[AusNOG] Labor to force people to connect to broadband

[Sean K. Finn]

> Sorry, I'm failing to understand how is having access to additional
> customers a bad thing.  I can understand being upset at someone riding
> on your coattails, so to speak, but now you'll have access to more
> customers at (in theory) a lower cost.  Call me a straw-man, but
> what's not to like?

Wealth for toil.

Curtis has spent the effort building out where no one else gave a damn to service his clients, just like everyone else.

He put in the investment in time and money to at least expect to recoup costs.

Trouble is that return on investment, now EVERYONE has equal access to his customers with bugger all investment.

It's this attitude that's STOPPING personal and private investment in new areas, thereby stopping natural growth in its tracks until carriers can TRUST the government.

This isn't Russia. People aren't owed access.

Even though I think it's a good thing connecting every one up, I'm still P***ed off that we've spent a couple of mil achieving what the gov't is now handing to every homeowner in a contestable labour electorate for virtually free.

The other thing to note here is with an opt-out model and 50% penetration rate, this means that FIFTY PERCENT told them to go jump.


Are we a free market economy or a communist / socialist economy or bastard stepson of both with a dual-system?

Sounds like our one government runs communistic style for everyone who has no motivation, and free-market for anyone else who wants more than the basics.

It's the FORCING of their ideals of either of the sides onto the willing participants of the other that creates the conflict and resentment.

/Rant


-----Original Message-----
From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Andrew Fort
Sent: Friday, 30 July 2010 4:03 PM
To: Curtis Bayne
Cc: ausnog
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Labor to force people to connect to broadband

On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 3:48 PM, Curtis Bayne <curtis at bayne.com.au> wrote:
> Ok, here comes my $0.022c worth (gst inc.)
>
> This "opt-out" model irks me. Deeply.
>
> I've spent the better part of a year coercing building management of various
> buildings in my local area to let me put microwave gear on their roof, run
> cabling to their tenant's demarcation points and generally do good things
> for connectivity in an area that's been neglected by every single other
> provider except Optus. How come NBNCo gets a free pass for the "subscriber
> in building" requirement under the Telco Act?

Sorry, I'm failing to understand how is having access to additional
customers a bad thing.  I can understand being upset at someone riding
on your coattails, so to speak, but now you'll have access to more
customers at (in theory) a lower cost.  Call me a straw-man, but
what's not to like?

-a
_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog