

The differences between 'manual' information transfer in the mid 80s during the inception of online technologies and what we currently take for granted now is remarkable and it far outweights the benefits that a faster network would provide today compared to what we currently have.

No doubt we're all moving towards faster and better systems at a fast pace and your vision of the future is ultimately where it's all headed. I can't argue with that and I won't.

Couple of questions. Do we need it right now? In what way is it going to make us more competitive? Can we safely rely on it? Is it safe to have medical files, private files online? Would you be confortable about a doctor's diagnosis and prescription issued after filling in a form online? Would you trust a monitoring system online for your loved ones in a retirement home?

In my view we're rushing towards more storage, more speed, more efficiency which is fine but we're cutting corners on control and security. The whole thing is flaky at best and opened to abuse. My point is that it will and must happen gradually over a period of time in a controlled manner. You can't jump in the deep end and figure stuff out as it comes.

[mithrandir]

Mum is in exactly that position today. She will be 90 in about a week. At least ASDL works in her street.

Gary and I use the same ISP. He's stuck with ancient copper wire because Telstra won't replace it. I'm going to have to change ISPs because Telstra won't install a DSLAM to run DSL into a part of Glenhaven subdivided about 25 years ago. They'd rather rip you off with their cable service than allow you to have an alternative.

Marc, your part of the world is recent enough for the copper to still be in reasonable condition, and it's purely a business decision for Telstra to not connect the fibre they have already run past you. If you were getting 2Mb/s with interruptions every time it rained would that be enough to run your business?

[multiweb]

Andrew I know exactly how sh|t the service is in Gary's and your area. Don't think it's any better here. I started trading in 2001 until 2003 I had no broadband. Ozemail dialup 26kpbs. First ADSL I got was 256kbs. I'm now at 4Mb/s and no hope of getting any better due to physical limitations, basically distance from the exchange. Every time it rains I lose connection because the copper is corroded. I have fibre optic in front of my house. I can't use it because of red tape and who's paid or who's going to pay for it. It is frustrating and I empathise. But I make do.

Last time I had a chat with the Telstra techie, he said wireless is the way to go. He comes to silicon the joiner box everytime it rains and I lodge a problem hound with Telstra business. TBH I don't know which way we'll go anymore. Undeground infrastructure or wireless? Optics fibre do break too and it's expensive to fix. My area is approx 20yrs old. We're one of the first having electricity lines underground.

[Larryp]

I'm no computer expert and I do not claim to be one, but I wonder what ultimate effect wireless internet will have.
Apparently Australia's uptake of smart phones and tablets is among the worlds highest, indicating people like mobility with their internet connectivity.
My own adult children have not replaced their laptops, claiming their smart phones give them all the internet access they require, and this seems a common attitude among their peers.
So many people seem to be dumping their land line phones in favour of mobiles, too.
The telcos seem very keen to roll out their 4G networks, and that indicates they feel lots of dollars are to be made from it.
Is it possible NBN could be almost redundant/obsolete before it is completed?

[multiweb]

Well it's a valid argument. Wireless has its limitations too. But as you mention mobility comes with it. Maybe the solution will ultimately be a mix of both.

[mithrandir]

Laurie, two of the problems with wireless are it is a shared medium and is subject to weather degradation. 4G does not have a lot of range which means lots of towers. If they used 4G to replace service to the wired households in range of a tower they'd get a small share of the bandwidth they can get with non-wireless. That's why NBN was planned to only use wireless or satellite where cabling was not economic.

[Larryp]

Thanks for the explanation, Andrew :)

[Bassnut]

According to wikipeadia, there are 7 million odd dwellings in Australia and the NBN all up will cost $44 billion. Generously assuming 90% of householders pay tax, thats $5657 per tax paying house hold :eyepop:.

Really, do you think its worth THAT much over other priorities :question:

Are you happy to pay that much?.

[AndrewJ]

Gday Gary

Whilst i personally agree we should be getting the fibre ( at least ) in the ground whilst we can afford it, i also think we have other priorities
that do require addressing more urgently.



Down here in melbourne, we are getting more and more complaints re no ambulance to come and get you, as the hospitals cant clear the emergency rooms to allow ambulances to unload.
A computerised call over the internet wont currently change that.


Andrew

[LewisM]

That is the scary truth. A LOT of "Joe and Joanne Average" believe it is the government paying for the NBN. How wrong could they be. Then again, a lot do not even realise what their taxation is for (that's IF they pay it, seeing how now the Tax Free Threshold was put WAAAAAAAAAY up under the Labor Government... more vote buying). Of course, we all moan about paying tax, but where exactly will the govenment otherwise get revenue... oh, that darned Emissions Trading Scheme...

When I worked in aviation, I paid $0.47 / dollar tax. Yes, almost half my wage went to the government to spend on frivolous things such as an non-essential NBN. Even though I paid almost half my weekly wage to the government for 15 years, when I decided to change jobs, the government REFUSED to give me ANY social security, nor my wife, for 3 years thanks to the bank account I had and the assets I had (still have). So, I contributed to everyone else's, but they won't give me one cent. Not even a health care card. Zilch. Rob the "rich" to pay the poor, and give them fast internet.

No, I didn't vote Labor nor LNP, so don't go judging me there either :)

[Bassnut]

Oh, and if the Liberals are correct and ittl cost 90billion, that's over $10k per household. Yikes , that's just NUTS :help:

[AndrewJ]

I was thinking more like a Star Trek transporter down the fibre:lol:
Now that would require a bit of bandwidth.
But you would still end up on a trolley in emergency.

Imagine if we just put a few Tardis like pods every Km or so,
( think public phone boxes )
we could just hop in and just send ourselves somewhere.
No need to waste money on roads or rail
but that may then put all the auto workers out of a job.

My biggest concern with all this stuff is it is eventually designed
to get less numbers of highly trained specialist people to be able to service "the world". Not everyone can ( or wants to be ) a
specialist like this.
With our population increasing at the rate it is,
but the requirement for lower skilled people being reduced by computers due to cost, it cant go on much longer without imploding somewhere.
Be interesting to see how it evolves.

Andrew

[The_bluester]

Of course that $5600 odd is spread out over a decade or so and it is actually borrowed money to be repaid by the project as it matures and connections rise, bringing revenue with it. It is far too simplistic to say that it is going to cost each household $5600 and that is that.

Regards spending the money on healthcare etc, refer to the point above, it is borrowed money to be invested in an infrastructure project that is supposed to make a return. How do you borrow money for operating costs of a hospital for example? While you could argue (And not unsuccessfully) that good hospitals and schools are an investment with the profit showing up in social good, it is going to be hard to convince the market of that.

Regards which way is best. A fairly basic examination of data use trends over the years says that 25mbit/sec will be barely adequate by the time the libs project s "Finished" and working in the industry myself, I have my doubts they will deliver even that, let alone 100mbit/sec.

They also raise the spectre of a distinct and widening digital divide where those that have the capacity have the advantage over those that don't. With improved bandwidth (Hopefully to be provided in a week and a half via an NBN fixed wireless connection, given where I live, the best I will ever get) I could work form home significantly more often and with better productivity. Money, non renewable resources and pollution saved. I can't do it very effectively now as the limits placed on my by the upload rate are severe. Stupid to have to sit in a car for two hours a day so I can sit in front of my laptop in an office 5 days a week.

