<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page Section1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body bgcolor=white lang=EN-AU link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>I’d also like to add that commercial common sense (even though
it is not as common as we’d like it to be) will ultimately solve this problem.
Like the power industry and the telco industry, the move to underground will
happen where cost drivers substantiate it. If, as has been said, the cost of
repairs will be prohibitive for aerial cables, then the carriers will put them
underground.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>But the experience throughout the world is to the contrary.
With the cost of aerial cables being far cheaper than the underground
equivalent even factoring in the times when you have to repair storm damage.
As for customer service, when a big storm happens and we lose utilities, us
Aussies tend to just grin and bear it. I’ve lived through blackouts for
several days because of 1-in-50 year storms and the community pulls together.
Fibre cable can be quite robust and pole loops can be used so that the cable
falls to the ground in the event of a tree falling on it.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>I’ve also had my phone and Internet off the air for days at a
time when a storm was nowhere to be found. These things we complain about! <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>All I do know is that the government made a serious mistake not
splitting Telstra in two when it sold it. We need separation of the
wholesale/retail businesses and this plan appears to work, as long as the
execution is right. So, really all we have to talk about is whether this
government can get the execution correct – and without a similar project as a
reference – we just can’t tell at this stage.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>The NBN is a project of national importance, as it directly
supports our ability to compete internationally and this ultimately increases
GDP and provides a positive revenue return over time. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>I for one think that we should just get behind it and (as an
industry group) make sure that the new entity does it properly – with our
support. Failing to support this would be disastrous and would mean that it
gets done without the wisdom of our collective inputs.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>And – a little off topic – HAPPY EASTER to all of you!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Cheers,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Rick<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext'>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext'>
ausnog-bounces@lists.ausnog.net [mailto:ausnog-bounces@lists.ausnog.net] <b>On
Behalf Of </b>Matthew Moyle-Croft<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, 11 April 2009 11:36 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> lists<br>
<b>Cc:</b> ausnog@ausnog.net<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [AusNOG] Aust Govt will build National Broadband Network,
no company will be awarded the tender.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Tim,<br>
Your emails seem to be based around the idea you don't like the idea of a fibre
network and you're highlighting any risk regarding them. <br>
<br>
Many countries around the world have significant aerial infrastructure.
US and Japan especially as markets I'm familiar with. They have
aerial Cu, Fibre and Coax. None of which, in my discussions with various
O/S telcos seem to worry them significantly in terms of maintenance, risk
etc. <br>
<br>
Verizon have said that the maintenance costs of their fibre network (FiOS)
(some above, some underground) are significantly less than Cu and more
reliable. They have developed significant technology around FTTP
install which makes it easy to do and not require as skilled people.<br>
<br>
In SA there is significant amounts of aerial fibre from one telco. The
outages caused by fibre physical failure have been few and far between.
Certainly no more than I'd expect from underground cable, maybe less due to the
fact that people can see above electricity cables vs can't see underground
cables!<br>
<br>
If there are certain areas where the design of the electricity poles is so poor
that there are outages more than every month, then I'd hope the percentage
underground would include those areas. Most of the
"backbone" will be underground as it's going to be purchased from
existing Telco installs or swapped for equitiy in the new company.<br>
<br>
At the moment I don't see much wrong with what the government has agreed to
do. The only significant change would be to have a time machine and undo
the selling of Telstra in the manner it was in 1997.<br>
<br>
The suggestion you make regarding repurchasing TLS and then using it's profits
to do fibre I think are ultimately fruitless as the cost is ultimately going to
be higher ($43b plus the $6b/year), take longer and not deliver an additional
network.<br>
<br>
It's certainly a valid point to ask about what other things could be done for
the $43b. It's the role of government to weigh these things
up. I guess the decision point is that GDP is likely to get a 0.5%
boost from FTTP but none from water projects. Water is primarily a
state issue, so I guess they're doing what all Federal Govts do and leave the
ugly stuff to the states. <br>
<br>
MMC<br>
<br>
<br>
lists wrote: <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>----- Original Message ----- <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid black 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt;
margin-left:3.75pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt'>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='background:#E4E4E4'><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> <a href="mailto:mmc@internode.com.au"
title="mmc@internode.com.au">Matthew Moyle-Croft</a> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><br>
lists wrote: <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Last
night I saw reference to 70% of the network being on power poles and only 30%
underground. emm I hope they don't get bush fires, cyclones, cars running
into poles, garbage trucks pulling the cables down etc etc etc. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Does your electricity on power poles go out much because of
this? Mine doesn't. I think you're overblowing the risk
here. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>I don't, based on my experience as a field manager for X and
research I undertook as part of a operations research degree I did into X's
network performance fault analysis as well as work I did as a state
analyst. Are you saying you don't have power black outs. If that is
the case you are very fortunate. I have 10 - 20 or more a year</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> Does your Optus Cable/Foxtel go out? <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>I don't live in an area that has cable. If it did exist here
there would be 10 or 20 faults per year. Believe it or not some areas are
more prone to storm damage than others. Hence why the design needs
to reflect the risk. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> I'll point out that undergrounding cable didn't stop
the San Jose vandalism last night! I've had more issues with water
getting into Telstra's Cu cables going to my house than overhead power issues.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>You really should compare apples with apples not oranges. The
issue with the cable to your house is not poor design, it is poor maintenance.
