Re: 79% connected at 25Mbps or less
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?
171 posts • joined 13 Dec 2014
Mathew if you have read he CP16 the ROI is now down to 2%.
But then it's a bit hard to talk about AVC and CVC when for $56B NBN cant deliver the same speed to everyone. How about delivering enough electricity to run one light bulb while your next door neighbor can turn every light on. Yet according to you they should be paying to same price of a connection. Yet one can use more than the other and pays according. While the other to get the same level of service has to pay $K worth.
Mathew42 the NBN can't abolish speeds teirs now as would you want to pay the same as someone on FTTP getting 100Mbps while you like the 10% On NBN delivering an upto 25Mbps. Would make sense if NBN was rolling out FTTP but they are not.
Even the current model is trying to copy the previous model
Sky mesh are offering a 100/100mpbs on fiber staring at $99 month. But the connection is really a 250/100 connection.
Again you talk about FOD but why should some people have to pay to get better speeds FTTN which cost more than the cost of FTTP while other people on FTTP and HFC get that same connection for free.
And how does the MTM go becuase you need speed teirs because at certian distance it can only deliver certian speeds. But it's ok apparently people don't need faster speeds. Yet the MTM is now only $8B cheaper than FTTP and only finished 1 year sonner great saving right there. The we add in the less revenue because it can't deliver speed with demand makes a complete mockery.
Wasn't $30 Million. To quote Turnbull they didn't need to change the $11B price for the orignal use of the ducts and pits. But what he forgets to tell you is the $1B+ maitience cost to keep all that copper running than is would have with fibre. Or asbestos and remediation cost that was covered by Telstra which had a Budget of $2B but soon found out was going to cost a lot more.
There was interesting figures before they pulled it off the web site about not deploying new FTTP back in 2014 just completing current projects.
but it's still have not even hit the price tag of $90 Turnbull was throughing around.
Yet the MTM getting worst and worst. It wasn't underestimated its border line fraud to be so far out with there figures. So instead of 3 years it's 7 plus instead of $29B it's now $56b prob more.
So where do you get this $100 ARPU how does the current model even come close to that with slower speeds masive increased ongoing cost and cost 2/3rds the cost of FTTP or costing more than the model you are getting your figures from. But there figure for the current rollout for the model your quoting was only expect an ARPU of only in the $20's
It's not the removal of speed teirs that is holding back but the CVC pricing which is based off Telstra own model is to high. But then we already have ISP offering unlimited downloads as well one offering a 100/100Mbps service.
Considering that the ARPU is stilling at $38 well above what they are expecting shows the model works.
But then Turnbull FTTN was only expecting an $18 ARPU.
But then poeple who are using the NBN that are downloading large amounts of data are the ones paying the 80% are not paying for a service they don't want if they are not paying more than 25Mbps are they since Telstra only offers an 0Mbps to 24Mbps service but now we going to get a 0Mbps to 25Mbps service sounds so much better.
Well the it was $7B but was only going party fund for FTTN and set to deliver an up 12Mbps.
Again you talk about FOD but why does FOD cost more than delivering FTTP wasn't MTM surprise to make it cheaper.
Or the fact people on HFC are getting a free upgrade to 109Mbps + speeds for free why are they not paying for that upgrade.
While you expect people on FTTN that can't get the min 25Mbps to for a service this now $56B dogs breakfast can't deliver.
Are you also going to quote that MTM cost is getting closer to the cost of building FTTP with another $15B add to the price tag of MTM
DO you remember Ziggy commenting about a drop in revenue when they swill start rolling out FTTN. But they cant be right according to you with those percentages they should be delivering the same revenue wouldn't they because a lot more people will be on the 12/1 or 25/5 than predicted.
And now the 200000 premises that where suppose to get FTTN trial has been cut back to 120000 which is going to take a year to complete atm FTTP is faster than that.
If you remember Turnbulls claim before the election there we would all have MIN 25Mbps by the end of 2016
2003 5 minutes to midnight
Lets the term Baghdad Network didn't come about for no reason.
CEPU "Because of faulty pairs, ageing, water intrusion, changes and split-redeveloped blocks, redundancy in the cables is now much less than the original 'near 100 per cent.' It is now closer to zero." Now add to this the adds, moves, changes, and the repairs performed by contractors who have no ownership of the infrastructure and who have not updated records for over five years. The result is we have no redundancy and a 30-plus per cent error rate in the records for the last kilometre - the pillar to the home.""
then there's The Gel debacle
2004 the cross-party, Environment, Communications, Information Technology and the Arts References Committee "The Committee does not believe that Telstra has given sufficient weight to its role as the guardian of the CAN in the past - on which all other access is essentially dependent."