Bandwidth requirements WILL continue to grow, Wireless for everybody is not the answer as there is only so much bandwidth to be had that way and it is a fraction of what fibre is capable of, and FTTN is at the very best a stopgap that will end up taking longer, costing more and in all likelihood, never actually working as envisaged and finally needing to be replaced by FTTH by the time it is completed. Now THAT is a waste of money.

I am actually staggered to see the "Faster access to porn" line trotted out again. I sincerely hoped that it went the way of the dodo with the comms minister who uttered it (Richard Alston) "Just faster movie downloads" is just a slightly less insulting way to express similarly luddite tendencies.

People (Including the previous government) sold this project with a stupidly narrow focus on the populist reasons like faster access to movies. The lack of vision on both sides of Australian politics depresses me. But hey, we can just keep on digging stuff up and selling it to China so we can buy it back in more valuable forms right? That will see us through the next 100 years.

[astronobob]

Well, Im like Laurie, no putta expert, I use wireless atm, line speed 2Mbps, enough for us, tho have the fibre optic on our street pole is a faster option !
NBN, would it or would it not be good for say, the CBD areas or all major cities where big data tranfer's are required day in day out, eg, big bussiness, government, banks, international traders, Imports,/exports, schools, colleges, hospitals, science departments, transport, industry etc etc, this would still give Aus a globle competitive streak !
And let the big fish foot the bill, good for the country, and slow the increase of porn download or what-ever, I dont think that FB or Tweeter techs could handle the speed anyway, and I doubt is making Australia a smarter more competitive country :P
Tho, essier said than done, and wouldnt it create an uproar :rolleyes:

[Bassnut]

Seems to me fibre to the node and copper to house is the go. If you want more, sure, pay for fibre to house/business yourself.

[The_bluester]

City areas already have extensive fibre networks.

Really the debate is on the consumer level. The applications like Gary raised will not come before at least the prospect of reasonably widespread access to sufficient and reliable bandwidth to make it work. If there is not sufficiently widespread access, who is going to develop something that relies on it? No matter how economically or socially positive it is. Health monitoring would probably have kept my mother in law in her own home longer, and the lack of it is likely to force the father in law out earlier than would otherwise be the case too.

Plus like it or not, data consumption is only gong to rise for both productive business, health, education etc and "Non productive" (if you want to call it that) stuff like "Entertainment" in all it's guises.

[The_bluester]

See my above post. And I suppose it is the go, so long as the assumption is that it is good value to build something that will very very likely take longer, cost more, not perform as well as it is supposed to and be near end of life and in need of replacement by the time it is completed.

[Peter.M]

When it is completed they will realise they need to go to the home because in 10 years when they complete it *im guessing* people will likely want/need the bandwidth.

In Adelaide we have a one way highway that changes direction at different times of the day. This means that for a few hours every day it is doing nothing, just waiting for people to be clear so that they can send traffic in the other direction. When it was built it was the only one like it in the world. Now they have decided that it needs to go in both directions so they are adding to it (it was 2 lanes). On top of the cost of building gates and lights telling people what direction it is going at every exit and entrance which will be useless. We pay for them to duplicate a road which will likely cost them more than if they just did it in the first place.

If I were buying or building a house and was offered fiber to the home for ten thousand dollars, I would pay it with no hesitation.

[The_bluester]

Wow, completely off the NBN debate but on your highway. I had never heard of that one! That is pretty insane stuff.

The closest we have to that in Melbourne would be Queens Rd which is five lanes wide, the lane in the middle flows according to the traffic peak, so it is an inbound lane in the morning and out bound in the evening. It works surprisingly well but is not on the same scale of strangeness as as bi directional highway!

[Peter.M]

If you want to see what a dumb idea it is its called the southern expressway google says the duplication is costing us 400 million.

[JB80]

This is the only point I'll make about a situation that has been made more complex than it needs to be




I have said previously in other threads that unlimited data is the only way forward, anything else is just draconian.
People should not even be mentioning data plans with any kind of cap.
Much of the world now sees access to the internet as a basic human right and in most of Europe(Spain excluded) and the US it's unthinkable to not have unlimited data plans.
Same goes for phones too these days.
NBN might just be a good thing and needed but Australia's internet issues would likely still be not up to first world standards to begin with.

Also while we are at it why not a proper high speed rail network connecting all major cities and at an affordable end cost to the user. I'd never fly again.
The undertaking on a national level would be huge, the sort of grand scheme not seen for years. It would also open up new hubs along the lines. We need to invest in our country properly while we are still on top of things.
How Australia is not bouncing of the walls at this time is just bad management.

And I'd also sack the official bribes committee, they failed on the World Cup and SKA. Lets put some of that Chinese money to better use at least.

Are these the most pressing of commitments?
Maybe not but I'd put them up the list a whole lot higher than playing tug boat with our navy in the Pacific.
They shouldn't even be election issues, they should just be. It's hard to believe in the one country has boomed over the last 20 years and side stepped the economic crisis that questions of basic infrastructure are even being discussed.
Get our priorities in order and keep our nation employed with home grown investment.

[Hans Tucker]

You sound surprised...the cost of NBN was all over the media and was the basis for the argument against it.

We will have super fast internet, maybe, but sub-standard hospitals and schools. Governments never get their priorities correct.

[noeyedeer]

lol I said in another thread the NBN is obsolete. maybe I predicted the future :(

I do agree ... uncapped broadband is the only way, either fibre or copper might make it not so

[The_bluester]

We have only done marginally better in Vic. It was apparently well identified at the time it was to start construction that the Western Ring rd around Melbourne really needed to be at least three lanes form end to end as it would be maxed out almost as soon as it was completed, that was about ten years ago and after five years of ever worsening congestion we have had over five years of constant roadworks almost from end to end to increase it from it's original two lanes and to delete some insanely poor road design. It has largely been completed in the section I drive daily but before that it used to take longer for the last 15KM of my drive than the first 60 did.

I suppose given the arguments put in this thread that still disregard the funding model and posit that the money for the NBN can just be swung over to other uses, which are not borrowed money on what amounts to a lowish return commercial investment any more and would almost certainly instead show up as a cost on the budget. and the fact hat we cant even get a 20KM road right in suburban Melbourne and short sightedly build it smaller than we need it to be to save money initially (Defer it slightly in fact) It is no surprise that the libs plan gets as much support as it does. We would rather save 30% now to get something second rate that will be obsolete pretty much when it reaches practical completion and require replacement, with little of it's infrastructure being useful in its eventual upgrade than to get very basic infrastructure right the first time around. That is without even going into the likely effect of breaking the pricing model too as they are likely to decide to allow infrastructure competition too and that will perpetuate the last 20 years of "Competition" where the competitors cherry pick the profitable areas and the rest can go hang. And Telstra does lovely stuff like not enabling ADSL2+ in an area until someone else does and restricts access to exchanges etc etc etc. Sets retail prices lower than wholesale, etc etc. you get the picture.

