National Broadband Network

John, this was the technology talked about just a few months ago at 12Mbs, now at over 100Mbs testing in Western Australia. Wimax can do all the NBN could do and more, but you need good backbone infrastructure.

I am with you John, the business model can't pay the capital cost. They are talking the IRR of close to the Long Term Bond Rate, but they can't get a commercial rate.

DOEY, satellite is a third rate system for the latency - that is the wait after the mouse click, then you try again to see if it worked then you bought two of them. People I know with them would rather Next G. Friends can't skype with theirs

he free to air antenna for TV is a different kettle of sardines. $6k+ for the automatic antenna arrangements. If you want internet the antenna and connections for the portable unit are $3.8k, manual find, then again the latency.

Wireless systems are ahead already with a large part of Australia coverable with an high gain broomstick and Next G. If you want to go further a yagi antenna can help. You go to the decent mine areas like Century Mine and they have Next G around Lawn Hill too, without an antenna.

Hi John

I agree with you 100% about its performance in its current form.

I wonder what it could be like if we threw $30billion into infrastructure to upgrade it, including more towers and satelittes etc instead of fibre optic cable??? Im sure with enough money it could be quite a useful, high performance system. Even potential to tap into overseas service delivery, for eg fast high speed internet to NZ, SE Asia etc. Maybe we can include data and communications as an export.

its just a thought.

not everyone is out to get bites!

3GoBush,

Would you, being an intelligent person, go and buy a brand new product without knowing the total price and all the performance details??

No, I didn't think so!

Why therefore should the Australian people buy the Conroy promoted NBN without knowing the total price and all the performance details.

If the Australian people take it on just the word of Julia, Wayne and Steven, then it serves them right if their fingers get burnt.
We, the people will be paying for it regardless.

End of story.

Disco.

Nah! don't worry about it, the cost is only 47 BILLION give or take a few BILLION, and how much will the ordinary house holder have to pay to use it???????.

Here in Sydney we have Two Optic Cables running along the road on Telegraph poles. Fiber for Broadband, Pay T.V. Etc but very few people using them. I was looking on Google Earth at where I lived in the U.K. and every house you can see has a Satellite Dish, very few Antenna's. At the Nullarbor Road House, I wondered why I could watch T.V programs from Sydney and Perth. Of Course it was all coming in on Satellite. Must be the way to go....

If the NBN was viable and cost efficient business model, can some please explain why the Gillard/Rudd theory requires they need to buy out the only real competition (Telstra) to ensure the NBN can charge a monopolistic pricing structure??

Regardless who you vote for, Even a simple minded person can see the NBN is a waste of money. Just have a look at you local phone book, its shrinking by the year. Previous govts have sold off anything of any value, including tearing apart Telstra and now want to ruin what's left of it. The money could be better spent on many other things, it just shows the foresight in Government. NO FORESIGHT!! Michael

Always the same, short term thinkers just can't be bothered with nation-building infrastructure development, but you can be sure they will bark about lack of it a decade down the track. There's been plenty of discussion on the wireless V fibre argument. Both have a role but fibre is a clear winner for high end needs, particularly in high population centres and for business/service applications (ie more than current home user needs).

The cost of the NBN has been published numerous times - even by the right wing rags. Most recently the costs have been revised downwards to $35B. Is it value for money? We probably won't know for 20 yrs but even without the many intangibles being factored in some think it is already a good investment:
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/thestump/2010/05/06/nbn-can-be-done-on-budget-on-time-and-itll-cost-35-a-month/

John - your question is obviously just a poorly disguised conservative comment but I'll attempt to answer it for you anyway. I'm no expert but this is what I've gleaned: NBN Co has been set up to provide wholesale access to the infrastructure at a consistent price across the country (which essentially means that city people will be subsidising country users at the wholesale level). Retailer service providers will have much better and more open access than they currently do (to Telstra's copper networks), and the industry expects far greater competition as a result. The Telstra 'buyout' as you call it actually results insignificant savings to the NBN - they can use existing Telstra conduits, and Telstra has guaranteed that it will migrate its customers to the NBN instead of being a competitor in the infrastructure area. Hope this helps but if not there is plenty of info out there if you care to look.

Business models are great for setting up a business and working out if you are likely to make a profit/loss on the deal. But folks the NBN is a Huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge infrastructure project that will have benefit not just to Joe average at home but will form the basis of many thousands of business models out into the future.....just as the OTL, the National Highways system, the Snowy Mountains Scheme, the National Electricity Grid, reticulated water supplies and so on didn't have 'business models' - think differently folks the NBN is NOT a business (sure it will recoup significant sums of money over the long term) per se but rather a framework that will allow Australia to actually move into the 21st Century and compete with businesses around the world. We simply cannot keep digging holes in the back yard...sooner or later that iron ore is going to run out and I'm guessing that the rest of the world won't really want much of our coal beyond the next 20-30 years.
My two bobs worth for what it's worth!

You guys can assume all you like.

The fact is you don't know whether this will "Transform" the Nation as the Gillard/Rudd government claims as they won't release its Cost Benefit Analysis, won't allow the Productivity Commission to scrutinize the arrangements and have not developed a Comprehensive Business Plan.
In other words they won't tell the taxpayers of this nation how they are dealing with our money and what the real tangible benefits really could be.

Its all so secretive, Oh!! sorry "Commercial in Confidence" I meant.

