A granny and a marriage celebrant show Turnbull's 4ked the NBN

At the end of my holidays, as I waited for a for a flight to Sydney, I ran to a bloke I know who has a very healthy business as a marriage celebrant. Two hundred couples a year say their vows under his auspices, and he’s always looking for ways to keep his business fresh, to keep those engagements coming. Within a few minutes …

[mathew42]

79% connected at 25Mbps or less

The biggest problem with the NBN is not the physical medium for delivery, it is the artificial financial model that Labor established and speed tiers.

> Suddenly, that wall isn’t keeping the nation from watching the latest mega-blockbuster. Now, it’s stopping a 95 year-old great-grandmother from having a look around the wedding of her great-grandchild. That’s a tangible failure.

The reality is that 79% connected on fibre to the NBN selected 25Mbps or less (NBN media release). It is almost certain that even if 100Mbps was available for frail Grandma that she would have the selected the 100Mbps speed tier. About as realistic as Labor's promise of 1Gbps connections.

> Although it may briefly preserve the media oligopoly that protects and defends the current political arrangements, the knock-on effects have appeared, and are growing.

I don't really understand how you can suggest that FTTN preserves the media oligopoly. FTTN will be sufficiently fast for streaming HD video, heck the average ADSL connection (11Mbps) does okay. There isn't a non-NBN alternative for UHD (4K). It is another one of those arguments that doesn't hold water.

I'm sorry but unrealistic use-cases as justification for the NBN are the reason why FTTN is being built. Come up with an NBN plan where the minimum speed is 100Mbps which as you correctly argue and Labor documented in the NBNCo Corporate Plan is the minimum speed for game changing applications then you might find the average person listens. Currently most people don't care, as indicated by 79% on fibre connected at 25Mbps or slower.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: 79% connected at 25Mbps or less

There are a whole load of reasons 79% of people connect at 25mbit or less - here are some possibilities

79% of people who *currently* have NBN connections are not heavy users

79% of people who *currently* have NBN connections are struggling with finances

79% of people who *currently* have NBN connections wouldn't know fast broadband if it came up and attacked them with a wet fish.

You don't need 100mbit to watch SD cat videos and tell us about your latest poo on facebook.

Also, if you have struggled with appalling ADSL1 speeds (2-5mbit) for the past 10 years, -anything- is going to seem like a massive step forward.

---but----

You do need 100mbit right now to work from home with large documents held in remote / cloud storage, if you don't like making cups of tea every 2 minutes

You do need 100mbit right now to feed a family of 4 bandwidth hungry users, all feasting at the bandwidth table at the same time

You do need 100mbit right now (my personal interest) to use things like Steinbergs VST Connect Pro with any sort of reliability.

With the ever increasing reliance on cloud platforms for all our needs, and the inevitable growth of 'Desktop as a service' it seems crazy to me that anyone in their right mind would not be able to look at the trends in data growth over the past 10 years and make a 'forecast' that would say that its highly likely that a reasonable proportion of people will need gigabit connections in the next 10 years.

Of course, time will reveal if people like me are right. I suspect we will be - and I also predict that the "640k is all we will ever need" brigade will be pretending that they always thought we needed more than 25mbit to avoid looking like prize tits in 10 years time.

Of course, by that time, Australia will be economically f****d and a digital backwater, visited only by people from other countries who fancy a trip down 'memory lane' to a time when cat videos in SD was all anyone would ever need.

Wake up Australians! The mining boom is over. The winners of the next 25 years will be those who can invent, develop and cease the moment in in increasingly technological age. Asia gets this, Japan gets this, Scandenavia gets this, Canada gets this, hell, even parts of America get this!

[mathew42]

Re: 79% connected at 25Mbps or less

> Of course, time will reveal if people like me are right. I suspect we will be

So far time is proving you wrong. Labor's predictions on the demand for speed mde in the first NBNCo Corporate Plan and little changed at the lower end in updated versions have stood the test of time better than other parts of the document. In designing the NBN Labor either decided that only an elite would ever experience the full benefits of the NBN (<1% connected at 1Gbps speeds in 2026), were clueless or possibly both.