People keep on carping on about huge delays, go look up the corporate plans, we are still so early in the ramp up phase that the actual distance behind the 8 ball it is (Which anyone with any knowledge of it will admit that it is) is actually difficult to make out on the graph. You have to change the scale of the graph to make it meaningless in the overall context of the build for the plan versus actual difference to stand out, and most of that falls inside the line made if you move everything to the right by 6 to 9 months to account for the single biggest delay in the project, the Telstra agreement (Which is one of the most complex commercial arrangement in Australian history and which will now need to be substantially renegotiated)


Anyway, this is all irrelevant at this point, what we are going to get is the libs Notional Broadband Network, hopefully, and just like climate change we are going to find out who is right by experiencing it first hand. At least unlike climate change, if the libs are proven as wrong as I expect them to be we don't loose as much in a tangible sense, you can always decide it was all a huge cock up and restart a FTTH build in a couple of years time.

On the climate change front, I am not particularly tarring the libs there, both sides were hell bent on plans that would make pretty much no difference. Just one of them they could call a tax for the purpose if a nice election slogan and the other one they have not told us yet what tax the money to do it with is going to come from, new or old.

[The_bluester]

I really should respond to that one, if they offered me fibre for that much, I would stump up the cash and ask when I could expect to see the trencher in my drive. But it would not be that much and I am realistic enough to know that at 4KM form the nearest fibre I am totally uneconomic to service with fibre unless perhaps at some point there is a transit network installed across the frontage which might be able to be used to deliver it. We would cost a couple of hundred K to service with fibre.

[noeyedeer]

speaking of roads, I think I read here a while ago about the US proposed to build a freeway from Melbourne to Brisbane with the resources from their army after ww2 with a price tag of a few million dollars.

the government thought it a bit rich so the US scuttled their equipment offshore and took their men home. imagine if we had that back then, our gov no matter who is in position only thinks for 3 years ... least it created nice reefs for fishermen

I'm glad I just don't vote!

[atkinsonr]

We're 25k from Sydney CBD as the crow flies yet the best wired Internet we can get is only 2.5mbps.

Am sure 3G/4G would be faster but don't want to pay through the Haagen Daas.

NBN would have been 10+ years away for us. I'm very technical and although I want fast Internet for everyone, NBN wasn't a good allocation of funds.

MTN is even worse.

[noeyedeer]

I also like how everyone is saying the money is spent better elsewhere, with all the slashing of schools and hospitals and everything else ... and mining and carbon tax ... looks like we are in for a roller coaster ride that Malcolm Turnbull wants to take over .. lol I'm over it, can't blame me but I'd rather fibre then the liberals.

poor people get poorer while the rich get richer is what the liberals want. ... no pun intended Rich :)

[icytailmark]

i think its time for people to accept that Australia will have 2nd world Internet connections for a very long time. Most people Australia think fast Internet isnt a priority. I was planning on starting up a File storage business but i dont see it happening now.

[strongmanmike]

It's a real shame, we have the opportunity here to build a world class piece of infrastructure, it is well under way the hard work has been done The new govermnet has little to do but they seem to think it is much better to pay mothers earning $150 000 pa their full salary for 6 months to stay home with their new babies :rolleyes: I mean reeeaallly....?

Hopefully Malcolm will wake up to himself and realise that just like the reality of climate change and the importance of putting a price on carbon (that he fully agrees with!) he largely ditches the nodes idea :prey:

That was no comment, my lip is bitten again :lol:

Mike

[Astro_Bot]

Vote 1 for the full NBN. Not fussed with who implements it (or claims it as theirs).

[acropolite]

I work in the telecommunications industry and I've always believed that the NBN was an ill conceived plan.

To even dream of replacing a copper network that was built over a century, with fibre in just a few years, is just plain stupid and shows a lack of understanding and logic by the decision makers of the time.

The NBN isn't a bad thing nor is it a waste of money, don't forget the investment will generate massive amounts of revenue and open up lots of opportunities, I'd expect that with revenue from phone and data plus the massively reduced maintenance costs payback would probably be less than 10 years.

Don't forget also that a big proportion of the cost and use will be by business and their continuation will help lower the cost.

As for wireless and satellite technology taking up the slack, forget it, shared spectrum is just that, very limited and unreliable.

More bandwith on copper is a pipe dream, the higher the bandwidth, the less the distance, I see poorly performing ADSL every day, it's prone to even minor cable faults and interference so reliability will always be an issue. Money poured in to trying to extract better service from the copper network is money wasted IMO.

In my Telstra days I saw a fibre cable that had a fire lit underneath it, there was nothing left of the cable but the original half a dozen glass fibres hanging in mid air, the entire sheath and protective system gone. We were alerted hours before as the copper cable disintegrated with the heat, the fibre maintained it's operation, remained fully functional and was still burning when we found the problem.

Fibre is immune to lightning, electrical interference, corrosion etc, the only thing that will affect it is vermin, I've seen rabbit and rat damage but only rarely.

Look at the money the government pours in to unsustainable industries, the forest and motor vehicle industries for example, tens of billions of dollars for no return.

To borrow an old TV ad line ... It won't not happen overnight, but it will happen......

[Astro_Bot]

IMHO "stupid" might be a bit strong, but I'd agree it could have been better planned and executed. For instance, not all of the copper network is going to fail in the next 5-8 years (or whatever the NBN rollout schdule was). "We" ought to have a pretty good idea of the life expectency of the copper - at least suburb-by-suburb if not pit-by-pit. It might have been better to phase in FTTH prioritised by the age of the copper it was replacing.

Of course, "we" mainly means Telstra, and they had/have a vested interest in not being as straight with that information as they might have been/could be.

Agree with everything else you say about satellite, wireless, etc. Fibre has such a dramatic capacity and speed advantage that there is nothing close to it in the race.

[icytailmark]

If the government does decide to not do FTTH im sure Telstra will do it later on *fingers cross*

[gary]

Hi Fred,

The construction of the NBN uses an equity funding model.

Initially a loan from the government (for example, $2.6 billion in 2012-13, $5.1 billion
in 2013-14 and so on) and later private equity.

Governments can source cash for equity funding in various ways, but one
common way is by the issue of bonds.

For example, they might issue AAA rated bonds at, say, 4.1% which institutional
and personal investors buy. They use the cash raised to invest in NBN and
as NBN begins to generate revenue, it pays back the loan plus, say, 7.1%.

Plus the government (i.e. the Australian people) then still retains ownership of NBN Co.

This is a totally different model to where you use taxation revenue to build,
say, a hospital.

Assuming public hospitals aren't about to start charging patients, public hospitals
don't generate income. So you wouldn't use an equity funding model to build
a hospital, unless in rare circumstances where you might need to build one
quickly, say during wartime.

Say tomorrow there was a knock on the door of the house up the street.
The owner opens the door and an NBN rep says that for zero dollars to the owner
they can get fiber to the home. In the short term, the funding for the parts
and labour to make that connection came from equity funding. For example,
an institutional investor bought a bond from the government. In the longer
term, it was paid for by the subscribers to the network. So even if the owner
never made use of the connection themselves, it would not have cost them
anything in taxation.

Perhaps counterintuitive to some, the owner up the street can actually end up
better off tax-wise over time because of the increased economic activity
and efficiencies that the NBN brings about.

Data usage on networks globally have been growing exponentially. The world isn't
about to slow down its thirst for bandwidth any time soon. With improvements
in bandwidth come new services, increased economic activity and additional
tax revenue as wealth is generated. The additional tax revenue then helps reduce
the tax burden for our owner up the street for the construction of, say, hospitals.

Just to put things into perspective again, in the ten years the government might
provide $36 billion in equity funding for the NBN - that is, they get the money
back, plus interest, plus still own the company - we will have spent as taxpayers
$1.2 trillion on health.