Its policy on the run and you need to remember that Rudd originally plucked the $43 Billion dollar figure out of the air when asked how much it was likely to cost all those years ago as he could not support the figure when further challenged back then and they still can't support the figure now.

How much will it cost each of us every month, anyone know for sure??
In a market that is pushing broadband prices lower every year will this project stack up financially when it theoretical comes on line in the years to come??
I for one won't be paying $100- plus per month for a service and a speed I don't need when I pay less than half that for a service that more than suits my needs now.

They could not deal with Pink Bats how will they fair with this project??
So far not very well otherwise they would not be hiding behind the rhetoric.

Oh and Bazooka I always thought it was the job of the opposition and for that matter all of us as taxpayers to question everything thats done by our elected representatives regardless of political gender, or at least I do it anyway.
You may be gullible enough to trust in the all seeing and knowing Julia & Kevin tag team but I for one don't.

So John there is those of us that ASSUME it will work and be viable, and then there are those of you that ASSUME it wont.

Labor has Government and the Liberals don't, my way of thinking is there has to be something in that, let history tell the story.

John - you've made a lot of wild assertions in your post that just don't stand up to scrutiny. Not surprising really. If you bothered to look the costings for the NBN were scrutinised by independent auditors many months ago and the summary business plan was provided to the parliament last week. You also fail to grasp that the NBN is not about your personal needs primarily, but the needs of the business and service communities (for example remote medicine). I gave you a link to comments about the financial viability of the NBN. You obviously didn't read it. There is heaps of information around about the NBN's technological advantage just waiting for you to devour if only you would open the other eye.

I'm all for accountability but I also expect my govt to look to the future - something Howard failed miserably to do with infrastructure, health (need a doctor anyone?) and education, just to name a few areas. Incidently, the same govt was responsible for the Telstra monopoly, something now being dismantled by Labor. As for Gillard - let's just say that I think she is limited (BER and the education 'revolution' demonstrate this IMO, but it's early days). Oh for a middle party without the Lib and Labor hacks - a mix of the better members from both sides, possibly with Malcolm Turnbull at the helm.

3GoBush
Interesting that you allege that I assume it won't work.

I have not assumed anything as there is not enough real detail released for scrutiny to allow any of us to make an informed decision.

Given the history to date on this governments inability to manage any project of significance then I feel quite justified in questioning all aspects of what they are doing.
After all I would think that most of us should be pretty concerned that $43 odd billion of our money is going to be spent to the best effect.

One last time John - there's an enormous amount of detail and information out there if you care to look, particularly regarding the economic benefits. Seems to me that your biases are holding you back. That's your choice of course.

Actually Bazooka the planned cost of the network has not been revised down to $35b..all you are seeing is a new accounting treatment.

What the NBN Co has chosen to do is split its spend into Capex and Opex, rather than report the original Capex only number.

So the payment to Telstra ($12b or $14b, whatever it was) is now being treated as Opex. As a result the Capex number has been reduced by the same amount.

They will still need the same amount of cash, so don't be misled (and that wasn't the intention of NBN Co) into thinking the price has dropped to $35b.

It will certainly be an interesting project, and one that will form the basis of a business study by the Harvard Business School (for one reason or another).

George_M

Yiou are absolutely correct George, thanks for pointing that out to me.

http://www.zdnet.com.au/don-t-add-telstra-deal-to-nbn-cost-quigley-339307580.htm

Absolutely agree with you Steve.....In the mining industry we are rapidly changing to majority fibre optic network as we are going totally DIGITAL.....it is faster and much more responsive and as a result all our copper is fast becoming redundant and is being removed....only some wireless, microwave and satellite remains to bridge the gap and have become our CHOKAGE points for data flow.
Recently we have retro fitted two of our P&H 2800 xpa shovels for digital and 90% is now (plastic) fibre optic....groan...I have to retrain as well to bring me up to speed....oh I am too old for this....life USED to be simpler.....LOL.

Not yet, Jon, but they will.

The first thing that Telstra must do to get into this market is buy sufficient spectrum. That process can proceed now that Telstra has agreed to a deal with the NBN Co (touch wood), and has also agreed to the structural separation of the Retail and Wholesale businesses.

The Government had previously threatened that without both agreements it would exclude Telstra from the 4G spectrum auction (not sure how that would have worked).

George.

Hi George,
Was a deal stuck today because the pollies don't want to spend more time in Canberra or they truly have the countries best interests at heart?
I guess only time will tell.

The governments has a few months up it's sleeves before it can be questioned again.

(lol) I think that time is against them, Jon - big promises have been made which, if not kept, will become a major issue at the next Federal election.

I think also that the legislation had to go through the Parliament this session as a prerequisite to the vote by Telstra shareholders planned for early next year.

This will be a very "interesting" project. Keep paying those taxes!!!!

George

'This will be a very "interesting"

I agree George.

Relevant point you make.
They could not install pink bats in houses without making a mess.
Can't wait to see the willful destruction of taxpayers money down the NBN toilet also.

'Wireless will outpace it before it is commisioned'.
Strange that pretty much NOONE in the telecommunications industry agrees with that opinion, but you're welcome to it all the same. Ever heard of spectrum?

Interesting John(Vic) that during the insulation program the rate of fires caused by incorrect installation (by private contractors) actually dropped significantly, and since no records have been kept regarding deaths we can't draw any conclusions as to the program's effect in that area. Have a look here if you want some perspective:
http://www.thepoliticalsword.com/post/2010/03/02/The-Great-Big-Home-Insulation-Program-Beat-up.aspx

Absolutely no doubt (IMO) that in its rush rush to stimulate the economy the govt was not diligent enough in ensuring compliance to standards and training by the many johnny-come-latelies who saw a chance to make a killiing. These companies obviously had few scruples and paid no attention to worker safety.

