[AusNOG] background radiation was: "i want a pony!" (wasRe:Long live the NBN. The NBN is dead?! [personal])

[Curtis Bayne]

Perhaps I'm over analyzing the question, or unsure of what exactly you're asking.

Regulatory certainty in this context is simple: a guarantee that a government-owned entity with practically limitless capital and with super-carrier privileges won't steamroll my regional telco deployment into financial oblivion.

Even a guarantee that if I deploy infrastructure as per NBNco specification which is then absorbed into the network for a price that allows me to make *reasonable* profit during my investment period would be enough to justify expenditure (this also frees up NBNco capital in the short term, allowing them to focus on the development of critical infrastructure whilst competent telcos build parts of the network where it is most needed).

What investor in their right mind would release funds to build regional telecommunications infrastructure in the knowledge that there's a strong chance it will be worth nothing before that investment is amortized?


-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Moyle-Croft [mailto:mmc at internode.com.au]
Sent: Thu 8/12/2010 3:08 PM
To: Curtis Bayne
Cc: Andrew Oskam; ausnog at ausnog.net; Tom Sykes
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] background radiation was: "i want a pony!" (wasRe:Long live the NBN. The NBN is dead?! [personal])
 
Sure, you can do wireless.   (Note: I work for a company with regional WIMAX and other radio networks).

But you didn't answer my question.

MMC

On 12/08/2010, at 2:36 PM, Curtis Bayne wrote:


It depends on population density and proximity to the closest point of interconnect: we've been deploying P2P fixed wireless upto 50Mbps for years (even using frequency diverse unlicenced - which works a gem in underbuilt regional areas). P2MP upto 20Mbps is easily achievable using WiMax or even TDMA WiFi for smaller providers and suits the sparse nature of regional areas perfectly.

The low barrier to entry achievable with this equipment will no doubt fuel fierce competition between small regional WISPs: with little to differentiate these types of providers, customer service and breadth of coverage will become the primary competitive factors for organizations of this type: smaller organizations also tend to be more agile because of their lack of bureaucratic weight and are more likely to have greater visibility of the technical complexities involved in servicing that particular geographical region (and probably more concerned with the preservation of the sanctity of areas of indigenous interest also).

It is in the best interests of these ISPs to build as quickly as possible and in as many areas possible as these markets are currently untapped - many smaller providers stand a chance to generate substantial amounts of revenue from customers who have cracked the shits with ISDN/Satellite.

High density industrial/business in regional areas are perfectly serviced by two-fibre single mode drops into each building, hauled back to an aggregation point and back hauled by dark fibre/Gbit microwave to the providers nearest PoP.

The proliferation of regional WISPs in countries such as the Czech Republic, Latvia, Africa etc. is a testament to the fact that this business model works. Then there's agility; reaching an agreement with Telstra to open up their regional fiber networks could result in these areas receiving high speed services within MONTHS of an agreement being reached, whether those services are deployed by wireless or DSL is upto the local provider.

It would also be naive to think that providers such as VHA and Optus would not utilize their already entrenched brands to start delivering HSDPA services in regional areas: Optus have already begun doing so and with great success.

Backhaul breeds competition - just look at the number of independent ISPs along Nextgen's inland and coastal routes (LinearG, Linknet, WorldWithoutWires, TSN and Cirrus Comms just to name a few) to get an idea of just how quickly smaller ISPs can go to market with solutions that provide REAL alternatives to the incumbent in a fraction of the time required to build a national customer access network.

-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Moyle-Croft [mailto:mmc at internode.com.au]
Sent: Thu 8/12/2010 2:25 PM
To: Curtis Bayne
Cc: Andrew Oskam; ausnog at ausnog.net<mailto:ausnog at ausnog.net>; Tom Sykes
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] background radiation was: "i want a pony!" (wasRe:Long live the NBN. The NBN is dead?! [personal])


On 12/08/2010, at 1:39 PM, Curtis Bayne wrote:

I do not deny that we need to focus on regional telecommunications, but I firmly believe that the NBN is not the answer. The government can build regional backhaul networks and let ISPs deliver the local loop (via FTTP, WLL, copper, whatever is most effective). The market will set demand, the regional blackspot issues resolved and we've spent a hell of a lot less than a metro FTTP network which duplicates what's already covered by 1xCopper, 2xHFC, 4xMobile and countless fixed wireless providers.

So, to go back to Tim's point "... if there's regulatory certainty" for people to invest.   Explain to me how you'd achieve this to give enough certainty to allow genuine investment and overbuild in regional areas as well as metro?

MMC


--
Matthew Moyle-Croft
Peering Manager and Team Lead - Commercial and DSLAMs
Internode /Agile
Level 5, 162 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: mmc at internode.com.au<mailto:mmc at internode.com.au>    Web: http://www.on.net<http://www.on.net/>
Direct: +61-8-8228-2909      Mobile: +61-419-900-366
Reception: +61-8-8228-2999        Fax: +61-8-8235-6909


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20100812/d782a7e1/attachment.html>