So incredibly massive are our tax expenditures on health, social welfare, etc.
that we need to ensure a strong economy in order to continue to supply funds for
them. As an example, whereas the mining sector currently accounts for about
10% of GDP, the services sector accounts for a whopping 70% and employs
four out of five Australians. We are effectively a "services" country. Things such
as banking and insurance, telecommunications and travel. Lo and behold, many
of these service activities mesh with the digital economy and so the NBN is
exactly the type of infrastructure the nation needs to invest in.

[strongmanmike]

Thank you for once again explaining what many of us think and feel but are either not bothered to or are unable to articulate as well. It is forward and bold thinking such as has gone into the NBN that reaps reward in the long term, not conservative reluctance based on the false and misguided idea of some imaginary small government concept.

Mike

[gary]

Hi Mike,

In the United States in the 1930's, most of the rural areas didn't have electricity as the
power utilities argued it was too expensive to wire the farms up.

Under the New Deal, Roosevelt created the Rural Electric Administration to bring
electricity to these areas.

Today electricity underpins nearly everything we do.
However, predictably, there were some groups who opposed it at the time.

One of the areas the government brought power generation and distribution to was the
Tennessee Valley.

As an historical footnote, during WWII, the power that was generated by the
Tennessee Valley Authority was used to refine the uranium for the atomic bombs
that played a part in bringing a more rapid end to the war. That in turn also ensured
the United States place as a new superpower.

[AndrewJ]

Gday Gary



For how long???
I fully agree that unless the govt subsidises the installation of the NBN, it wont happen properly, other than in a few major cities.
I also agree that doing a proper installation up front will be far more beneficial long term than the fibre to the node ( maybe ),
but not cost effective in the short term.
But once done, i have no trust in out Govt ( of either side ) not to sell it off in order to say they have "balanced a budget".
After that Rafferties rules will rule.
Labour seems to get us into debt based on unfunded socialist ideals,
but the libs tend to tell us how wonderful they are by always balancing the budgets by selling of the "family silver" with the profits going to their mates.
Once the NBN is in place, other than medicare or personal superannuation
it will be the first thing the pollies look at selling or taxing to make themselves look like good financial managers.

Andrew
( am i sounding a bit cynical ??? )

[noeyedeer]

I'm glad labor was in for the global financial crisis. we are the only country to come out on top. no recession... lowest intrest rates in history .. highest American dollar in history etc ... that can't be that bad.

I could imagine where we would be if others were in charge, now we will see.

[noeyedeer]

the libs will sell their souls ... ie Telstra andany other companies .. to balance the books ....

[gary]

Hi Andrew,

Thanks for the post.

When I wrote that sentence I meant it in a transactional sense rather than
in the sense that the government would necessarily own it forever and forever. :)

It had already been signaled some years ago that the plan was eventually
to sell it. Whether it will remain public or become private will obviously be
a decision that will be made by the powers that be in the future.

Whether it is eventually sold for political expediency to make the bottom line look
good is certainly not without precedent.

[AndrewJ]

Gday Gary

I give it less than five years after implementation before the govt sells it
( unless they can up the GST to cover the looming lack of cash flow )
After selling it, just for info, how long do you reckon it will be
before the "non profitable" sections of it ( ie not in a major city )
get dropped or ignored???? ( for commercial reasons )

Andrew

[gary]

Hi Andrew,

The previous government had already tendered for and ordered the two new
purpose built NBN satellites that were to service those parts of the
country that didn't get fibre or the LTE fixed wireless service.

These are being constructed by Loral in the US and are
scheduled to be launched in early and mid 2015.

These would provide enormous benefits to people living and working in
the most remote parts of the country as well as Norfolk Island,
Christmas Island, Macquarie Island and the Cocos Islands.
They were to service about 200,000 premises.

Of course these very remote areas that are to be serviced by satellite and
the other rural areas that were to be serviced by the high-speed fixed
wireless LTE service are the types of areas that have been of little interest
to the private sector and hence one of the reasons why the previous government
stepped in and created NBN Co.

[AndrewJ]

Gday Gary

Im talking of people less than 30 to 40km or more from the centre of Sydney/Melb/Brissy/Perth.
Even now, i am about 11km from the melb GPO, but have crappy service,
( and i have piccies of the copper rotting in the pits due to maintenance by failure that is favoured by private industry )
that doesnt look like being upgraded for a long while.
If they sell it off, anyone not within a few Km of a city centre will be "collateral damage" as they arent "cost effective".
Some things shouldnt be privatised.

Andrew

[multiweb]

Well a mum who clocks $150Gs a year pays enough taxes for the system to cover her maternity leave. Good on her. I have no problem with that.


Watch that lip again mate. It starts hanging down. :P

[multiweb]

Electricity is an essential service such as water, sewerage to some extent. Fast(er) internet is far from it.

[rat156]

Does she? How many will be the partner of a business owner who becomes an executive assistant for whatever the minimum service period will be? If there is a minimum service period, who knows? We know SFA about the new government's policies because they weren't shown to us until just before the election, if at all. Not that the other side was any better, there was no real political debate in this country, just a popularity contest, much like most of the crap TV "reality" shows.

It looks like I'll be means tested out of a 30% private health insurance rebate, which a previous LNP government essentially forced me to take out (the private health insurance, I was happy to pay more to Medicare, but no I have to prop up some private health insurance company). Now someone can get paid parental leave without any sort of means testing?



I think that the point Gary was trying to make is that when electrical connections were in their infancy, the connection of electricity was not considered essential in much the same way that high speed internet is not considered essential now, but may be in the future. Oh and we're coming around to disconnect your sewerage as you don't think it's essential.

Cheers
Stuart

[multiweb]

Taxed at 45c in a dollar? :question: You bet she does.


LOL. I hear this one all the time from my mates. That's how employed people think. Put that on the business. The business takes care of everything right? Who makes the money? The business or people working for it? In your example the partner will generate enough income to pay her a wage and pay group tax. So it's still money put in the system. :)



Ideally there should be one. Like sick leave.


Too early to tell what they'll deliver on their promises. They're all pollies. They have a huge baggage to deal with now. Give them time. We'll see where it's all heading. Cutting spendings is good. For a little while until the water clears.



I know that but I pointed out faster Internet is not a necessity right now. Some people in the bush have septic tanks and are not linked to the grid. That's what I meant. I don't expect you to pick up my s||t. :lol:

[AndrewJ]

Gday Marc



Not many families where the wife earns that sort of money pay full tax,
as they can afford to get around the edges via clever accountants.
What would be nicer is if it was based on say an average declared "taxable income" over the preceding 2 years, vs current pre tax "salary".
That said, i still dont see why i should be paying to directly support the kids of people on that sort of income.
If the govt really wants to do something, make having kids cheaper.

Andrew

[multiweb]

Sorry if this is going a little off topic. Last post for me on this subject. Promise. :)


Hi Andrew, the ATO doesn't believe in clever accounting. Trust me on this. If you show $150k as income you pay or you get fined. Hefty fines + interests. Seen it all. To employ somebody at $150k gross + super + group tax you need to generate a lot of income which will be shaved by GST as well. So a lot of money is involved and going back into the system in various form.


Yes, that would be one way to look at it too.


Because they generate a lot of money in taxes in the first place so they do contribute for a significant part of their maternity leave.



