<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On Aug 6, 2013, at 9:17 AM, Peter Tiggerdine <<a href="mailto:ptiggerdine@gmail.com">ptiggerdine@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">Is it me of is ACCC playing favoritism with every other ISP other than Telstra?</blockquote><br></div><div>Aside from Rob Hudson's comments (which, IMHO, were spot-on), the bigger picture here is that "playing favoritism with every ISP other than Telstra" is precisely what the ACCC is supposed to do.</div><div><br></div><div>Telstra began its life as the one-and-only carrier license holder, the only organization that could legally provide carrier services, 100% market share. Then "competition" was introduced, and a bunch of telecommunications-specific laws were implemented to transition Telstra from 100% market share to something approximating a "fair" market share.</div><div><br></div><div>Or, to put it another way: Telecommunications competition policy in Australia has a specific aim of reducing Telstra's reach and influence.</div><br><div>They aren't supposed to be treated fairly. Twenty years after the introduction of competition, they remain utterly dominant in retail, and mostly dominant almost everywhere else. The role of the ACCC is to promote better consumer outcomes by driving competition <i>by tilting the playing field against Telstra.</i></div><div><i><br></i></div><div>I wonder how many of their shareholders have ever understood that?</div><div><br></div><div> - mark</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></body></html>