We were rung up by one such company. The conversation went thus: 'Hello, we are ringing to offer you free insulation under the govt insulation program. ' 'Thank you, but we had new, top-rated bats installed 3 yrs ago.' 'No problem, we can install new ones over the top.' 'No, our bats are sitting on insulation fluff and are the thickest recommended.' 'Okay, we can remove all the existing bats and replace them for you free of charge.' Needless to say we declined the 'offer'.

the smartest thing said on this topic all day!!

surely no-one can argue with that- oh hang on here comes Bazooka!!!!

Yes Doey, given you have added zero to the discussion and invited me in I'll respond to the BKS' comment.

It need not be an either/or situation with a lot of govt policy/spending. It depends on what you are prepared to pay. For (just one) example if we had implemented the Mineral resource rent tax as suggested (supported incidentally by David Buckingham former head of the Minerals Council and Executive Director of the Business Council of Australia) we could be doing many more things. Personally I'd be paying 'carers' more before putting more into raods, but that's me.

(By the way if you do nothiing else after reading this have a look here, you might be surprised:
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Behind-the-resource-rent-tax-hysteria-pd20100510-5ARLS?OpenDocument )

However, you also need to understand the difference between policies which enhance the economy and those which enhance our living standards but are costs to the budget. The NBN is a business enabler which has the potential to significantly boost economic activity well into the future. Govt receipts can then be used to upgrade hospitals, roads etc.

As I've said elsewhere, I appreciate the concern about the costs of the NBN but that needs to be weighed against the benefits, and the cost to the economy of doing nothing.

wow, i knew you wouldnt be able to resist.

I couldnt give a stuff about the MRRT, actually i could but not going to debate it here and with you, thats a different topic for a different time.

i do see your point about the NBN, and like you, we all have an opinion.
I think most peoples concerns are the wasting of money, initiatives that are done ad-hoc or reactionary when the polls are not in their favour and the use of funds for things that may not be a priority. More hospitals, doctors and nurses would not be a bad thing, i would think they were more important, obviously you think they can wait in favour of fast internet, maybe to access this forum so you can shoot everyone down with your closed minded opinions and links to every document ever written. Do you have shares in Wikipedia?
This raises the issue of what is a priority? there is no right answer to this as we all have different needs, concerns or agendas.

I think the NBN would bring long term economic advantages if done CORRECTLY. I think we all need stable, reliable and somewhat fast internet, our lives now evolve around the internet in some form or another.
Like i have stated elsewhere, we dont need super-dooper fast internet, but we do need COVERAGE and for our government to consider long term investment viability.
I just dont agree with HOW the NBN is proposed to be rolled out, in bed with telstra using existing infrastructure??? surely there are better ways. my personal opinion is wireless\satelite as it works well for tv and internet in the bush now. Imagine if money was spent upgrading this system, putting another satelite up... surely TV, Internet, mobile phones reception etc could benefit from being able to tap into this infrastructure. And for us travellers, having access to this upgraded infrastructure would be a blessing.
im not an expert, perhaps you are, im not sure. but i would love to hear from julia gillard about other alternatives that have been considered (if any) and what makes the proposed roll out so fantastic in comparison.

Sorry Doey you seemed to have missed the point of my post to BKS. It states clearly that there isn't a need to play one budget item off against the other. It merely depends on how you intend to pay for them. As for the links - they are simpy to encourage 'you' to actually read some of the myriad info available before posting what could only be politely called throwaway lines. Seems you didn't read the MRRT link - pity that, but you know what they say, horse, water etc.

You again roll out the 'we don't need fast internet' and satellite/wireless nonsense. You personally may not, and hundreds of thousands of home users currently don't but that is far from the point of the NBN. One thing that noone is arguing - the NBN will be critical infrastructure for business and govt in the near future and fibre is the answer to their needs. Wireless is a relatively small but important part of the equation esp out bush, but it is NOT the solution to future business needs if you listen to the many of the industry smarties.

You'd "love to hear from Julia...."
The information is already out there if you really want to know. Don't take my word for it (I'm certainly NOT an expert), get onto some of the telecom/technology sites (or just Google) and you will see what a range of experts think not just about the tech challenges but also the implications for the economy. Accusing me of being close minded while refusing to make the effort to do a little research is a tad unkind, especially in a thread full of opinion but light on information. Apologies if I've offended you by offering an alternative view.

Bazooka can you explain exactly what economic growth will result from NBN?

BKS - just Google 'Economic benefits NBN'. You'll have enough reading to last a week.

Cheers

Read the iteml in the SMH today out of London. Its all a big Con. As usual Kevin Dudd Lied about the benefits. South Korea's productivity has actually dropped because they are spending so much time doing online gambling and games.

Can you give me a link to the information regarding your Sth Korea claim BKS? I'd be very interested to read it. Must admit this is a first - your inference being that the NBN will actually have a negative economic effect due to online gaming and gambling (I'd add porn given that it's one of the most accessed 'appilications' on the net apparently)? Haven't seen that argument rolled out before though. Wonder why that is?