Kids will never be cheap. In the long run they cost you more and more. :lol:

[alocky]

Not true at all. My wife earns that sort of money - as do I, and just about half of Western Australia. The suggestion that everybody in our position tries in anyway to pay less tax than we are obliged to is a pretty offensive sweeping kind of generalization. Once you factor in the outrageous cost of living in Perth, the cost of daycare, and Australia's relatively high tax rate, I would be better off living in just about any other country on half my income and my wife not working at all. Fortunately, many of us choose to stay here and continue paying tax. I know my wife wants to work, and thee aren't many who could do her job as well as she does.
If it makes you feel any better I'm no happier a person now than when I lived on a postgraduate stipend.
The sort of people you're talking about aren't paid salaries. They own the businesses.

[Larryp]

I can see points for and against paid maternity leave. Its proponents say other developed countries have it, and I'm sure they do.
But it has to be looked at in the context of all the other middle class welfare in this country, which has been brought about by blatant vote-buying from both sides of politics.
When I was raising my kids, we got absolutely zilch in government assistance, and endured 19% interest rates as well-yet we survived and coped as did everyone else at the time. We also paid higher marginal rates of tax than exist now.
I may be retired now, but in the last few years of my working career, it bugged me that I was expected to pay taxes for middle class welfare that was not available to my generation, and at the same time listen to the recipients of this middle class welfare complain about having to provide aged pensions to my generation as they retired.

[chiaroscuro]

The point you make and that everyone should accept, is that we pay taxes to provide services and infrastructure that our society needs to function fairly. We don't pay taxes as some kind of investment in our personal welfare, but as an investment in a fair society. And despite all the whinging that goes on, particularly around elections, we have a pretty fair and equitable society, with comparatively minor problems. We should be more grateful for that, if you ask me.

[Larryp]

I wasn't talking about infrastructure and services-I was talking about middle class welfare!

[casstony]

Furthermore, you are deprived of retirement income because the 'have everything now' generation needs low interest rates to afford the loans for their overpriced and oversized new houses - all orchestrated by the politicians and bankers via supply of cheap money.

[chiaroscuro]

I agree - but the last government wound back middle class welfare, like the Private Health Rebate for high income earners, and the baby bonus, to the deafening screams of the recipients. Thats exactly the point I'm trying to make.

[gary]

Gentleman, just a friendly reminder that the thread is wandering way off topic. :)

The thread topic is broadband infrastructure.

[cristian abarca]

Wow struggling on $300K a year, that's a good one.

[Larryp]

I would like to see it wound back even more, but once it is given, it is very hard to take it away-"the deafening screams of the recipients"
It would be fairer to reduce taxes-that way all working people benefit, instead of a targeted few.
But given the state of the nation's infrastructure, perhaps it would be better to spend the money on that.
And don't start me on private health insurance-why should people pay a Medicare levy, private health insurance premiums and still get massive hospital bills?

[Larryp]

You are right Gary-we are off topic, and I shall desist from further comment :)

[chiaroscuro]

Everyone has an opinion on where taxes should be spent and for some, the NBN has a high priority. I'm not really across the economic advantages of the NBN, although I can see advantages for Australia, particularly in areas like remote area medical care. But I don't think its benefit should be assessed solely as "what does it do to help me?" but "what does it do to help society?".

[AndrewJ]

Gday Marc



So if i was earning 150K per year and paying lots of tax,
but my idea of having a "baby" was buying a new supercar each year,
lots of money still goes back into the economy,
( more exotic car taxes, rego, insurance, speeding fines :-) )
but i dont expect the govt to pay me to do it.

Having children is a choice and with that comes a responsibility.
( and a drop in living standards for a few years )
This non means tested maternity leave is socialism gone mad,
whereas at least the NBN applies to everyone equally.

Andrew

[avandonk]

The argument is simple folks. A single optical fibre has a theoretical bandwidth that is about a million times more than ALL the radio frequencies. The limit currently is the opto/electronic bits at the ends of the fibres. So practically currently it is about 300,000 times the bandwidth. This will be easily improved by just changing the bits at the ends of the fibres.
The copper network is problematic. Currently to just maintain it, is costing more than a billion dollars per year. This is not being done!
In the laboratory twisted pair brand new copper will give reasonable speeds. If you are more than km from an exchange or node your speed will be lucky to be better than 12 to 15 Mb/s . That is mega bits not bytes.
For those of you that think your phone works with wireless think again. All the towers are connected by optical fibre. With the NBN your wireless modem will work faster than a local phone tower with your smart phone.
I have HFC copper internet at 30Mb/s . All my younger friends with their smart phones can download and upload for free through my wireless modem at far higher speeds than 4G (16Mb/s). I have a limit of 200GB.
If every household had fibre they could allocate spare bandwidth for phones and mobile devices even for others so taking the load off the main mobile phone system.
We do not know what bandwidth we will need even ten years from now.
I can remember the good old days of 48k modems.

Bert

[gary]

Hi Luke,

A very important point to note that it is equity funded not tax funded.

Please see my post here on the topic -
http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showpost.php?p=1013792&postcount=74

To fund things such as health, defence and education, governments draw
down from the pool of taxation.

As you can appreciate, when you build a hospital or a submarine and pay for it
with taxation dollars, there is no direct financial return on your investment on the
balance sheet. In other words, you don't get your tax dollars back.
We, as a society, are the end-users of the hospital or submarine.

To fund things such as a national broadband network though, you don't need to
draw on taxation dollars. The Australian Government has one neat trick up its
sleeve which that they can write an IOU on a blank piece of paper and investors are
eager to exchange cash for them. I am speaking of course of AAA rated bonds.

The government says, thank you for your thousand dollars, I will pay you
back in say 10 years at an interest rate of 4.1%.

The government then loans the thousand dollars to its own company, NBN Co.

NBN Co uses it to provide a broadband connection to someone. Perhaps your house.
Perhaps the headquarters of the Commonwealth Bank in Sydney.

You use some data in posts on IceInSpace and elsewhere and you pay your
ISP your monthly fee. They in turn pay NBN a part of that for use of the network.

The Commonwealth Bank on the other hand uses lots of bandwidth and they pay their
ISP obviously much more than your monthly bill would be. Once again, the NBN
is paid by the ISP for the bandwidth.

Since an enormous percentage of the country's communications will flow
through the fibers of the NBN (keep in mind even wireless mobile services
route their data from cellular towers over optical fiber), the revenue stream will
be significant and the plan of course is that it will make a profit. The profit then
goes initially to repaying those who have provided seed equity funding, namely
the government and some private investors. Plus they pay interest of, say, 7%.

The government then gets the bond back and pays the owner their $1000 plus
4%.

So there is no "opportunity cost" in the sense that you are not drawing
from the same taxation funding pool that you would use for say schools or
hospitals or roads or defense.

Of course, equity funding is what companies do all the time to bootstrap themselves.

So you may then ask, why not fund it entirely privately?

The answer is that the return on investment (ROI) is seen as too low for most
private investors compared to other places than can invest their money.
For example, say you have $1000 burning a hole in your pocket. You look around
and might decide that you can get a better return on Commonwealth bank shares,
or mining stocks or fixed term deposits and you want to turn your money around
in a shorter period of time.

However, when governments invest in broadband infrastructure they might
get only a small return on the investment directly on the balance sheet, but the
increased economic activity it helps bring about also brings them additional tax
revenue.

