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

[Glenn Lake]

I personally love the idea of the NBN - in theory.

 

I just can't resolve the following:

 

.         How does government justify subsidising alternatives where
competition is already working nicely

.         How does government justify subsidising alternatives with
detriment to existing private investment (Sovereign risk?) - except where
genuine monopolies exist.

.         Can we say that customers are getting a better deal if they are
paying for it in other ways (for example):  

o   Increased national debt, higher interest payments

o   Economic and opportunity costs of utilising this money for other
(perhaps more needy) infrastructure / services?

 

I agree that the NBN would be preferable to doing nothing, however isn't it
possible that we can treat what the coalition is proposing as phase 1?
Does their proposal limit Government from getting involved in the future
should competitive forces fail to take advantages of backhaul alternatives.
IMO government should provide what the market can't or won't for various
reasons - never should it render previous private investment useless, nor
should it overtly subsidise competition that will destroy competitive
alternatives.

 

Could somebody explain how we believe that NBNco would be different here?
Once NBNco kills of competition (read infrastructure competition, since who
can compete with a government subsidised investment when private investors
expect a reasonable return on investment), what levels of service could we
expect from NBNco - and how this would be different to the arrogant,
monopolistic attitude that Telecom/Telstra had before being privatised and
telecommunications being de-regulated?    Competition not only drives price,
but innovation and service levels (to avoid losing market share).  What will
force NBNco to fix a fault within X hours?  Who would we threaten to migrate
our services to, should SLA's continually be not met?

 

I have read with interest the debate on this for some time, and some would
argue that the national interest is the driving force here, and while I
could agree that having a technological edge on other countries will do us
much good, have we not learned from the lessons of the past?  How long would
this technological edge exist for?   If we have to imagine that the
potential payback on this project will be 15-20 years - and if networks need
upgrading during that time, will it be upgraded?  Again - In my opinion- we
will see a lack of innovation and progress in the medium to long term, and
we will once again fall behind.

 

One more thing that others may have considered/discussed - How do we
facilitate genuine redundancy options for customers that require it?  Who
(other than perhaps Telstra) could easily reach a customer premise with an
alternative path on fibre?  How much more expensive will the redundant
service be - when compared to the primary service being obtained from NBNCo?
Would any carrier justify further investment and expansion of their fibre
assets just to be considered an expensive redundant solution for the limited
number of organisations that would require it?

 

And finally, I do think that it is a mistake to not deal with access to
customer premises, specifically access ducts / conduits etc.   I wish that
the coalition policy had dealt with this.   Backhaul and duct access
probably are the two biggest inhibitors to competition in this space.

 

I am open for arguments either way - but I cannot stress enough - that
government has never ran anything efficiently, built anything on-time or on
budget, provided high levels of service or quality, nor had a customer
service focus at least in my own lifetime.   

 

 

Sorry for rambling ;-)

 

Glenn

 

 

 

From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net
[mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Matthew Moyle-Croft
Sent: Thursday, 12 August 2010 4:17 PM
To: Curtis Bayne
Cc: ausnog at ausnog.net
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] background radiation was: "i want a pony!" (wasRe:Long
live the NBN. The NBN is dead?! [personal])

 

So,

You're arguing against the NBN because your customers might get a better
deal?

 

MMC

 

On 12/08/2010, at 3:19 PM, Curtis Bayne wrote:





Of course I don't - Telstra aren't scary.

Telstra need to justify this investment to their shareholders, fund their
steamrolling expeditions out of cashflow, are bound by normal carrier
privileges and will probably just throw down a few token DSLAMs about the
place because that's how they (truck/rick)roll. Maybe turn up a few extra
NextG channels for good luck and call the job done.

...and they'll price themselves out of the small to medium enterprise
market.

NBNCo, on the other hand, will directly target each and every one of my
customers, install infrastructure into their premises on an opt-out basis
and deliver it at a price point which no cashflow-funded entity in this
country that I can think of can compete with.

The latter scares me far more!


-----Original Message-----
From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net on behalf of craig at askings.com.au
Sent: Thu 8/12/2010 3:31 PM
To: ausnog at ausnog.net
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] background radiation was: "i want a pony!" (wasRe:Long
live the NBN. The NBN is dead?! [personal])

Curtis Bayne wrote:
> 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.

Do you want them to ban Telstra from overbuilding you as well? Prior to
the NBN being a glimmer in Conroy's eye, if you built any kind of regional
Customer Access Network in an under-served area Telstra would come in and
try and steam roll you.

I'm sure there are a few people on this list that have seen that first
hand, perhaps somewhere in South East regional part of SA????

Craig.



 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20100812/5853dbb4/attachment.html>