Here it is

SMH link

I heard an interview on TV where the Brisbane Lord Mayor was looking at running the cable through the existing sewer system as that would save time and money, I sometimes wonder where they dream up these ideas, and I also wonder how they can pluck a figure out of the air regarding cost, regarding trenching excavations, cable installation, restoration of footpaths and road crossings, even the initial surveying to work out where the cable will go so they dont dig up other underground services ect, the amount of kilometres of cable to go down every road, street, hwy, and easements is mind blowing, and as it happens now some poor sod on a backhoe or what ever accidently damages the underground fibre optic cable on a hwy ect and half of a state is off line, oh well think i'll stick to Wireless like a lot of people are doing.

Daza,
And when you get crap line speed we'll know who to blame.
Cheers Mate.
;)

HAHA, ive been watching his thread today.

you have stated such a valid point.
i dont think telstra or the government are capable of coming up with a solution, all they have is OUR money to gamble with.

Satelite is the answer!!!

its not just about super-dooper speeds, its mainly about coverage. Id prefer to have enough speed to stream some music or movies and maybe do a few other things at the same time and be able to do it ANYWHERE!!! surely that is infrastructure for the future!

Isuzumu, yeah, I was worried this would go the way of my last post on Vanishing Food Resources (too political) and my question on which fridge is best (trolling, which was true).

But at least this Thread has some meat. It's almost like the old days.

"And someone said that they can use existing conduits, hahahahaha most are very full or useless, I did work for the telco for awhile."

Seriously, you are suggesting that Telstra has pulled the wool over the eyes of both industry and govt? Few such facilities exist? This will surely come as a huge surprise to NBN Co (which expects to save billions of dollars by not having to duplicate or service the 'ducts, pits and conduits' provided by Telstra), and the govt which has paid about $5 billion for the privilege. Obviously a huge number of industry experts, accountants and govt employees have been asleep at the wheel. Conroy will be huffing and puffing even more when this news gets out. Must pen him a letter before they hand over the money.

This is enough feed back for meNBN

Bruce - you seem to be happy to throw the baby out with the bathwater. You will find many (including supporters of the NBN) who agree that the economic argument for fibre to the HOME is dubious at the PRESENT time (key point). But for one thing that does not factor in uses of the internet that haven't yet come to light. As I said to BKS, try Googling 'economic benefits NBN' - you might be amazed at what is already being considered. Once the infrastructure is in place it is fair to assume that over the next 3 decades many new technologies and applications will emerge which require the speeds and bandwidth provided by the NBN.

And you can be sure that Telstra will not be spending billions of shareholders dollars on keeping the copper network (life of 20 yrs according to some reports) going when far better alternatives exist. A piecemeal approach will ultimately cost us more directly and indirectly than the $35B being outlayed over the next 8 yrs (ie under $5B per year or 0.5% of GNP).

Interesting readingAdam: There is no way in hell the NBN will give 'returns' of $55b per year. This figure is "gross economic benefit", which is a term that can mean pretty much whatever you like. For example, in most economic textbooks, war has a "gross economic benefit" since things are being made quite quickly. The fact that they are being destroyed even more quickly is (economically) irrelevant. The most famous example of this is the broken window - in most economic schools of thought, breaking your window is a GOOD thing, since you have to pay somebody to fix it, who can then use that money to pay somebody else, etc, etc. So taking this to the extreme, smashing every window in Australia would be economically positive?!

It is abundantly clear that the NBN will make a staggering loss, that is not an issue for debate. To even cover borrowing costs, the NBN would need to generate $50/month per household in Australia in PROFIT (not revenue), a figure which is so far removed from telco reality to be laughable. This of course assumes 100% takeup, which juding by present indicators is going to be closer to 40-50%. No, the return on investment for the government will be very, very poor.

The economic advantages of the NBN will only be seen in other areas, which are difficult if not impossible to measure accurately, since once it's built it's clearly impossible to calculate how much "better" things are than what they would have been like without it. Short-term, the benefits will be few. There are not enough services relying on super-fast broadband to take advantage of the higher speeds, and for those few applications that require it, a patchwork solution of fibre where necessary, or multiplexed copper connections, is a far cheaper solution than running fibre to every premise. In time, these applications will naturally develop - the question is, does it make economic sense to build the NBN *now*, or should it instead be built piece by piece as the demand arises, as was the original telephone network. There are compelling arguments both ways, and no crystal ball solution, unfortunately.

But to argue "economic benefit" for a proposal that will run at a large loss, with only a promise of "economic benefit driven by future needs" is a rather unstable platform.
REPLY ALERT MODERATOR

'It is abundantly clear that the NBN will make a staggering loss, that is not an issue for debate. To even cover borrowing costs, the NBN would need to generate $50/month per household in Australia in PROFIT (not revenue), a figure which is so far removed from telco reality to be laughable. This of course assumes 100% takeup, which juding by present indicators is going to be closer to 40-50%. No, the return on investment for the government will be very, very poor.'

So Browny, where did you get these interesting figures from ? I suspect we know but you could tell us so we can compare with other official numbers that have been scrutinised and discussed by economists and telecomm experts almost ad nauseum.

By the way, the answers to many of your rhetorical questions can be found in Mike Quigley's 2010 Charles Todd Memorial Oration.
http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/08/19/nbn-ceo-i-have-to-tell-it-as-i-see-it-without-fear-or-favour/

gee bazooka, im starting to think you may own the company who got the contract to supply fibre optic cable to telstra.
There is plenty of info out there for and against (you probably have a list of links to each and everyone no doubt). Because someone doesnt agree with your point of view, doesnt make them wrong. I know you havent blatently said anyone is wrong, but you seem to be quite defensive when someone doesnt agree with you.
It might be time to leave this discussion alone- its not going anywhere.
but hey- nothing on tv. Carry on...................

