Reply to post: Re: >80% connecting at 25Mbps or slower

Re: >80% connecting at 25Mbps or slower

"My argument is that speed tiers (as predicted by Labor) have created a digital divide and enabled MTM"

So apparently supply speeds of 100Mbps and giving consumers choice on hiw fast they want to pay for is some how in your delusional frame of mind creating a digital divide. While your copper fan boi support which gives a lottry tickit on how fast your connection is doesnt create a digital devide.

"The significant changes made by LNP have been lower CVC quicker than Labor planned and build FTTN / HFC (irrelevant to the > 80% ordering 25Mbps or slower)"

Lol as i have stated under labor FTTP it cost the same to deliver the different speeds. It would have been extremely easy for FTTP to adjust the CVC price. As the MTM is relying on more CVC revenue than FTTP at this point in time a simple fact you have chosrn to ignore. While we know under FTTN even if tthey make the prices better people still wont beable to order a better service due to the limits of copper even though above you have claimed otherwise.

"Still in your delusional world where >80% on 25Mbps or slower and <14% on 100Mbps is a better outcome than Labor's plan for 50% on 12Mbps, 30% on 100Mbps and ~3% on 250Mbps?"

So as i have shown you with very simple maths that more peple on higher teirs under fttp generates more revune. But alas you have chosen to ignore that simple fact and claim its CVC cost is the revune stream lol. Considering your delisional in think cvc cost is supplying most of the revenue when it only supplies 30%

"So quoting from Labor's NBNCo Corporate Plan is considered lying and spin?"

Yes as you well or might not as you are delusional. As FTTP has been doing it for 4 years now. The fact your compare mtm figures vs fttp figures which hasnt change much at all since 2013 who knows what it would be now. You dont want to compare the $29B evone to have 25Mbps by last year. But considering how delusional you are you seem to believe it has happen.

"I suggest that Labor's response to Google Fibre's 1/1Gbps direct fibre build by increasing the NBN top speed from 100Mbps to 1Gbps just prior to the 2010 election and omitting to state their expectation that it would be so expensive that <1% of Australians would be connected at 1Gbps in 2026 is a good example of spin."

Considering Google was going to announce which city in decmber 2010 but was pushed back to early 2011. So before the august 2010 election lol. But please keep being delusional lol.

"My suggestion at the time and since is that Labor should have responded by offering Google $20 billion to build Google Fibre here. By now we might have had the network built and a Google Lab experimenting with Loon for remote access."

Considering before the nbn there was a tender for FTTN. Which no private company put in a successful tender. But then how delusional you are thinking a private company going to not cherry pick areas lol.

"I've never been a fan of FTTN / HFC. I've merely pointed out that Labor's decisions in setting up the NBN have had a significantly bigger impact. Secondly, the technology change has impact on only about 4%, .who are mostly rich."

Yes you have as have. Lol really. Wrong again there is a report that doubling the broadband speed of a country adds 0.3% to the GDP then each doubling after that keeps adding 0.3%. So since the mtm is only required to deliver an up to 25Mbps and adsl "average" speed us 12Mbps. So it only doubles once how many times does FTTP doubles our country speed? So since thats a sizable increase to our GDP as a country which affects more than the 4% you are trying to spin and lie about