My comments all relate to design and the business plan</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> Heck, the water pipes in the street here crack
three times as often as the electricity has gone out due to someone doing
external aggression on power poles!<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>Different issue. Water pipes break because of old age (rust),
tree roots, soil cracking, back hoe fade etc. Other than back hoe fade
telephone cables are not affected to the same extent by the other causes in the
same way as water pipes are not affected by electrolysis whereas telephone
cables can be.</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>
</span><br>
<br>
Overhead fibre/coax is extremely common around the world. US/Japan
especially. One of the reasons they have many more last-mile networks
than us is that they're not so precious about this.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>1. They may not be, but your customers are. Aerial is cheaper
to install but costs more to maintain in the long term. I do first
in maintenance on a major TV repeater, if the TV signal goes off or is
degraded there can be as many as 300 calls evey 30 minutes from a repeater that
servers 50000 people. In fact when the olympics was on I was paid to sit
and baby sit a transmitter for 5 hours just in case something happened.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>2. Customers seem to be expecting quicker and quicker repair times
as people rely on these systems more and more they will require better and
better reliability and repair times. I am already seeing it, with
residential customers asking for compo if their service is down for more than a
day.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>3. If you do not live in a city then it is highly unlikely that
there will be a maintenance presence. It is not uncommon for telstra to
not have a splicing van within 4 hours of a lot of places. That is because
it is rare for something to get cut. I expect that will be the same for
NBN mk2. As a result of there not being a need on a regular basis there will
not be to many of these vehicles around period</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>4. This brings me to the mess that will happen when cyclones. bush
fires etc etc happen. A set of tools for a copper jointer cost sub
$1000, it doesn't matter if they get wet, dusty etc etc. An OTDR and a
fusion splicer cost $50k and they need to be kept dry clean etc. This
requires that the network be built in such a manner as to be protected from the
elements. Fibre is a very different animal to copper and coax</span><span
style='color:blue'><br>
</span><br>
Quite frankly most people have little understanding or appreciation for
external plant and street furniture. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>That is true, but my experience is extensive in that area,
especially in copper and fibre. The one thing about fibre is that it is
not well suited to frequent re entry. The fibre on power poles around
australia is all on very well maintained main transmission routes. With
all the greenies and the move to aerial bundled cables in street distribution
the same level of maintenance is unlikely /is not going to
continue. I was in Brisbane last week and the weather was wet and
windy. Energex had 6000 customers without power all day, as they fixed
some others were reported. This was predominantly due to trees falling on
power lines. This is quite common now. If that had been fibre it
would have taken a week to fix it, not same day. Then there is the cost
issue, fibre cable is cheap but splicing and enclosing it is a different
story. It would not be out of the question for a fibre break to cost $3
to 5k to fix a simple break where a copper break could be fixed
for $300. If you are paying off a new network you do not want
high maintenance costs. Lets put it this way if I had a choice of
providers and one was under ground and the other on power poles, I would be
with the underground preferably ducted network.</span><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>They finally notice things that have been there for years
and get all precious about the risk, ignoring the fact that nothing has
happened.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>Weather events do happen regularly</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Copper
cable is easy to locate and make temporary repairs quickly, not to mention
copper is a lot tougher than fibre. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>I think that's debatable - fibre is quite tough. You
can make it as tough as you want - depending what you order. (Ever seen
the armoured submarine cable for shallow waters?)<br>
<br>
On power poles faults are easy to find/fix - you just look up!<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>I hope you don't want me to take that seriously. Get someone to
show you a bit of fibre. It doesn't have to come down to break. It
deosn't stretch like copper. You need to use an OTDR to locate faults and to do
this you need to have access points without splitters etc. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> Often fibre repairs get a bad rap because the
cable is quite strong <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>I am not sure about that</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>- so by the time it's snapped it's really messed up
(eg. ever seen it fibre really messed up because of a big earth drill
pulling and snapping it?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>That is underground cable. I haven;t seen to many direction
drills that go through thin air. From my point of view those cables
should have been located properly</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> Cu cables tend to be so heavy they break in
different ways.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>Actually quite often the bearer breaks and the cable falls on the
ground and the cable is still connected through resulting in many customers
still having a phone</span><span style='color:blue'><br>
</span><br>
Doing Cu repairs is time consuming and hard on large cables.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>And should never be required. There exist cable locators and
vacumn excavation equipment. I have no sympathy for careless operators
who get big bills. The thing about underground is that if a ducted cable
is cut it is generally in good weather and a quick repair can be undertaken.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> Fibre splicing these days can be a lot quicker - you
can much more easily run temporary fibre cables than Cu ones. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>perhaps on cables > 100 pr, but such damage is preventable if
good practice is followed. I am yet to be able to order a storm or wish a
bush fire away. That is the distinction. Using your reasoning we should
probably not go ahead with the NBN because Telstra's underground cables are
going to be cut by all the cowboy operators constructing the NBN.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> I'm not sure if you've ever watched someone repair or
punch down a 1200 pair street cable, but it's a lot harder than doing fibre.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>Believe it or not I have watched, in fact I have done it.