Doey - it's not a matter of agreement with my view of the NBN as far as I'm concerned. I'm simply responding to a lot of uninformed nonsense that has been posted here and trying to get people to look at the wide range of well written commentary that is available before dumping on the NBN. I have NO problem with people questioning priorities or asking about the economic value, but hopefully most Exploroz readers are smarter than to base their views on some of the throwaway stuff in this thread. Cheers

I guess we should not let a good Gillard/Rudd story get in the way of an opposing view.
Especially as the Government who is putting up our money refuses to release the FULL details for proper untainted scrutiny.

All comment to date has been from the sidelines and is largely speculative as they have not been given free and unopposed access to the full raw data that Labor has been using to supposedly plan the NBN.

Sounds a bit like the Rudd climate change argument, along the line of the greatest risk to us etc etc and we need to act right now to price carbon etc before we are all swimming.
Was a good sucker argument right up until he said, its does not matter now it can wait until we re visit it in 3 or 4 years time.

Labor = Zero credibility!!

Zero credibility - why am I suddenly reminded of the pot and kettle I wonder.

Thanks mate, I just won a $50- bet with your reply. :-))

I knew you could not bear to let an opposing comment go unchallenged.
God forbid someone challenges your links and views.

I guess you received your renewal notice just recently for your Labor Party dues and felt the need to spruik the party line also.
More so I guess since Brumby got the boot in Victoria and NSW is next in line.

And no I'm not affiliated with any political faction, just a taxpayer that questions everything that the government of the day does, particularly if I think my great grand kids will be paying the bill for the excess spending of today.

I liked the Quigley speech, good to see you don't think the bloke installed by the Labor Government and paid by them to run the NBN is regarded by you as unbiased in his views...funny about that I guess, unless you think he does not want to keep his job??

As for quoting from Stephen Mayne's blog as a reliable source of information, well Mayne's views and credibility has been questionable for as long as I can remember.
I have been at a few shareholder meetings over the years and watched Mayne get slam dunked by various directors in front of a live audience.
Old Solly Lew did him over in a big way at a Coles/Myer meeting years ago, Mayne downed tools and walked out with everyone laughing their heads off.

By the way, did you see Turnbull on PM Agenda on Sky News today?
Excellent questions being asked by him of Gillard and Co and about the cost analysis and the rational of the claimed speed/cost benefit required well into the future.

'Thanks mate, I just won a $50- bet with your reply. :-))'

Really? Somehow I doubt it. You may not be affiliated with any party (as I am not) but by any reasonable measure your views on this are ridiculously unbalanced.

By the way I won $100 that you'd reply (gee it's easy to write BS). Guess you've won another $50 with this resonse then? If we keep it up can I get 10%? Farcical, and you know it.

Yep!!
Double or nothing that one was.

And its your views that are questionable, no one is allowed an opposing view without you getting your knickers in a knot and trying to belittle every other point of view.
You sure your name is not Mike Harding??

Kerching. $150 less my fee.

You really are something John. Not staisfied with ridiculous assertions you then slag off at highly qualified and committed people like Quigly. If you have a problem with what he says why don't you challenge him, or at least seek clarification of his comments? The email address is: info@nbnco.com.au. I suspect he knows far more than ever will about NBN issues, but that's just my opinion. You also seem to think it's okay for you to sound off but when I challenge you to put up that's belittling? Interesting perspective that.

By the way, Mayne sold out of Crikey a long time ago and but for institutional proxies (with vested interests) many of his motions would have been carried (particularly those regarding the abominable packages paid to some executives irrespective of company performance. He had massive individual shareholder support for many of his motions). Perhaps you were also unaware that many of his (and others') comments on Crikey were based on leaks provided to him by business executives themselves and members of the same political party he was ragging. Crikey has a lot of credibility in the right areas.

"Crikey has a lot of credibility in the right areas"

LOL now thats funny, I guess those credible areas just happen to be those you selectively quote to try and support your position.
ROTFLMAO You are a very funny man. :-))

P.S.
Damn I am so sure your name is Mike Harding.

Bazooka.

Would you be kind enough to (in list form) without links, tell me what the short term and long term advantages would be if the NBN was rolled out in its current proposed model.

Would you also like to add if you think there would be any other alternatives the government could consider that may be viable? like i have suggested wireless\satelite, for more than just fast internet. Also what is your position on that option?

dont get me wrong, im not trying to stir you (ok= just a little) but i have just noticed a lot of defensive comments and responses when someone else mentions their doubt or are not convinced with the current governments credentials, especially based on their prior performance.

cheers

Doey

Haven't we been over this? TV must be bad mate.

Do your own research is my suggestion, it ain't difficult. A good place to start would be
* Mike Quigley's speech (covers a lot of what you want),
* then the NBN website,
* then a cursory Google of wireless/economics/technology/spectrum/towers/ limitations/advantages/disadvantages with NBN in the search line.

Results will provide a huge range of comments. You can fairly quickly work out which ones are credible I'm sure. There is no point in me paraphrasing what other more knowledgeable people say when you can actually read it for yourself. Not a bad practice to get into anyway if you want to get a good range of views on any subject. Yes it takes time, which is what many people don't have unfortunately, so they get overloaded with rhetoric from both sides of politics and of course vested business interests.

