> Yes they have tons of spare bandwidth but that's because they've priced it out of reach for the RSP and their customers.
Somebody has to pay for the infrastructure to be built. Labor policy was for the NBN to be revenue neutral so that means customers have to pay the full cost. Pricing can be based on two components: connection fees and usage fees. Labor chose to reintroduce speed tiers (AVC) and also have data charges (CVC).
- If AVC is priced too high, then less people connect. FoD demonstrates this as many complain $5000 is too much even when arguing that FTTP will improve property values and $5000 is less than 1% of average house prices and cheaper than painting or a kitchen renovation.
- If CVC is expensive, then people will still connect, but choose more wisely on what content they consume. Unlimited netflix is the counter example to this and a major cause of the current issues.
> The NBN was meant to be a catalyst for changing. For advancing Australia. Instead its expensive, of worse quality then say ADSL and it has major limitations and issues.
Speed tiers severely undermined the ability of NBNCo to act as a catalyst for change especially when Labor predicted that 50% would connect on fibre at 12Mbps. I would countenance a serious argument that internet access should be subsidised by the government for those receiving government benefits.
> Just because they can charge so much for it doesn't mean they should.
Current NBNCo wholesale plans are discounted. The NBNCo Corporate Plans document the steep rises in ARPU to north of $100. The NBNCo plan is for revenue growth to mainly come from growth in CVC. Those people who think that NBNCo should be providing 1Gbps plans with unlimited quota for $150 wholesale have no understanding of the flawed foundations that Labor set for NBNCo.