So the government investing in the NBN didn't cost you anything. You paid
no additional tax. You get a free fibre connection. There was no opportunity
cost in the sense that money was not diverted from schools or hospitals.
In fact, over time, your tax bill becomes lower because the network
helps more efficient delivery of health and education services and the profits
it makes from large users goes into consolidated revenue.

The biggest risk is that suddenly computers start getting slower and individuals
and businesses no longer have a need to communicate in the future.

The timing is perfect because the interest rates on much sought after AAA rated
Australian bonds is low.

[Larryp]

Luke, I'm afraid I cannot see any advantage in remote area medical care with the NBN. At the end of the day, it is just a means of communication, and you will still need medically trained people with the necessary equipment and medications to physically administer treatment.

[Astro_Bot]

There have been presentations on telemedicine and telesurgery in various media - Scientific American, Catalyst, New Scientist, etc.

You may still need a general purpose surgical assistant, resident, theatre nurse, and so on, physically on site, but a specialist (who you would never find in a remote locaility) can control complex procedures remotely over a reliable, high-bandwidth connection. It's more than surgery, though. Instant communication with a specialist, with 3D imaging and all medical sensing/testing immediately available to the specialist permits diagnosis as though the patient were in the room.

I'm not a medical expert, but I can see the value in that straight away.

[gary]

Hi Laurie,

Currently if a patient requires the consultation of a specialist, perhaps for an ongoing
condition, either the patient or the specialist needs to travel some enormous distance.

As you can appreciate, most medical specialists reside in the larger cities
and their time is in incredibly high demand. Whilst they are in transit, their
time is effectively lost.

if the patient can reach a rural medical clinic the medical officer at the clinic
can perform diagnostics under the direction of the specialist.

A video that showcases that using the NBN is here -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ul2xP9S_BbA

For example, in the video, Dr Haikerwal, Head of Clinical Leadership and Engagement at NETHA,
talks about the treatment of stroke patients.


It would clearly be foolish to ignore what these people are telling us.

Sometimes we all undergo some procedure or treatment and require the briefest of
consultations of a medical practitioner.

For example, you look and some of the stitches are coming out on the back of the
head from when you fell off the horse in the muster. "Show me", might ask the
clinician as you stream HD video from the farmhouse over your satellite
NBN connection. "They will be fine" answers the clinician. "Simply come into town
as planned next Tuesday and we will have nurse remove the remaining sutures".

I am sure all of us, at one time or the other, have walked into a GP's surgery
where the problem is self evident and apart from eyeballing you, they don't
even need to lay a finger or instrument on you.

These "micro consultations" no doubt form a sizable portion of the country's health
bill.

I know that if I was in some rural area and found myself in a situation where I
needed to provide first aid to someone who had undergone severe trauma, it would be
reassuring to be guided via HD video link by doctors say from the emergency
department of the RPA in Sydney whilst we waited for the Royal Flying Doctor
plane.

[chiaroscuro]

The most obvious advantage is the ability to transfer medical imaging files like CT scans immediately for real time interpretation. Also , video-linking remote emergency departments and operating THEATRES to give reaLtime support to doctors doing unfamiliar procedures, resuscitation etc.. High speed broadband would definitely make that easier. At the moment, it's done by phone, with the risk of misinterpretation.

[Larryp]

Luke and Gary, I will grant there are some medical uses for high speed broadband in remote areas-transfer of data and images could be quite useful. But as far as surgery being performed by staff unfamiliar with techniques, etc-it could lead to serious legal implications.
I have worked in the health industry since university days, and would not want to be around once the lawyers got hold of an unfavourable outcome.:)

[chiaroscuro]

In places like the NT, it happens all the time, through necessity. There just isn't the medical expertise in remote areas.

[Terry B]

I'm a GP and have NBN at my surgery. It means I can download ct and ultrasound images very quickly rather than waiting for the hard copies. Not earth shattering but still useful in my rural area.

[Astro_Bot]

Here's an example of telesurgery from over a decade ago:

Transcontinental Robot-Assisted Remote Telesurgery: Feasibility and Potential Applications (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1422462/)


They relied on a fast, reliable, dedicated networking connection. To make telesurgery feasible on a larger scale means the whole broadband infrastructure needs to be fast and reliable.

[gary]

Hi Laurie,

I think the video in the link showcases one good example of the types
of consultation that a fast broadband network could provide today.

Nobody will be proposing that they perform tele-surgery for the sake of tele-surgery
unless it makes sense to do that in a particular situation. :)

I don't know about you, but when I think of the total number of times I have walked into
a GP's office and the total number of times he has said, "You need surgery",
thankfully the ratio is very, very small. :lol:

Our collective tax bill for health is enormous. It's great to live in a country where
anyone can walk into a hospital and be treated.

But anything that we can do to make health service delivery more cost effective
can lead to better outcomes for us all.

The NBN is one way that can come about. It isn't paid for by tax, it is built by
equity funding. When people say "no" to it, they are simply denying other
Australians the benefits it can bring. There are no opportunity costs or
shuffling of national "priorities" required. There is nothing "selfish" about it
because it hasn't taken away from the opportunity to do anything else.

I can see a lot of people don't get it. :) With infinite patience there are those of
us collectively trying to explain. One can appreciate their skepticism but there is
hope yet that it will dawn on them that they really are just looking at a gift horse in
the mouth. :thumbsup:

[AndrewJ]

Gday Gary



Just for info, can you explain in more detail where the money will be made to pay it back at the end.
I understand the fact that tax dollars may not be reqd now to get it built,
but if it costs lets say 80 billion by the time its done,
where does that amount of money come from to pay it back???
Ie a lot of the revenue stream will be required to run maintain and update itl, so where is the free profit coming from to pay back the bond holders ( plus interest ).
To me, its just like putting the cost on a credit card,
ie it still comes out of our pockets ( one way or another )
in the end.

Andrew

[astroron]

The Snowy Mountain Scheme and the Sydney Opera House were expensive White Elephants when first built, now we wouldn't be without them.
Cheers:thumbsup:

[Larryp]

Hi Gary, I can see a fair bit of logic in your arguments, and I can see you have researched your subject well.
For my part, I do not know if NBN will be a good thing in the long term, or not.
From what I read in the newspaper today, Ziggy Switkowski is being courted to take over the running of NBN Co., since it is way over budget, well behind in roll-out and the uptake by potential customers is poor. This doesn't surprise me, since goverments are historically poor at building anything efficiently or profitably.
With such a poor client uptake, perhaps it is being overpriced, or perhaps some people are worried that since it is government owned, it will allow more government intrusion in their lives.
Can someone tell me if a similar project has been carried out in another country?

[Larryp]

Hi Ron
The Opera House is still an expensive white elephant-but it's an instantly recognisable world-wide symbol of Australia-and that makes it a worthwhile white elephant!:lol:

[Peter.M]

When I see statements like this on this site it immediately highlights the age difference between me and probably the majority of the community. I am 26 years old, I went to university after school and am in a modest paying job. If I choose to own a modest house for say $300000 my weekly repayments will be 70% of my wage. This house will be so far from my workplace that petrol will probably cost me the other 30% and that is before I pay any bills, registration, insurance, or eat anything. I don't deny that it was hard for your generation, but please don't belittle me into believing that I have it so easy.