Doubts? Of course there are many doubts and risks in any major undertaking, especially in a high-tech industry which continues to see fairly rapid change and advances. But most (certainly not all) of the nay sayers on this thread haven't been from genuine doubters IMO. They are clearly from anti-Labor people who just regurgitate the usual conservative rhetoric irrespective of the issue. While that's understandable it is also irrational in my view.

I repeat, don't believe the rhetoric (from me or anyone else). Satisfy your curiousity and do your own mini investigation. At times you will be astounded at just how much good information is at your fingertips.

bazooka
Thanks anyway mate- time to change the channel me thinks.
Same storyline gets a bit boring.
thanks for the laughs

Hey DOEY you sound like a man beaten. LOL

I must say that DOEY sounds like a what is between MR RABBITS EARS. ROTFLMAO

'thanks for the laughs'

No charge Doey, but I admit I did have higher hopes for you. Thread confirms the truth about Leopards and spots. Like most people I don't particularly like confrontation but some of the 'opinion' paraded on here just shouldn't go unchallenged. Unfortunately I don't have the tact of many others so I challenge comments directly. Must work on that.

Hey.........
you can not win against ignorance, so yes it would be safe to say i was beaten.

"I must say that DOEY sounds like a what is between MR RABBITS EARS"?
perhaps you meant to leave the "a" out, yeah? not to worry, its a common doey mistake!

all i will say is 3GoBush- and STAY THERE!!! PMSL

Where ya been 3Go?

Yep Doey is dead right about one thing - some people feel safe in their ignorance and just can't stand to be challenged. Don't get it myself but that's human nature for you. Thankfully most of us in Australia have the choice - be independent/informed or follow the shock jock crowd. Guess you didn't look up spectrum/wireless limitations then Doey?

Phew, that's almost the last I can squeeze out of this topic, but maybe one of the neos will come back for one last crack.

you are geat value, Bazooka.
Would love to have a beer with you sometime!
perhaps together we could work out how they got the bubbles in there!

Don't know how they get them in Doey but the Pommies fought for years to get them out. Apparently you get more beer without them. You've struck yet another thing I don't get (okay there's a million more things but let's not go there) - the attraction of warm, flat beer (even in a cold country). Tried a pint in Nottingham once - couldn't get past half way tho'. Sad, very sad.

Baz,

Sorry I should of made it more clear that my post was a cut and paste from one of the web sites you suggested we look at to educate our selves, not my words at all, it was a responce to someone who was talking up the benefits of NBN, who coincidently was the head of some communications network (or something similar) who stands to benefit financialy from the go ahead of NBN.

Mate to be honest I'm a fence sitter on the whole subject, but I'm allways a little sceptical of the reasons behind some people and there glowing recomendations of some things.

I also think that the comparisons between the costings of getting it to every home in a densly populated asian nation and seemingly "remote" locations, can't be compared to our situation here in OZ.


There are certainly pro and cons I reckon, but I'm sure that once up and running the NBN will be a good thing, just weather it was worth it only time will tell

Cheers........Browny

Browny

The costings for the rollout are very solid, but the takeup rate (which obviously affects the income and pricing regime) looks optimistic to me. That said I accept that NBN Co and others have done due diligence and haven't plucked their numbers from the sky, and I've read enough of the discussion about that aspect to think the assumptions are in the ballpark.

"There are certainly pro and cons I reckon, but I'm sure that once up and running the NBN will be a good thing, just whether it was worth it only time will tell".

This is one of the most reasonable comments on here. Agree totally. Especially wrt the fibre to the home component, which for at least the next decade or more (that's just my guess) does not look to be value for money on face value. That was obviously a huge dilemma for the govt and NBN supporters but you can imagine the outcry if only the major regional centres were done. No doubt one of the reasons that Labor has pushed the current NBN model so hard is to differentiate themselves from the Lib-Nats (it is ultimately what gained them govt of course).

Cheers

For an alternative view on the NBN debate.

An analyst perspective on why the NBN business plan is flawed.

Not hard to guess who will pick up the bill in the long run.

Morningstar Analysis on NBN

...lols...

Bazza, one of the reasons they got the votes was that some guys were saying they could download movies in seconds. It was common thinking on Whirlpool. One wonders why you need to do that as the movie may take an hour or two to watch. Why do they want to stream so many at once or so many video conferences at once?

You are quite right, there are other priorities

Okay I glossed over that bit in the article (for good reason), thanks for highlighting it.

"But maybe the massive increase in online gaming, facilitated by the broadband revolution, played a role.''
'MAYBE'??? Either the evidence suggests it played a role (to what extent?) or it is just a stab in the dark. If the rest of the Kennys' analysis is as flaky as that no wonder the govt is dismissing it.

Irrespective, the notion that a minor level of productivity loss (which certainly occurs in some workplaces in Australia with the current internet) would in any way diminish the massive advantages to businesses of fibre broadband is just nonsense. Not even your mate Barnaby would touch that argument.

Bazoooka !! why would it not be better to fix some of the infrastructure that has been promised in the past and let the private sector work on the internet infrastructure? Or maybe you want this NBN to download movies all weekend at rocket speed!! Michael

Hi Michael,
I think your right about that.

Barely deserves a reply Michael but actually I prefer to use the internet to get a wide range of information and views (though I do occasionally watch ABC replays on Iview). The internet is a great source of good and bad information. Perhaps if you used it more you'd be less inclined to make patently absurd statements like your first above (...'Even a simple minded person can see the NBN is a waste of money'). If you only realised the irony of your following comment because if nothing else the NBN is PRECISELY about foresight.