An additional headache is that copper condition directly affects the promised minimum download speeds of 25Mb/s by 2016. For instance, in the UK, corrosion has seen average speeds drop from 53Mb/s to just 6Mb/s. Furthermore, to hit the promise of a minimum 50Mb/s for all Australians by 2019, following German upgrade paths, the copper would need to be remediated for FTTN and then remediated again to add the subsequent "Vectoring" speed boost. One commentator puts the latter cost at an additional $20bn. There's also no word on who would fix problems that occur with the copper within people's own premises.
Remember we where suppose to get a MIN of 25mbps not 5Mbps in the current design rules.
I guess you can't read either as I said the "current".
But backhaul doesn't help when NBN can't deliver faster speeds any faster than what they have now.
No need to run new fiber. So the ones where there connection drops to dialup speeds or even drops out should be fine. Like those poor people in the coast had not even a phone line for months due to flooded pits. Or the fact it costs an extra $1B to maintain the it. Now the SR even states by 2027 the cost of FTTP and MTM with be the same so really how much money does it need to keep running.
Let's see HFC which according to Telstra already delivers an up to 100Mbps so why do they need a "Free" upgrade to 3.1 when you bang on about FOD surely if they want faster than an upto 25Mbps service "insert your quote here".
I don't mind FTTB as the copper is very short and not prone to weather. It's a good stop gap that labor should have adopted.
FTTN now consider that report are saying upto 70% of the copper is not up to scratch and our national average before the NBN was only 4Mbps and Telstra own claim as to why they don't do naked DSL (they would have to register faults and there would be many) as many would not get it considering a fully laden node ATM supports 5Mbps or 20 premeses at 100Mbps if they can get it. So I would say many more like a few
But then NBN is only now required to deliver a once a day 25Mbps for $41B 1Mbps faster than ADSL2. That show real great value for money right there doesn't it.
consequences - only benefits the rich as poor cannot afford fast speeds
iiNet ADSL 300GB connection of an upto 24Mbps (average 4Mbps) $79.95
iiNet NBN 250GB connection of upto 100Mbps $89.90
But remember Turnbull said his would be more affordable but now doesn't look like it.
Yes but Mathew the NBN under FTTP only need 20% on high their consuming data. While Turnbull has stated he needs at least 75% connected or his plan will cost $Billions more.
Labor decision gives you a choice of upto 100Mbps whether you need it or not.
Turnbull choice is you can pay more get get faster spends that a $41B dollar project can't deliver. Bit of a joke really. Plus the FOD which cost more to deliver than FTTP also has problem with congestion at the node. As the current design only delivers a 5Mbps on a full node. Quite funny really since our average is only 6Mbps. But then we where surprise to get a min 25Mbps and 90% where surprise to get a min of 50Mbps
NBN could go the way of Google. $120 for 1Gbps + pay TV, $75 for 1Gbps only or $300 connection fee for a free 5Mbps for 7 years free (makes FOD a joke)
ATM the AVC is priced cheaper than Telstra current ADSL pricing.
The complaints about FOD is that it's cost more than delivering FTTP. When are we now building a network which claim to make FTTP cheaper about FOD cost more doesn't make any sense.
Yes the CVC pricing is high. As the current ratio you keep harping on about as it the target ratio they where aiming for and the current ARPU was $39 when they where expecting around $26 in the current build. It does need to change but if they do the MTM won't have a chance to break even.
And instead of as you have stated the user paying it will be the taxpayer that pays.
But you keep ignoring the on going cost of MTM. I like a car to sell you it cost 2/3rds of a new one and to keep it running it will end up costing too more than buying the new one. But that's ok you got it cheaper lol.
Plus upgrading back haul won't help people getting once a day 25Mbps service on the copper. But then a fully laden node of 394 on there current back haul of 2Gbps only gives an average speed 5Mbps if all are using it at the same time.
You keep carrying on about the bottom 50% that wouldn't be paying for the network. What happens now is that MTM won't be able to make a revenue as all it can promise is a once a day 25Mbps service.
Can you give one company promising a min 25Mbps or even a min 50Mbps service.
How about reliable when 7 years after MTM is complete it will cost more than FTTP. Flooded pits like the people on the north coast had not even a phone service for months but that great service there.
Since it cost NBN to same to deliver 12/1 or 100/40 I will help your math a bit.
Let say makes a profit of $2 on the 12/1 $24 price to help pay back the loan.