[astroron]

[QUOTE=Larryp;1014039]Hi Ron
The Opera House is still an expensive white elephant-but it's an instantly recognisable world-wide symbol of Australia-and that makes it a worthwhile white elephant!:lol:[/QUOTE

Larry, It has probably paid for it's self many times over by the amount of tourist it has encouraged to come to Sydney, as well as other parts of Australia. :)
Cheers:thumbsup:

[strongmanmike]

Funny, regardless of what you think of it as a whole, I wonder how many of the home experts in this thread have used their current connections (that they are very happy with) to actually scrutinise the information available on the NBN website (http://www.nbn.gov.au/) :question:

Just a thought :) because if you haven't, I am sure there is plenty on there to interest most of you either way :thumbsup:

As is often the case with emotive issue (which it shouldn't be) lots of basless and misguided comments are made particularly when one bases these largely on political loyalty grounds....and No, I would heave been very happy had Tony and Malcolm announced they were going to do it differently but make it better and perhaps even more powerful

Mike

[Bassnut]

This has been a very interesting thread. I wasn't keen on NBN just on the cost alone, but I must say I've changed my mind now, mainly due to Gary's missives, most impressive, thanks Gary :thumbsup:

[rat156]

Well, you think you had it tough (though you're probably not old enough to understand the reference either).

When I got married, we had just bought the house we still live in, we borrowed a modest $70k (total price was $75k) for a 12.5 sq house on a 972 sq m block in Werribee, which is 35 km from the city. At the time my wife worked in Highett, at least 100 km round trip, I worked in Parkville, about 70 km round trip. Interest rates were 18.5%, we had a 30 year loan, the repayments on which took about 80% of our combined income, the rest went on bills and food, which was almost exclusively home brand and the cheapest cuts of meat. At one stage our loan got put out to 35 years because the bank couldn't put the payments up as we wouldn't have been able to afford them. This is what happens to your economy in a recession, something the Government that is responsible for trying to implement the NBN (trying to remain partly on-topic) managed to pretty much avoid by spending on infrastructure and running the economy into deficit. Something the new Government will continue to do (Tony's own admission on Sunday), without the infrastructure spend (I couldn't find any big infrastructure spend in the LNP policy).

There really isn't a lot of difference between your situation and ours, except for one huge difference, the interest rate. Housing prices have been driven up as a consequence of the lower interest rate available for mortgages, but even at $300k vs $75k you are actually heaps better off (and you end up with a $300k investment). Oh, your house is almost certainly at least double the size, if not triple the size of ours.

So, although you don't have it easy by any stretch, it's still not as hard as it has been.

My mother-in-law will tell you about what happened in the Great Depression, they really had it tough.

Count your blessings.

Cheers
Stuart

[Peter.M]

I will not turn this into a fight over who had it harder, but to say that you have a 75k investment vs a 300k investment is silly. Your house value now is the number we should be comparing, unless your saying that you bought a property for 75 grand and it has not appreciated in any way.

I am not arguing that we have it good, because we do. But participating in this community it seems like some older generations would rather just tell me how easy my lazy, freeloading generation have it to make themselves feel better.

[strongmanmike]

Yup...where is Doug anyway? :lol: :P :D :lol: :rofl: :thumbsup:

[mithrandir]

What's this got to do with the NBN?

Yep. I remember those days. We'd just done $50K worth of extensions when the rates skyrocketed.
Melbourne must be cheaper than Sydney. $300K won't buy you a block of land, let alone a house. 19 years ago we paid $270K for a modest 4 bedroom house - admittedly on 1100 m2 - in an outer suburb.

[gary]

Thank you Larry.

I am a professional Electrical Engineer and have been a member of the Institute of
Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) for 35 years.

We've consulted to Lucent (formerly Bell Telephone) and Telstra Research Laboratories.

By the late 80's, the professional literature was overwhelmingly pointing to the
fact that future telecommunications would be predominantly digital.

My principle interests were in areas such as computing, computer architecture,
integrated circuit design and embedded computing and it was obvious by then
that unless countries started to transition their public switched telephone networks
to new digital networks that they ran the risk of falling behind economically.

Thus it was a great pity for Australia when in the period that Telstra (formerly Telecom)
had Frank Blount as CEO up to 1999, that there was no push to change the public
switched telephone network (PSTN) to an all digital system. Blount was an Engineer
himself and should have known better.

If you had raised the topic with me in after-dinner conversation back then, I
was already on the soap-box that we needed to go digital.

Ziggy Switkowski was Telstra CEO from 1998 to 2004 and also totally
missed the boat. Rather than appreciate that they better start deploying fiber,
Telstra attempted to squeeze whatever was left out of the copper switched
network.

By then I was jumping up and down on the soap-box if you were unfortunate enough
to ask.

Sol Trujillo was Telstra CEO from 2004 to 2009 and again there was no movement.
Telstra was so confident that they would be asked to build the NBN that it came
as a shock to their board when their bid was rejected because it was incomplete.

Back in December 2007, IEEE Spectrum magazine quoted an estimate attributed
to Gordon Moore, founder of Intel, that perhaps one quintillion
- that's 10 to the power of 18 - transistors are fabricated within devices annually.
Moore went onto say -
"We make more transistors per year than the number of printed
characters in all the newspapers, magazines, books, photocopies,
and computer printouts".

And that was back in 2007.

Just in the first three months of this year alone, a UK company you may never have
heard of called ARM Holdings, reported that some 2.6 billion CPU chips based
on their design were shipped.

Apple meanwhile has the largest market capitalization of any company in the
world, exceeding that of Exxon.

So computing and electronics are trillion dollar industries and that doesn't
count the enormous economies that now flow across the world's networks.

So I have not been thinking about the NBN just for the last few years.
I have been advocating a digital network for decades.



Under Switkowski's reign Australia was set back several years by him not making the
decision to go digital.

He therefore is not the right person for the job.



Australia is a vast country. This is not just one of those "mega projects" like you
see on TV. It is a mega mega project. The global engineering fraternity acknowledged
it as that even before it began.

The major delay was during the long negotiations with Telstra over access
to the existing trenches. That also required shareholder approval. The deal has
been struck and so it should now be quicker to lay cable.

Projects of this magnitude tend to be slower at the start as there will always
be some unknowns that are initially encountered which require innovative solutions.

When the rabbit proof fence was first being constructed in the early 1900's, the
camels would sometimes eat poisonous vegetation and become sick.
As RJ Anketell, who was an officer of the Public Works Department in West
Australia, wrote in his report of 1907 -



In other words, Australia has the legacy of a huge land mass that can
present all sorts of obstacles to the building of infrastructure and
people learn on the job and improvise on the fly.




Many, many countries have deployed FTTH either in full or in limited stages.

South Korea and Japan have very deep penetration.

The People's Republic of China is deploying fiber to the premise.

Ireland is doing the same.

Here is a list -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiber_to_the_premises_by_country

The decision to use an FTTH architecture was also partly driven by the advice
of countries that had mistakenly taken the FTTN route.

At a UK parliamentary inquiry British Telecom's (BT) former Chief Technical Officer,
Peter Cochrane, who spent most of his career there, has publicly declared that -



Article here -
http://delimiter.com.au/2012/04/30/fttn-a-huge-mistake-says-ex-bt-cto/

My nephew has currently relocated himself and his family to Hong Kong
where he is working for the next few years.