Wrt your recent question, Labor is obviously playing catch up with infrastructure after 11 years of conservative neglect. Did you miss the BER or the ports/rail/roadspending? This might help:http://www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/plans/index.aspx

Hey Bazooka, do you wear pants or a skirt? cause if you were the latter you might be JG in disguise hahahahahahahaha

I can pick BS a mile off Bruce and your comment on conduits was a good pile.

Bazooka, you can't use the Building Education Revolution to support your argument and expect us to take you seriously.

What a slush fund that was.

Michael writes, "want this NBN to download movies all weekend at rocket speed!!"
Thats all the under 25's want it for.
But hey, lets use the reason that the country will be better off for it be cause of faster speeds.
The tech savy are screaming that we need it.
Seriously, what 'REAL' benefit will this give to Jo Blogs in the street?
Nothing, Nothing at all.
Just another diversion from a failing government. cynical, I know, But hey thats just me.

20/20 Summit= Fail
BEC= Fail
Fuel Watch= Fail
Grocery Watch= Fail
Insulation= Fail
Green Loans= Fail
Boarder Protection= Fail
Providing more Hospital beds= Fail
I know this is a State responsibility, But rudd said the buck stopped with him, Hmmm He got out of that one. ;)
This Government loves to spend yours & my hard earned tax dollars like a drunken Sailor in the Cross.

Sorry, but they don't have a good track record,
NBN= will Fail.

Gone Bush - we've established your politics elsewhere so there is little point in us arguing the BER case in detail. Again, have a look at unbiased reports and you'll see that it was not as bad as many would have us think.

That said, I absolutely agree that NSW in particular administered the scheme VERY poorly, and the need for stimulus does not excuse the lack of reasonable oversight of the prices being charged by many ripoff merchants (private contractors). I have a contact in that area so I'm very aware of their practices - including some not canvassed in the public arena. Absolutely disgraceful IMO but that's what you get in unregulated private enterprise from time to time.

You've well and truly established yours too, Julia.

Nice come back there George. But 'the real' Joolya wouldn't be anywhere near as gentle as I have been. She might however say that some of our responses show her 'education revolution' was long overdue. Thanks for raising this by the way. Been damn hard work and I'm sure it has just about run its course.

The FACTS on the BER as detailed by the Auditor General were that it cost about 6% more than it should. That was considered a small premium to pay to get things moving quickly and avert a recession.

And we did avoid a recession, the only advanced economy in the world to do so. And we have modest debt of between 4.5 and 6% of GDP, depending on which economist you choose to listen to.

Jobs, businesses and homes were saved due to the quick action of Kevin Rudd. History will show him to have been very harshly treated.

The facts are there, just depends on what you want to see. ;)

"Jobs, businesses and homes were saved due to the quick action of Kevin Rudd. History will show him to have been very harshly treated."

Are you saying that Howard would not of done the same kinda thing?
Because they would of put in place some form of package that would achieved the same result, it was China's need for our resources that help too.

"it cost about 6% more than it should"
From figures I've seen, that's nearly a Billion dollars of waste. Yeah, that's a small "premium to pay"
Doesn't sound like much when you say it quickly ;)

Jim, many economists also agree the rudd did nothing special either.

Hairs, read this

Sydney Morning Herald

There is no doubt in my mind that we would have gone into recession under a conservative government; they always have and always will react rather than act.

$1 Billion as a portion of GDP, to help stave off a recession is a drop in the ocean and has proven to be money well spent.

I can assure you from a business owner's perspective that the last four months of 2008 were very scary indeed. The stimulus worked.

Cheers,

Jim.

My guess is that Costello/Howard would have implemented some sort of stimulus, but let's not split hairs, the current conservatives opposed it on every front and continued to oppose it even when confronted with evidence of its success. All they could come up with was the big bad debt mantra - even the most conservative economists agree that govt debt is usually not a bad thing when it is targeted at stimulating the economy.

Numerous independent economists have said the speed with which Rudd acted and the focus of the stimulus were significant factors in Australia keeping its head above waters. China was undoubtedly a major factor but unless you were totally blinkered you would have to give due praise to Rudd's actions in that area.

Hey Guys,
Lets not forget the Insulation screw up as well.
What was there, 4 Deaths and how many genuine insulation companies that went out the back door because of poor policy decisions and unchecked accreditation system.
Some bureaucrats had concerns about this, But No, Tanner told all involved, it must be rolled out. What about a viable budding solar industry, a shot in the head for them, again more out of work.
I'm sorry, I can't give rudd & Co much credit at all.
And don't get me started on Garrett & Wong. The word Muppets comes to mind.
I put this to you both, So Swan is in the same league as Costello & Keating?
I don't think so. I can't believe this clown is our deputy PM.
Now, the international Monetary Fund has praised rudd & Co, hang on a minute, what credibility do they have, they sat back and watched the GFC unfold and said nothing or they didn't see it coming. So their comments mean nothing in my book.
So Jim, your business survived because of the rudd governments fast action hand outs? sorry mate I know of others that lost theirs because of rudds populist egotistic policies that did fail through no fault of their own.
I believe that if a business 'needed' rudd's hand outs to survive, there is something wrong with that business.
I am a self employed Carpenter, rudds cash splash did nothing for my back pocket.
What about the 100 million dollars a day we are still borrowing?
Not much gets said about that.
We still have a very low unemployment level, but we have a rising asylum seeker population rising by the week, what drain on services is this having.
Hmmm and I don't have blinkers on. I choose to see thing for what they are, and not what I'm told to see.
So I guess we will just have to disagree on this.