> Of course, by that time, Australia will be economically f****d and a digital backwater

I don't think the choice of technology will have a major impact on that on the economic challenges Australia faces. Those people who want / need the faster speeds will have the option of either moving to a better location or installing fibre on demand. Yes, there will be a digital divide but that same divide will exist under FTTP or MTM unless the underlying financial model is changed.

The fault for providing the Liberals with an option to change the NBN is also Labor's responsibility. A 1Gbps fibre network would have been world class and comparable to what is being built around the world. A 1Gbps network where you still cannot order those plans 2 years after NBNCo made them available in December 2013 and Labor predicted to have less than 1% connected in 2026 makes us the laughing stock. If Labor had not imposed speed tiers on the network then it would have been a 1Gbps versus 25Mbps network. Based on what people are choosing on fibre, for 80% of people FTTP or FTTN won't make a difference.

[Tailgator]

Re: 79% connected at 25Mbps or less

@ mathew42

Not it is not 'Labor's Fault'. As much as you continue to push that opinion.

The reality is that the Labor Govt introduced a model to install FTTH to 93% premises by using a Govt funded and subsidized model, one which the commercial markets/private enterprise couldn't possibly hope to emulate. And the end result would have been a massive boost to the infrastructure of the country and it's ability to compete in the global economy.

That opportunity has been sacrificed to the Liberal Party slavish adherence in the belief that free markets are Always the best solution no matter what. And the PM Turnbull is too egotistical to admit he was wrong.

Australia now has the 'MTM'. A policy which combines the worst aspects of both the US and GB models. And the Aust economy and society will suffer for decades to come as a result.

(Aside - Had a good laugh at Turnbull's damning with faint praise of Mark Pesce in the provided video link. Patronizing bastard.)

[mathew42]

Re: 79% connected at 25Mbps or less

The reason it is Labor's fault is that developed a policy in which they predicted that close to 50% would be connected at 12Mbps as documented in the NBNCo Corporate Plan. To write a document where it states that the benefits come from 100Mbps plus speeds yet create a financial model which results in 50% connecting at 12Mbps suggests a failure of judgement.

> And the Aust economy and society will suffer for decades to come as a result.

I doubt that simply because the outcome will not be significantly different. Those who can afford the faster speeds will install FoD (less than 1% of the average price of house in many areas).

[Jasonk]

Re: 79% connected at 25Mbps or less

Mathew

According to Turnbull own figures we could have had a FTTP new that could deliver upto 1Gbps for only $64B but not this gov only building an upto 25Mbps for $56B which is better value for money?

[Anonymous Coward]

2.5Mbps connection here

Absolutely NO chance of ever seeing the current NBN where I am, and I can see a capital city.

The coalition's version of the NBN is dead to me.

[Oengus]

It should be about choices.

"Currently 79% on fibre connect at 25Mbps or less"

They choose to connect at those speeds because they don't know what is possible with the higher speeds and to save a few dollars per month. Most ISPs only offer 3 tiers 12Mbps, 25Mbps and 100Mbps. With 12Mbps usually $30+ (and 25Mbps usually $20+) per month cheaper than 100Mbps people are driven by price. They see that they can get the "cheap" plan and get equal to (or better than) what they currently get. Most people don't realise the options that the faster speeds give them.

At least with the FTTP option people will be able to upgrade their speeds easily (and possibly be able to upgrade "on demand", for a fee, if an enterprising ISP recognises an opportunity). Imagine being able to contact your ISP to be able to upgrade your connection for a single month (day, week, hour) so you can watch the Tennis in UHD format or the international cricket tests in 3D or the football finals in HD3D or watch all in-car feeds from Bathurst or the F1 Grand Prix simultaneously. (Yes we aussies are sports mad).

