<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7638.1">
<TITLE>RE: [AusNOG] background radiation was: "i want a pony!" (wasRe:Long live the NBN. The NBN is dead?! [personal])</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT SIZE=2>This is true, but what will the attrition rate be?<BR>
<BR>
Anybody? No? Nobody knows. It hasn't been built yet.<BR>
<BR>
Now justify that to someone who's about to outlay a non-trivial amount of their wealth to build this independent infrastructure (keeping the "fools and their money" adage in mind).<BR>
<BR>
I can practically assure you that every seasoned investor will give a similar response, the second word of which is "off".<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Brad Gould [<A HREF="mailto:bradley@internode.com.au">mailto:bradley@internode.com.au</A>]<BR>
Sent: Thu 8/12/2010 3:26 PM<BR>
To: Curtis Bayne<BR>
Cc: ausnog@ausnog.net<BR>
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] background radiation was: "i want a pony!" (wasRe:Long live the NBN. The NBN is dead?! [personal])<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On 12/08/2010 14:48, Curtis Bayne wrote:<BR>
> Regulatory certainty in this context is simple: a guarantee that a<BR>
> government-owned entity with practically limitless capital and with<BR>
> super-carrier privileges won't steamroll my regional telco deployment<BR>
> into financial oblivion.<BR>
<BR>
Oblivion will only happen if they (NBNCo+ISP's) offer a product which is<BR>
clearly superior to yours.<BR>
<BR>
Being the incumbent in a regional area would certainly confer some<BR>
advantages long term.<BR>
<BR>
And you could supply those same customers with service on NBNCo<BR>
infrastructure afterwards - there will be a level playing field.<BR>
<BR>
NBN != instant customer base<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Brad<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> What investor in their right mind would release funds to build regional<BR>
> telecommunications infrastructure in the knowledge that there's a strong<BR>
> chance it will be worth nothing before that investment is amortized?<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: Matthew Moyle-Croft [<A HREF="mailto:mmc@internode.com.au">mailto:mmc@internode.com.au</A>]<BR>
> Sent: Thu 8/12/2010 3:08 PM<BR>
> To: Curtis Bayne<BR>
> Cc: Andrew Oskam; ausnog@ausnog.net; Tom Sykes<BR>
> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] background radiation was: "i want a pony!"<BR>
> (wasRe:Long live the NBN. The NBN is dead?! [personal])<BR>
><BR>
> Sure, you can do wireless. (Note: I work for a company with regional<BR>
> WIMAX and other radio networks).<BR>
><BR>
> But you didn't answer my question.<BR>
><BR>
> MMC<BR>
><BR>
> On 12/08/2010, at 2:36 PM, Curtis Bayne wrote:<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> It depends on population density and proximity to the closest point of<BR>
> interconnect: we've been deploying P2P fixed wireless upto 50Mbps for<BR>
> years (even using frequency diverse unlicenced - which works a gem in<BR>
> underbuilt regional areas). P2MP upto 20Mbps is easily achievable using<BR>
> WiMax or even TDMA WiFi for smaller providers and suits the sparse<BR>
> nature of regional areas perfectly.<BR>
><BR>
> The low barrier to entry achievable with this equipment will no doubt<BR>
> fuel fierce competition between small regional WISPs: with little to<BR>
> differentiate these types of providers, customer service and breadth of<BR>
> coverage will become the primary competitive factors for organizations<BR>
> of this type: smaller organizations also tend to be more agile because<BR>
> of their lack of bureaucratic weight and are more likely to have greater<BR>
> visibility of the technical complexities involved in servicing that<BR>
> particular geographical region (and probably more concerned with the<BR>
> preservation of the sanctity of areas of indigenous interest also).<BR>
><BR>
> It is in the best interests of these ISPs to build as quickly as<BR>