It is apparent that you see what it suits you to see Jon, no more.

4 deaths from the insulation program - guess you didn't read my post about this above. Absolutely appalling behaviour by a few cowboy companies in their dash for cash and hopefully they will get their comeuppance in court. Irrespective, given their are no stats for previous deaths related to insulation installation we don't know if this was abnormally high or not. The stats we do have is for rates of fire caused by insulation, and these show that since the govt stimulus plan the rates have fallen significantly.

"how many genuine insulation companies that went out the back door because of poor policy decisions and unchecked accreditation system."
Okay tell me, how many, or was that just another shot in the dark aimed at misleading?

Your claim that Rudd's stimulus did nothing for your back pocket is dubious also, but perhaps you were one of a very few unaffected directly or indirectly. Had the economy gone into recession the knock on effects in almost every industry would have been disastrous. Have a look at the situation in the good ole USA.

Australia's debt is one of the smallest in OECD countries, and a large proportion of that debt is private (including significant borrowing by mining companies to fund the mining boom). Debt becomes a problem when you don't have a plan or the wherewithall to cover the borrowings. Neither is the case in this country.

'It is apparent that you see what it suits yo'
same can be said for your views.
Funny how you just bang on about the debt that we don't have.
So who is borrowing the 100M a day?
You have failed to address any of these that I mentioned before.
20/20 Summit= Fail
Fuel Watch= Fail
Grocery Watch= Fail
Insulation= Fail
Green Loans= Fail
Boarder Protection= Fail
Providing more Hospital beds= Fail

So tell me please why Labor got a good smacking at the last election?
Surely not because they are the best economical managers the world has ever seen.
Because people woke up to the fact that they were being lied too and are still being lied too
If it wasn't for two Independents that had the wool pulled over their eyes, and have decided to sleep with the enemy there would of been a change.
"Australia's debt is one of the smallest in OECD countries,"
Why? because we were not in debt to start will. Jeez, just imagine the mess we would be in if we were.
Also look at the size of our Population compared to the US and other countries. A big difference.

Your banging your head against a brick wall trying to convince me of anything else.
The country was in really good shape well before the GFC.

You are entitled to your opinion, just as I am to mine, thats what makes the world go round.
Anyway this is heading way off topic, a discussion for other day maybe.
Happy Days LOL

I don't address mindless slogans or lidicrous claims of lies - pointless exercise. Did I say we don't have debt? No, but it is apparent that your understanding of debt's place in a national economy leaves a lot to be desired. Do you have shares in mining companies? Worried about their debts? I do and I'm not becaue they are investing to make money and have the capacity to repay the debt, as does this nation. When govts go into debt to stimulate an economy or build infrastrusture which will bring economic benefit (eg transport infrastrusture, NBN) then most economists agree they are usually on the right path.

Thanks to Rudd's prompt action to stimulate the economy (the advice of Treasury, Reserve Bank and industry) during the world economic meltdown we are now in a far better position. An important part of the deal was that the money has to be paid back - we were told this ad nauseam during the major part of the crisis. It is happening as we speak despite continuing difficult trading conditions. Meanwhile your conservative mates were twiddling their thumbs saying we shouldn't do anything. Their position has been discredited while Labor's actions have been lauded across the globe.

Is that you Kevin?
;)

It can't be Kevin, he got knifed by his own party remember??

He did such a good job with running the country that Julia & Co said he had caused the government and the party to become lost.
So Julia needed to arrange a public knifing by the party/union heavy weights to ensure they could find their way again.

It makes a mockery of all those people in this thread who argue that Kevin was right and made the correct decisions on managing the affairs of the country when his OWN party disagreed and dumped him in a very public show if disunity.

John Quigley's 2010 Charles Todd Memorial Oration is compulsory reading for anyone with an interest in the NBN. Far too long to copy here so I'm sorry but you will have to copy and paste the link.

http://www.arnnet.com.au/article/357411/2010_charles_todd_memorial_oration_by_nbn_co_chief_executive_mike_quigley/?

Socialist Government madness!! Imagine the labor loonies paying Telstra 10 Billion to buy their customers!!! So the government it appears, cant even compete with Telstra... It must be unsure of the real costs to consumers... By the time the White elephant is finished, most of us will be well and truly on Wireless! Michael

Another well balanced assertion there Michael.

As the late great Peter bowers said to PM Malcolm Fraser many years ago "You wouldn't want to bet on it, would you?''
["By the time the White elephant is finished, most of us will be well and truly on Wireless!"]

How true Doug! When seemingly normal people enter politics, their brain seems to fall out! Michael

LOL :-))

Nothing wrong with having a different point of view, this after all is what makes the world go round. Just because someone doesn't agree with my way of seeing things doesn't automatically mean there is going to be "division and animosity"
EG, I hate unions with a passion, yet a very good mate that I played under 17's footy with is a big union delegate on QR National. Believe it or not, we can sit down have a few beers and agree to disagree without creating division and animosity, Our friendship spans 28 years, and it will for many, many more years to come.
I am happy that everyone behaved themselves and it is allowed to run.
It's a credit to those that posted and to the Mods for watching and keeping it open.
It's Friday morning now, I've just got home from work, I'll be be awake again at 5.30am, I reckon I'm going to enjoy that first coldie at 3.30pm.
Hope you have a good one.