12Mbps = $24 * 38% = $912 Profit of $2 = $76
25Mbps = $27 * 38% = $1026 Profit of $5 = $190
100Mbps = $38 * 24% = $912 Profit of $14 = $336
Hope that clears it up your math Mathew42
Currently NBN is well above the ARPU there where expecting. Already show your flawed argument.
As of February 26th, 38% on fibre have connected at 12Mbps while a further 38% have connected at 25Mbps. Hardly a justification for FTTP.
You also forgot the 19% on the 100/40 that pays more than those combined.
Considering that 12/1 cost $26 and 100/40 cost $38. Now Telstra wanted to charge $35 to keep the copper running. NBN won't have a choice to up the price just to keep it all running not to cut price of CVC but just to keep it running.
Or better yet there was 3 million faults with BT copper in 2012 great news for copper.
"build the nbn network sooner "
Only 7 sec faster than FTTP.
"less cost to taxpayers than originally anticipated"
Means I have shifted upfron capex cost to OPEX which will cost the taxpayer more in the long run.
"all the technologies being used in the nbn network can be upgraded to deliver even faster speeds and greater capacity when consumer demand calls for it"
That FOD already cost more than delivering FTTP it will cost the taxpayer even more to upgrade later.
Ziggy had no vision. Back in1996 Telecom had a plan to deliver FTTP by 2010.
Sol FTTN proposal was going to deliver at the time slower speeds than ADSL1 but charge even more for the service on top of that to restrict competition by being the only provider in the network.
The NBN was to release the strangle hold grip of competition. As the 12 page report for the tender for FTTN shows.
Yet there are people lucky enough to get FTTP with out paying for it. For the HFC getting an upgrade to 3.1 with out customers paying for it. Yet you expect people to pay for FOD on FTTN when they can't deliver the speeds as well as paying more than what it would have to deliver FTTP in the first place.
And by Turnbull's own speech if the NBN doesnt hit its 75% take up it could add $B to the cost since he can't guarantee the high speeds to generate the money any more. Or if it does hit the revune target adds $B to the cost which it won't because it can't deliver the higher speeds. Or if it get delayed adds $B to the cost.
You keep going on about her bottom 50% on the lower speed tries. When I time and again tell you the original plan only needed 20% on the highest tier that would pay for the network. And delivering 100Mbps to all reduces the cost of having to upgrade later as the average cost of FOD is high than deploying FTTP now.
Since you have brought up HFC in its current stated it covers the current giv of delivering an upto 25Mbps so no upgrading required. Even the current ADSL network delivers and upto 24Mbps so it's in line with that plan so not upgrading to FAtTN is required. Or that you say people on FTTN sound pay for fiber while people on HFC are getting a free upgrade to dosis 3.1 why are they not paying for it the you say people on FTTN should when the NBN can deliver any speed better than what they have now.
Or the fact the MTM cost the same as FTTP by 2027. Why would you want a rusted out combi when it's will cost you the same in the long run as a new Holden.
The problem with those dieing copper wires is NBN has to hit 25Mbps for 1 second every 24hrs.
So when no on is using it hits 25Mbps when people on it watch is drop like a rock.
Now let's look at the CBA with have ours with one member using his own report from 2011 claiming that plans would be upto $300 a month. On top of that -18b to the ecomony.
Now look at NZ which already have FTTN and upgrading to FTTP has a CBA which says FTTP delivers $50b to the ecomony.
Lobor developed a plan based off the expert panel which show it would be paid with 10 years of it being complete. Tutnbull has never release those figures for his MTM. Or that is claim of saving $30B is saved at all but added to OPEX as by 2027 from his own Stragic review give FTTP and MTM is just $1b difference in cost after that MTM cost more than FTTP.
"This is based purely on AVC pricing, whereas you need to consider the CVC pricing which is the same regardless of speed tiers."
With the CVC user you use more as the plans can handle the bandwidth. Eg. YouTube test you connection and give you the best picture best on that unless you change it otherwise.
Internode had problem with Netflix across its entire network including ADSL, HFCand FTTP.
FTTP will get you as close to the speed you pay for subject to ISP network on other contention. My mother is lucky to have FTTP she is on 12/1 which is all she needs. He had tested her connection mulitple times and 99% of the time it's at 11Mbps and have seen it drop to 3Mbps for a second once.
"At least we agree that moving is a viable option. $4300 is less than 1% of an average house price and cheaper than repainting or a kitchen / bathroom renovation."
