[AusNOG] Government sets parameters for NBN

[Jake Anderson]

On 09/04/14 21:44, Mark Newton wrote:
>
> On 9 Apr 2014, at 5:17 pm, Greg Anderson <ganderson at raywhite.com> wrote:
>> In my opinion, the FTTH was expensive but invaluable,
> That meme is one of the reasons it failed.
>
> It was only "expensive" if you had no sense of proportion.
>
> This country spends $110 billion *per annum* on health funding; the absolute worst credible estimate of NBN costs was about half of that spread over a 15-20 year build cycle, and that was assuming there'd be no cost recovery afterwards by selling it (the second half of the NBN policy proposal) or charging for its use.
>
> The kind of money the Coalition was holding up as a worst case to build a national FTTH network was roughly the same as the life cycle costs of two Collins Class submarines.
>
> We (the electorate) let the current government get away with happy-clapping about the cost of this "gold plated" proposal for 5 years, even though the expense was a drop in the ocean, about 0.5% per annum of the half-trillion-dollar Federal budget: Literally a rounding error.
>
> They're still doing it now.
>
>     - mark
>
>
Don't forget the recent strategic review shows that the actual cost of 
FTTP is a whole $1Bn more than the cost of The Malcolm Turnbull Mess. 
The difference in "peak funding" in that report is primarily achieved by 
changing the run rate to being below what is being achieved right now, 
so the whole thing takes longer meaning there are more interest payments 
to make. If they used their "superior management skills" to actually do 
the damn job of putting glass in the ground everybody would win.