Beer because it is essential when watching sport...

[mathew42]

Re: It should be about choices.

The primary choice should be how much data not what speed.

> They choose to connect at those speeds because they don't know what is possible with the higher speeds and to save a few dollars per month.

The problem is that without the opportunity to experience the benefits of a faster connection people aren't as likely to upgrade. Very few people have the skill to determine at which point in the network path congestion is occuring.

> At least with the FTTP option people will be able to upgrade their speeds easily (and possibly be able to upgrade "on demand", for a fee, if an enterprising ISP recognises an opportunity).

Nice idea, but unfortunately the only option NBNCo provide is to upgrade for a month, not two hours to watch the footy. The other issue with this that in the use case provided an RSP would also need to significantly increase backhaul to cope with the demand from a major sporting event.

A more feasible option is to remove speed tiers and then RSPs could offer 'premium' plans with guaranteed performance. NBNCo would still benefit from increased data usage.

[JJKing]

Geez Matthew42, you have to be one of the more short-sighted person I have seen post here. I am assuming the 42 in your Nic is the number of millimetres available in your vision depth.

Matthew42 said, "Those people who want / need the faster speeds will have the option of either moving to a better location"

Define a "better location" matthew42????? Have you even looked the liberal's screwed up rollout plan for the rest of the "high speed broadband" (have to call it that as National Broadband Network doesn't exist in anything but name, oh wait, $700,000 and that got change as well)? In Victoria, apart from 3 FTTP locations, 1 of which is already underway, everything else is FTTN or poxy coax.

Why is it that your political mates can fuck this country up to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars and then leave their job and still fuck us over with their obscene pensions while at the same time being lauded, by those still isolated from the real world living part time in Canberra, about what a great servant of the country they were? I screw up at work I get fired. Politicians screw up, they get a massive pension and an ambassadorship or similar high paying taxpayer funded position.

[mathew42]

> Geez Matthew42, you have to be one of the more short-sighted person I have seen post here.

I'm not short sighted. I just don't believe that a FTTP network where Labor predicted that in 2026 50% would be connected at 12Mbps and less than 1% at 1Gbps to be visionary. I could not support a network in which only a few would receive the benefits while most received little to zero benefit.

> In Victoria, apart from 3 FTTP locations, 1 of which is already underway, everything else is FTTN or poxy coax.

You are excluding the new developments of which there are a significant number across Melbourne.

> Why is it that your political mates can fuck this country up to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars

Not my political mates. I supported Labor's idea to build FTTP but like most of their policies once it moved beyond an idea, the implementation became a complete disaster.

If you are looking for someone to blame, blame yourself. It was very obvious from the first NBNCo Corporate Plan that Labor were not delivering what the spin masters promised. Remember the 1Gbps announcement just before the 2010 election? It was made in response to Google Fibre and the NBNCo Corporate Plan predicted that take-up would be almost zero until 2026. 1% on 1Gbps in 2026 is hardly going to make us world leaders. The actual cost of delivering 1Gbps on FTTP is zero, but Labor chose to impose speed restrictions limiting the usefulness of the NBN. You and others chose to ignore this because you selfishly thought you would be okay. Sadly the result is a mixed technology network, however for most people (the 79% on fibre connected at 25Mbps or less) it won't make much difference.

[SpaceKidette]

Locked out of Commercial Opportunities & Growth

Ever since Turnbull announced the compromised, patchwork quilt of copper obsolescence I have been saying that this was going to cost Australia dearly. This is decision was about knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

Any communication network is, and should be viewed as, an enabling technology and as such what it is able to enable is limited by its capacity. In terms of capacity to carry, technology has reached, and moved beyond, 'Peak Copper'. The inherent physics of copper mean it that its day is done. It served its purpose way beyond its original intent, but technology and the world have moved WAY beyond any of the technologies cobbled together in Turnbull's version of the NBN.

