<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div><div>On 12/05/2010, at 2:48 PM, Bevan Slattery wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite"><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#000000"><br></font><br>So, if Telstra were still under Government control and say a fibre<br>company like PIPE Networks decided there was a business case to deliver<br>competitive backhaul to say 200 exchanges, the reports suggests the<br>Government should levy said commercial operator out of those markets.<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>If in this example exchanges means POIs then I doubt that's the case. The whole argument for where you can gain access to the NBNCo network is based around where POIs have competitive backhaul.</div><div><br></div><div>So, if PIPE was to build to some/all of the POIs then I seriously doubt there would be a levy on that. (At least I hope not - it wouldn't make sense).</div><div><br></div><div>The concern from my point of view is balancing last-mile issues.</div><div><br></div><div>Whilst I may not mind too much about redundancy and other options for residential, I would want other options to exist for corporate connectivity to ensure that we could get non-NBNCo diversity to sites where that matters. Being penalised for building fibre out to provide that would seem pretty at odds with sanity.</div><div><br></div><div>MMC</div><div><br></div></div></div></body></html>