> possible and in as many areas possible as these markets are currently<BR>
> untapped - many smaller providers stand a chance to generate substantial<BR>
> amounts of revenue from customers who have cracked the shits with<BR>
> ISDN/Satellite.<BR>
><BR>
> High density industrial/business in regional areas are perfectly<BR>
> serviced by two-fibre single mode drops into each building, hauled back<BR>
> to an aggregation point and back hauled by dark fibre/Gbit microwave to<BR>
> the providers nearest PoP.<BR>
><BR>
> The proliferation of regional WISPs in countries such as the Czech<BR>
> Republic, Latvia, Africa etc. is a testament to the fact that this<BR>
> business model works. Then there's agility; reaching an agreement with<BR>
> Telstra to open up their regional fiber networks could result in these<BR>
> areas receiving high speed services within MONTHS of an agreement being<BR>
> reached, whether those services are deployed by wireless or DSL is upto<BR>
> the local provider.<BR>
><BR>
> It would also be naive to think that providers such as VHA and Optus<BR>
> would not utilize their already entrenched brands to start delivering<BR>
> HSDPA services in regional areas: Optus have already begun doing so and<BR>
> with great success.<BR>
><BR>
> Backhaul breeds competition - just look at the number of independent<BR>
> ISPs along Nextgen's inland and coastal routes (LinearG, Linknet,<BR>
> WorldWithoutWires, TSN and Cirrus Comms just to name a few) to get an<BR>
> idea of just how quickly smaller ISPs can go to market with solutions<BR>
> that provide REAL alternatives to the incumbent in a fraction of the<BR>
> time required to build a national customer access network.<BR>
><BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: Matthew Moyle-Croft [<A HREF="mailto:mmc@internode.com.au">mailto:mmc@internode.com.au</A>]<BR>
> Sent: Thu 8/12/2010 2:25 PM<BR>
> To: Curtis Bayne<BR>
> Cc: Andrew Oskam; ausnog@ausnog.net<<A HREF="mailto:ausnog@ausnog.net">mailto:ausnog@ausnog.net</A>>; Tom Sykes<BR>
> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] background radiation was: "i want a pony!"<BR>
> (wasRe:Long live the NBN. The NBN is dead?! [personal])<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> On 12/08/2010, at 1:39 PM, Curtis Bayne wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> I do not deny that we need to focus on regional telecommunications, but<BR>
> I firmly believe that the NBN is not the answer. The government can<BR>
> build regional backhaul networks and let ISPs deliver the local loop<BR>
> (via FTTP, WLL, copper, whatever is most effective). The market will set<BR>
> demand, the regional blackspot issues resolved and we've spent a hell of<BR>
> a lot less than a metro FTTP network which duplicates what's already<BR>
> covered by 1xCopper, 2xHFC, 4xMobile and countless fixed wireless providers.<BR>
><BR>
> So, to go back to Tim's point "... if there's regulatory certainty" for<BR>
> people to invest. Explain to me how you'd achieve this to give enough<BR>
> certainty to allow genuine investment and overbuild in regional areas as<BR>
> well as metro?<BR>
><BR>
> MMC<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> --<BR>
> Matthew Moyle-Croft<BR>
> Peering Manager and Team Lead - Commercial and DSLAMs<BR>
> Internode /Agile<BR>
> Level 5, 162 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia<BR>
> Email: mmc@internode.com.au<<A HREF="mailto:mmc@internode.com.au">mailto:mmc@internode.com.au</A>> Web:<BR>
> <A HREF="http://www.on.net">http://www.on.net</A><<A HREF="http://www.on.net/">http://www.on.net/</A>><BR>
> Direct: +61-8-8228-2909 Mobile: +61-419-900-366<BR>
> Reception: +61-8-8228-2999 Fax: +61-8-8235-6909<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
--<BR>
Brad Gould, Network Engineer<BR>
Internode<BR>
PO Box 284, Rundle Mall 5000<BR>
Level 5, 162 Grenfell Street, Adelaide 5000<BR>
P: 08 8228 2999 F: 08 8235 6999<BR>
bradley@internode.com.au; <A HREF="http://www.internode.on.net/">http://www.internode.on.net/</A><BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>