But more important than the physical obsolescence is the technology/commercial obsolescence. That is to say that that innovation, technology development, business and consumer demand are already beyond it. It is this obsolescence that will cost Australia dearly.

Why? Because we will be locked out of innovative new applications that are only enabled by a communication network that has a capacity to deliver it. We are spending $50 Billion plus on a solution that we KNOW will not meet the immediate future technology requirements - and that is just what we can already see.

It means Innovative Australian businesses and technologists will have to go overseas to develop applications on a communication network that WILL enable their innovative business ideas and systems. It means that Australian businesses will not be able to implement innovative new business applications that drive new levels of efficiency and effectiveness. It means Australia will lose bright young minds to overseas markets.

As a business consultant I have personally seen three Australian business grapple with the impacts of a communications network, that even at its best, won't deliver for them. The three business are currently trying to develop work around strategies, but these band-aids won't fix their business problems. It simply kicks the can down the road, hoping that their will be a solution in the near future.

And ultimately it means we will have to build the NBN all over again.

[mathew42]

Re: Locked out of Commercial Opportunities & Growth

> Any communication network is, and should be viewed as, an enabling technology and as such what it is able to enable is limited by its capacity.

Labor's speed tiers have definitely limited the capacity of the NBN for real users. It is almost inconceivable that you could build a new FTTP network where 79% of speeds (12 & 25Mbps) are slower than FTTN. Consider this is NBN removed the speed tiers on FTTN connections for most people FTTN would be faster than FTTP based on current take-up.

> It served its purpose way beyond its original intent, but technology and the world have moved WAY beyond any of the technologies cobbled together in Turnbull's version of the NBN.

You do realise that for greenfields FTTP is still the plan. Fibre on demand is also on the roadmap.

> It means Innovative Australian businesses and technologists will have to go overseas

You mean relocate to a location / business park that has the appropriate services.

> It means that Australian businesses will not be able to implement innovative new business applications that drive new levels of efficiency and effectiveness.

I would agree with your concerns, if Labor had planned to build a FTTP network where everyone had 1Gbps, but the reality is that 79% currently connected to fibre have opted for 25Mbps or slower and based on Labor's predictions less than 1% would have 1Gbps in 2026. Compare that with cities overseas where 100% of connections are 1Gbps symmetric. Businesses understand there is little point building innovative applications for the general population if only a small percentage can use them.

After Telstra disrupted Labor's 2007 plan to build a FTTN network, Labor had an opportunity to develop a network that would have been seen as innovative on the world scale. Sadly they completely failed and too many in IT were too blinded by 'shiny fibre' to understand chasm between Labor's spin and the reality of what is building.

The country would have been better served by Labor giving Google $20 billion in 2010 to build Google Fibre across the country, rather than announcing 1Gbps capability with a prediction that <1% would be connected at those speeds in 2026! NBNCo released 1Gbps plans at the wholesale level in December 2013 but zero RSPs are offering those speeds because the numbers don't work. This is what happens when you build an artificial pricing model.

[Jasonk]

So Mathew

Do you believe a $56B upto 25Mbps is better value than a $64B upto 1Gbps.

Now I have already shown you that the ones on those higher theirs are paying for the network.

Your excuse is remove the Speed Teirs. So you want people who get less than 25Mbps to pay the same as someone who can get 100Mbps. So instead of the people paying for the faster speeds paying for the network you want people who can't get any faster speeds to pay for the ones than can.

Then

Your excuse is there is FOD so not only are they paying the same for a slower speed but then have to pay even more to get the same level of service. So not only by Mathew model the people on the lower speeds are paying for the ones that can get the faster speeds but then they have to pay even more to get those faster speeds.

The best yet is you claim if they remove the speed Teirs would on FTTN would be faster but have you forgotten that the current node design only allows 5Mbps to each customer on a node if they are all using it at the same time.