What really makes it interesting is when it is a randon jointed cable which
means both ends need to be identified as well. But I do think such cable
cuts are a lot rarer than cables coming down in storms. In fact I would
recon there would be less than 2 nation wide annually all over Oz. Stom
damage from wind or trees would be probably 20000 to 50000 anually I think that
is a material difference. In fact the numbers could be 10 to a 100 times
higher than that.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>I
fellow can locate and make temp repairs to copper cable, fibre splices need to
be prepaired and protected making temporary repairs that would take 15 minutes
on copper take 4 or 5 hours and more than 1 person on fibre. If the $43Bn
cost estimate is based on 70% aerial deployment then it may well blow out to
$100BN + if it were to all be put underground.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>If you've got real cable damage then fibre ain't going to be
hard to fix. Maybe you need better splicing guys? I can give you
some references ...<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>No its not hard, it just takes longer than copper and cost a
lot more. By the way the last time I looked there weren't to many 1200 pr
cables in the distribution network, most distribution cables are between 2
and 100 prs, with most 30 or below. I can joint a 50 pr in 45
minutes. I can do a 10 pr in 10 minutes. Try getting your gun
fibre spicer to do that. By the way FTTH design is differnet to IEN
design and will involve a lot more fibre in residential streets</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid black 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt;
margin-left:3.75pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt'>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><br>
So, why underground it unless necessary? The rest of the world has
moved on from this curiously Australian dislike of overhead.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>It provides for better reliability in storms and fire events, end
of story. Also there is a report that all carriers that have external
plant are required to fill in regarding getting all the communications cables
under ground which is a requirement of the telecommunications act</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>My
analysis would be that if Rudd is as keen as he is to build FTTH then he needs
to buy/ re nationalise Telstra and build out the Telstra network and
separate it etc. That would be a cheaper way to do it. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>It'd cost $40b to buy Telstra, then another $43b to do
FTTH. So instead of $43b you're out $83b. What's the point of
that? <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>It would cost $41BN to $50bn to buy Telstra which would
give you the ability to fund $6BN per annum out of free cash flow to
extend the existing fibre network not build it from scratch, so my point
is that it would cost $41BN to do what they want, change the rules and refloat
it for probably $41BN =$0 cost to the taxpayer.</span><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> </span><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'>There are
many other reasons to do it this way as well</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Might
I also add that not all government assistance needs to be in cash form.
Governments could also use their business as a catalyst to encourage investment
etc. This would result in a better outcome for taxpayers who ultimately
pay for all of this. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'><br>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>I don't think people have thought some of the investment
part through. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>I am absolutely sure of that. The whole process has been
flawed from the start</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> Nor why the government is doing it. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>The government are doing it to save face and get even with Telstra
for not submitting a valid bid. It is as simple as that. It also
looks like good politics, but when interest rates start to climb again and go
through the roof the mood may change. They dont even have a business plan
yet. How dumb is that announce a $43 Bn project before they have a
business plan. That is assuming this bunch can do it for $43Bn which is
unlikely. There are less risky ways to achive this end which will cost a
lot less. If the governement has a lazy $43 BN to invest on a
nation building project then they should be looking at the Bradfield scheme to solve
the nations fresh water problems. As I said to someone
the other day, we humans need food and water to live but we can survive with
out internet, but better still we can have both for the same money. FTTH
will happen without this grand standing, once the business case exists.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid black 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt;
margin-left:3.75pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt'>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Regards<br>
<br>
Tim<br>
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</body>
</html>