But the MTM as Turnbull has claim will make upgrading to FTTP cheaper then why does FOD cost more. Or let's say you get FTTN and all you get for most of the day is 10Mbps on and 25/5 plan while you neighbour got 40Mbps on 50/20. You would be happy to fork out that extra money to get the speeds like your neighbour can that a $41B network couldn't deliver. Would you say that's $41B dollars well spent.
"Can you link to the RSP page where I can order one of these connections"
Just call an ISP for a price if it's not on there website doesn't mean it's not available.
"Is any other country in the world building a FTTP network with the expected speed tier take up that Labor planned for in the NBNCo Corporate Plan (close to 50% of fibre connections at 12Mbs and less than 5% at 1Gpbs in 2028)?"
Again that now 5% or even to 20% on 100Mbps makes more revenue than the bottom 50% by 4x they where aiming for so far that take up rate has been correct. If more go on those higher tier FTTP would be paid back sooner.
"so no guarantee of speed. "
Wrong on FTTP NBN guarantee the speed to your ISP. On FTTN just need to get 25mbps once a day.
"People who need the faster speeds have two options: move to an area with FTTP or order fibre on demand. You may also note that 1Gbps plans have been available for order from NBNCo since December 2013, but are not being offered by RSPs because Labor's completely screwed pricing model."
So now that we are building a $41B network that cant guarantee any better speeds than ADSL2. If you can get any better speed that what you currently have you either move or pay more than the cost of FTTP as Simon Hackett has stated that the average of FOD is more the FTTP at $4300 so much for MTM to make it cheaper to upgrade. Plus there is currently at least 5 users with 1Gbps connection.
"How are they viable models "
Turnbulls just saving $22mil in interest with delivering a service we already have. NBN is so worried about TPG FTTB would take a hugh chunk out of its revenue that Tunbulls had to finally step in and try to curb them and failed. Even though he was pro competition before the election now all he is pro competition with fiber competition. NBN has even taken TPG to court and failed. Sound much like to Telstra of old now.
Considering that after the transition NBN is only required to deliver 25Mbps only once a day. That's real great value for a MIN of 25Mbps we where to get from the MTM as well as a MIN of 50Mbps to 90% of the premises it's a laughing stock.
Those percentages are now only going to get higher as the NBN won't be able to achieve faster speeds. But MTM claims it can generate the same revenue as FTTP.
Lol remove speed profiles that's what we have now with Telstra 0 to 24Mbps but what you are now sue jesting a 0 to 25Mbps
"Labor made Australia the laughing stock of the world by building a FTTP network while planning for effective speeds slower than FTTN."
Highly unlikely here is a nice vid of someone trying to sell MTM to other people in other countries which shows that he MTM is the real laughing stock.
"Depends on where you are. In many places copper is above ground."
Not many places have it above ground.
"If you are wondering why Labor were planning for so few people to be connected at 1Gbps it is because of the cost."
Yes and but labor main aim is to supply the same speed upto 100/40 to everyone one so people do have a choice on what speed they would like to pay for as well as maximising the revenue to get that 20% on the highest teirs that pay for the network not the 50% that you keep going on about. Or that they are building a legacy network that would last more than the 5 years that the MTM is good for.
"The reality is that:
- everyone in a new development will receive FTTP"
Which now the developers have to pay for the build which would be past on in higher house prices.
"- everyone in highrise will receive FTTB"
Now I don't mind FTTB as the copper is weather proof and have very short length to get the max speed out of VDSL. And they came come back at a later date supply fiber.
"- everyone in HFC regions will 100Mbps"
Well according to Telstrathe HFC already can do 100/40 but are getting a free upgrade which they don't have to pay for that will make HFC do more that 100/40. But that's you argument for FTTN.
"- everyone else that requires higher speeds has the choice of moving or paying for direct fibre, which theoretically should add to the value of their house"
So what your saying that a $41B network that doesn't give any better speed than what they get now should have to pay for it while other people don't have to pay for it. Latest report from NBN states that during the transition period the FTTN just need to deliver 12Mbps just once a day and when the everything is up and just 25Mbps just once a day if it doesn't then they would remediate the copper not replace with fiber that Turnbull claimed. That great when all the other services can deliver upto 100Mbps without paying for it. Or that the average price for FOD is higher than FTTP of $4300. So when NBN decides to up grade it will cost more than doing it the first time.
- less than 24% actually care about speeds faster than 25Mbps based on current take-up rates.
Considering that our current national average is just 6Mbps. So ATM 50% of the population gets a quarter or less than that speed now. It would be like going from dialup to ADSL.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021