In April this year he wrote me -

[Larryp]

Thanks for all the information, Gary. I think I have a better understanding of NBN now.
But I still feel there were other more urgent infrastructure requirements.
As I said in an early post in this thread, I find it hard to think about the NBN when it takes me 30 minutes to get from Padstow to Bankstown in morning peak traffic-and that's common to all of Sydney :)

[rat156]

Yes, my house value now would be an appropriate measure IF I earned the same then, as you do now. The only real way to measure this is house price as a percentage of take home pay.

Back in 1987 our house price was about 5 times our combined take home pay, unless you take home less than $60k, you are actually better off.

I was about to do a comparison, but as has already been pointed out there is no relation to the NBN, so I will stop at this.

Cheers
Stuart

[gary]

Thank you Fred, you are most kind. :)

When you think about the monumental strides in computing just in the past
few decades and try to imagine what it might be like in a couple of decades
ahead, it readily becomes apparent that you require the fattest i/o pipes possible.

It is not hard to imagine that interacting with systems across the network
that are the descendants of systems such as this one may become the norm -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lI-M7O_bRNg

People will want to be able to move, mine and analyze massive amounts of
data in real time. You will want to be able to ask real questions, not just
Google for relevant documents.

Metcalfe's law, which is attributed to Robert Metcalfe, co-inventor of ethernet,
states that the value of a telecommunications network is proportional to the
square of the number of connected systems.

For countries such as Australia, where 70% of our GDP comes from the service
sector, fiber to the premise makes 100% sense.

[astroron]

In my humble opinion,the solution is not better roads but less traffic.
This can be partially achieved by people working from home.
Hence the need for better broadband. :)
Cheers:thumbsup:

[Larryp]

Actually, Ron, so much peak traffic is associated with schools. Its amazing how much traffic is reduced during school holidays

[gary]

Thank you Larry!

Sydney traffic is a nightmare but again to reiterate, unless you plan on building
toll roads designed to make a profit, the NBN is not somehow stealing funding from
them.

It is that important distinction between something that is tax funded and
something that is equity funded.

If you want a toll-free road, you and I have to pay for it with our taxes. We are the end
users of it. We are its consumers so to speak.

If you want an NBN connection, it is ultimately paid for by the people who use it.
If you and I don't use it, we ultimately didn't pay for it.

Now if you want a toll-free road and you want a hospital but have limited funding,
you have to make your list of priorities. That's because neither of them make
a profit and so they are paid for by taxes. If you want the NBN as well, no
problem, you can have that because its construction is paid for by the
issuing of bonds and these get paid back, plus interest, when the network
starts to make a profit.

Now, having said that, there are circumstances where a government might decide
it is wise to build a road quickly or a hospital quickly and, sometimes controversially,
they will issue bonds to do it. In fact this is what we did in WWII to fund the
war. If the interest repayments are low, it may make perfect sense for a government
to borrow to do this, but that is an entirely different topic altogether. :)

By the way, it is interesting to look at the price of road building in Sydney.
For example, the F3-M2 link (the F3 has just been renamed the M1 Pacific Motorway)
is a 7km tunnel and is estimated to cost $2.65 billion. It will be a toll road.
So $44 billion only buys you about 116km of modern Sydney underground roadway.

Several members of my extended family have the advantage of being employed
by companies where they can telecommunicate a few days a week.
With 4 out of 5 Australians employed in the service sector, some of them
could probably be taken off the roads as well.

If the NBN existed today, in all of my years of engineering, I would have to
think hard if there would be any reason why I or the people I worked with would
actually need to physically come into the same office. Except for Friday drinks. :lol:

[Steffen]

Work, school and a lot of other things will be transformed by ubiquitous high-speed communication. There simply won't be a need for being there, at least not to the degree we have it now. Virtual meetings, class rooms, GP visits and a lot of other things we can't even imagine yet will be possible, if we can muster the vision and foresight to make it happen. This isn't about faster downloads, it's about transforming pretty much everything in our lives, very much like electricity did.

Cheers
Steffen.

[Astro_Bot]

I've spent the best part of 18 months telecommuting - the company's servers are in Sydney while I am in Brisbane - connection is over an IPSec VPN - it's just like being at a desk in the office.



Doing the same job in Sydney, before I moved to Brisbane, my daily commute was 1h 35m in each direction on public transport (there was no prospect of driving since there was no parking within cooee of the office), except if I missed a tight connection when it would add an extra 45 to 60 minutes, depending on when I got away.

The awful commute is one of the reasons why I moved to Brisbane.

Anything that gets traffic off the roads is a good thing - not just from the point of view of congestion and commute times, but also smog and greenhouse gases, cost, time saved (better spent with kids/loved ones), reduced stress, etc.

IMVHO, one of the biggest failings with the way the NBN was managed was the marketing - much of the message I recall was about home subscriber download speeds ... touted as good for movies and such. The NBN is so much more, and I think the apparent assumption that the electorate wouldn't understand the main benefits was shortsighted.

[The_bluester]

One aspect that really needs considering when looking at the competing NBN models (Without going into the ideological debate)

The current average net connection in Australia sits at around 4Mbit/sec (Which I suspect as it is rising is already being affected by people getting on to NBN fibre, when someone can buy a service that is more than 20 times faster than average, the average will start to shift soon enough)

Most people ARE limited in some way by the available bandwidth.

Bandwidth demand I have seen figures of it growing by as much as 50% per year, take a conservative figure of 30%.

Start from 4Mbit/Sec and apply 30% annually, and if you believe the coaltions promises regards speed (I do not) and take it that 90% of the population will have 100Mbit/sec by 2019 (50 to 100Mbit per the promise actually, so a ratio of 100%, just take it for the sake of the argument that thay actually swing it and 90% get 100Mbit)

Even at 30% bandwidth demand growth, seven years (2026) after the (Very optimistic IMO) promised delivery date of the higher speeds the FTTN network is a bottleneck to the tune of people looking for 20% more capacity than it is optimistically able to deliver for an off budget "Saving" of perhaps ten billion. We will by then be looking at spending tens of billions of dollars more to go back to the model that is in place now and the "Payback" time of the equity funded model is well and truly trashed.

[GTB_an_Owl]

well ladies and gentlemen

i can't see the point in having a 20 story building with a lift that only goes to the 16th floor

geoff

[multiweb]

The lift goes to 19.99 :)

[GTB_an_Owl]

not to my way of thinking Marc

not to my way of thinking

geoff

[killswitch]

I saw the NBN co contractors down the road from my house.. would be nice to have fibre at home.

[multiweb]

Oh it does. Believe me. There's fiber optic in the joiner box in front of my house. I know it's wired to the miller exchange 5km away because all the new development on the other side of cowpasture road already have it. When I check the rollout map (http://www.nbnco.com.au/when-do-i-get-it/rollout-map.html)though my neck of the wood is not even scheduled and 'work' hasn't even started. It's like I'm being surrounded but in a black spot. Weird... :whistle:

[GTB_an_Owl]

i have a friend being connected next week at east gosford
three houses on the other side of the road to him - first one, fibre to the front - 2nd one, nothing - 3rd one, fibre to the front

completely missed one house?

geoff

[GTB_an_Owl]

I know of a residential roll out in coffs harbour that stops 100 metres from a small Maternity Hospital ? go figure

geoff

[The_bluester]

What colour is the fibre?