back to article nbn™ dumps Optus HFC, will use fibre to the kerb for ≈700k sites

nbn™, the entity building and operating Australia's national broadband network (NBN) has announced it will overbuild part of the hybrid fibre-coax network it acquired from Optus. When nbn™ bought the Optus network it proclaimed that doing so “will hasten the rollout of the National Broadband Network … and enable us to complete …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Errm… minor nit…

    So why's nbn™ backtracked? At the March charm offensive, The Register was shown Optus' HFC cable in the Brisbane suburb of Redcliffe. Nbn™ now says that's the only place Optus cable was launched. The Register suspects it went badly.

    Redcliffe is not a suburb of Brisbane. It is part of Moreton Bay.

  2. JJKing
    Flame

    Bloody shame the lib pollies weren't required to put their pensions on the line with Faster, Cheaper, Sooner bullshit. Maybe with their own money at risk we would have had a realistic and eventually a useable high speed, that's world high speed and not politician high speed broadband.

    1. mathew42
      FAIL

      80%+ on 25Mbps or slower != high speed

      Currently 80%+ are connected on FTTP at 25Mbps or slower. If the data hogs get their way and CVC prices reduce then high speed NBN will be very rare and the percentage on 25Mbps or slower continue to rise.

      Approaching 3 years since NBNCo made 1Gbps plans available yet not a single RSP is selling a plan faster than 100Mbps. Harly surprising when Labor planned for less than 1% to have 1Gbps in 2026.

      Sadly the NBN is a typical Labor policy initiative: great idea, but incompetent implementation and inadequate funding resulting in it objectives not being delivered. Worse fibre fanbois didn't critique the plan because they were worried that it flimsy.

      1. bep

        Re: 80%+ on 25Mbps or slower != high speed

        No one is going to pay more for high speed connections that they don't believe will be delivered. Calling big users 'data hogs' is quite a joke: Labor's original projection was pre-Netflix and pre every news site loading three auto-run videos on every page. Still, the original NBN was designed to cope with such increases in demand. I've got no idea what the Multi Technology Mix (now plus yet another technology) was designed to handle.

        1. mathew42
          FAIL

          Re: 80%+ on 25Mbps or slower != high speed

          > Calling big users 'data hogs' is quite a joke:

          It is the volume of data being transferred not the speed which is causing the network congestion. It is reasonably to call those people wanting unlimited internet data hogs and encourage them to recognise that by reducing CVC prices, AVC will need to rise, pricing higher speed connections out of reach, fulflilling the Liberal's statements that demand for higher speeds don't exist.

          > Labor's original projection was pre-Netflix and pre every news site loading three auto-run videos on every page.

          Labor's projection was 2008/2009. Netflix was well established in the US by this time and many people in Australia were streaming video. It should have been obvious to any technology observer of the direction that technology was heading, especially when streaming video was given as an example.

          > Still, the original NBN was designed to cope with such increases in demand.

          Labor designed the NBN to see revenue growth from CVC while AVC revenue shrunk so that people could afford higher speeds.

          > I've got no idea what the Multi Technology Mix (now plus yet another technology) was designed to handle.

          Faster than 25Mbps which is adequate for 80%+ (and increasing). At the request of selfish data hogs the Liberals will decrease CVC pricing making faster speeds too expensive and justifying MTM. Of course these same people will grumble about not having 1Gbps connections ignoring the fact that Labor planned for less than 1% to have 1Gbps in 2026.

          1. Jasonk

            Re: 80%+ on 25Mbps or slower != high speed

            So when Turnbull claim his AVC price for fttn as $16. But how can there be higher demand when it can't deliver it the 50% of the population as doesn't mater what speed you purchase NBN is now only required to deliver 25Mbps for 1 sec.

            But labor plan was avc and cvc prices to reduce as demand increase. But thank to Turnbull that your such a fan of there won't be a demand because it can't provide it.

            Lol reducing cvc price I didn't know will increase the cost wow what topsie Turvey world you live in.

            Now we have a fttn for 50% of the country where 50% of them will be lucky is they see higher than 50Mbps.

            Lol you claim many people which was estimated at around 200,000 stream Netflix from the us at the time yet you scoff at the 100,000 labor was expecting to be on 1Gbps

  3. theniginator

    Umm....

    So have had Optus HFC here is Brisbane for years and get 100Mbps with their speed pack. Although having said that it is good for 80-90Mbps in the morning but by evening it limps along at 3-5Mbps. Still better than ADSL+ so not complaining too much But to say its not suitable for broadband when its doing right now what the NBN says its going to provide seems like BS to me. Wonder how much more our glorious new NBN account will cost once they turn off or overbuild our cable to provide the same service.....

    1. Magani

      Re: Umm....

      Ditto on the Optus HFC - probably about 6~7 years for me. Never bothered to go with the Speed Pack as my requirements are generally not for speed and the standard connection has been doing OK.

      However, of late I am unable to run YouTube at anything over 720p from 4:30pm-ish through to about 9:30~10:00pm.

      I wonder what the cost will be when the nbn™ comes down our street. I suspect that: a) it won't get cheaper for the same level of service, and b) it may not get faster for the same amount of coin.

      I'm always happy to be proved wrong.

    2. rsole

      Re: Umm....

      The trouble with HFC is that you get good performance when you can get everyone else off the shared cable. I see you have success with that in the morning when you obviously need to use it most. When you don't need to use it much, in the evening for instance, you let everyone else share the resource. Very considerate of you.

      Now consider that I used to be happy with a 2400 baud modem, compared with 300 and 1200, but today that would be unworkable, it does not take long to realise that what is acceptable today will not remain so for long. Your morning performance would probably be acceptable for the the foreseeable future but I fear your evening results will just bring frustration.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I would kill for 25Mbps

    It's more than 7 times what I get now....

  5. Knoydart
    Megaphone

    Leak confirmed?

    So the info that allegedly came out of nbn co that at the time was all lies and made up, is now confirmed to be true now?

    How much FTTP would have $800M got is the question someone should be asking? Optus (like Telstra) must be loving having their cash windfall. I wonder if the accountants can depreciated the assets as well?

    So much for Mr Turnbull's much vaulted mixed technology approached. That 2014 renegotiation is not looking very flash now.

    I think I'm still a fiber fetish which is a good thing, as (the non CVC) UFB has recently been installed in my building.

  6. Adam 1

    > noting that while its original agreement with Optus was for “progressive migration of subscribers to the nbn™ network and the eventual decommissioning of the Optus HFC network.”

    Why should nbnco care about that? As clearly demonstrated, their HFC network isn't able to deliver the scaling needed. From optus's perspective, they are being paid to shutdown a network they would have mothballed for their own commercial reasons or if they truly believed in the future scalability they would need to invest their own dollars in it. In short, this dumb decision means that taxpayers pay optus for doing what they would have eventually done on their own.

    1. mathew42

      > In short, this dumb decision means that taxpayers pay optus for doing what they would have eventually done on their own.

      A significantly less costly decision to pay Telstra $800+ per customer for migration from copper to FTTP for a network that Telstra would have eventually shutdown.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    They paid $800M to take out a competitor (Optus). As we can all see, TPG can deliver NBN like speeds cheaper than NBN. If Optus was to wake up and realise for a modest investment they an dial up their HFC network and sell it to consumers more profitably than reselling NBN services, the NBN business model is under risk.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020