NBN - Everything you need to know about the National Broadband Network

Engineers will suffer from Telstra NBN: Optus

If Telstra wins the national fibre-to-the-node broadband network contract without an operational separation condition, innovation in the telecommunications industry and the engineering community will take a hit, according to Optus chief Paul O'Sullivan.

Optus CEO Paul O'Sullivan
Optus CEO Paul O'Sullivan

Speaking at UTS today, O'Sullivan said that where competition is scarce, development is slow — and he sees "dark clouds on the horizon" for telecommunications innovation, as a result of the AU$4.7 billion national broadband network (NBN).

He urged the academic community to raise their voices on the structural issues of the national broadband network as it will have a "significant impact on the degree of innovation" and therefore affect future engineering graduates: "I would strongly encourage those in the room ... to be looking at structural issues as well as technology issues," he said.

"I think we far too often get caught up in technology and innovation and forget about market structure," he added.

The network shouldn't be owned by any one player, according to O'Sullivan, or "inevitably there will be higher prices and less innovation."

"What Australia is doing now will develop the competitive structure of the broadband market for the next 10 to 15 years," he continued. "Given Australia's size, population density and natural monopoly, the reality is there will only be one national broadband network."

As a result, says O'Sullivan, operational separation is a must: "If Telstra will not accept this, there are plenty of other bidders who will."

Optus is not the only voice calling for a split: the states have already expressed their desire that Telstra undergo structural separation if it wins the bid.

Telstra on the other hand, says international examples show that operational separation inhibits innovation.

"With forced separation, you don't see investment in infrastructure and innovation," a spokesperson said: "The company doesn't have any reason to keep building and innovating on the network. It just has not worked anywhere in the world."

Talkback 39 comments

    The understatement of the year I think Lord Watchdog -- 05/06/08

    Telstra in in the process of sacking engineers, they'll be lucky to have any left soon. Nothing serves to destroy confidence in an employer than having one of them commit to mass sackings to save a few bob. When this happens no account for employee service and loyalty comes to play. Sol, the $8m dollar man, doesn't give a damn. He still has his job tomorrow and as far as worker input v's worker output goes, he, and his Amigos, are far less efficient and cost-effective than most of his staff.

    To make matters worse, Telstra is yet to complete their planned wipeout of 12,000 jobs.

    Telstra Bashing again rick -- 06/06/08 (in reply to #320103366)

    Where in the article is the reference tp job cuts....can you pls stick to the debate/article and keep your prejudiced based rants to yourself.

    No wonder people who are so Anti-Telstra are constantly proven wrong. Less emotion & more facts please.

    Takes one to know one Lord Watchdog -- 06/06/08 (in reply to #320103413)

    Your one-eyed reference to "anti-Telstra" shows a smattering of emotional bias Rick. You can hardly expect people to consider your irrelevant contribution to be worthwhile when you do the same thing you expect others not to do.

    The article is about engineers. I am simply saying that those working for Telstra have plenty on their plate, not just to do with future broadband networks.

    I will also add that I know a few people that work for Telstra and they live in fear of reprisals if they speak out against their employer. It is unfortunate that Telstra doesn't value free speech.

    Takes one to know one? My how deep. Anonymous -- 06/06/08 (in reply to #320103462)

    Talking about emotional bias, ha ha!

    Yes, people you know at Telstra, we believe you!

    Is Optus Structurally separating? Anonymous -- 06/06/08

    Comments fom Optus CEO Paul O'Sullivan, state

    "The network shouldn't be owned by any one player, according to O'Sullivan"

    This comes just after Optus have handed over their bond and launched their own bid, separate from the Terria group? Or have

    18% James -- 06/06/08

    Structural separation naturally wouldn't work for Telstra - if it happened they'd need to do some work to get their publicly stated 18% after-tax return on the NBN (and how long did they want that? 20 years?)

    No competition for 20 years? Sydney Lawrence -- 06/06/08 (in reply to #320103415)

    James it was Optus (TERRiA) that wanted a twenty year holiday from competition if they were to win the NBN Tender. Remember now?

    OPTUS Scare Campaign Anonymous -- 06/06/08 (in reply to #320103421)

    Dont worry Sydney...it is only OPTUS up to their old tricks!!!

    Take a holiday Lord Watchdog -- 06/06/08 (in reply to #320103421)

    I suppose Telstra would open their network to competition without a friendly boot up the khyber from the ACCC, say like all the competition that exists on their HFC network for example.

    khyber. Anonymous -- 06/06/08 (in reply to #320103463)

    do you open up your IRC to your competition or do you need a friendly boot up the khyber too?

    Gotta love these anonymous trolls Lord Watchdog -- 08/06/08 (in reply to #320103483)

    Whilst IRC is irrelevant to this thread, like most of what the pro-Telstra brigade has had to say I will briefly reply because what I am about to say reflects on Telstra's standards of service overall.

    IRC is an open communications medium world-wide, regardless of who owns the thousands of existing networks. However, unlike Bigpond IRC, network owners maintain their networks in good order. Currently, Bigpond has only ONE active server out of a peak of four. Their WA server went first around 2000 and Bigpond gave up on it. Then in late 2007 the NSW node carked it and was never seen again despite assurances from a Bigpond host that the NSW server is alive and well but only used to host security robots. DNS for both these servers was merely redirected on each occasion to hide the problem from the users, who Bigpond obviously believe are stupid, blind or both. Last month the VIC server delinked and it is still floating around the Internet like a meteorite in space. A fortnight later it is still delinked and Bigpond's lack of foresight and their non-existant maintenance and monitoring programme is providing a great deal of entertainment for a large number of people.

    What will happen when the QLD server carks it? I am glad I bailed from there in 2005. The fact that Bigpond IRC is owned by Australia's largest ISP is an international embarassment and I am glad that my name is no longer associated with Bigpond's systemic disregard for its reputation, let alone its equipment. Sadly, Bigpond run their ISP as a whole in pretty much the same way. Their service and support continue to lie in a state of decay too. The only thing that is well fed at Bigpond are some of the managers and Bigpond's prices.

    Irrelevant? SJT -- 08/06/08 (in reply to #320103586)

    It's not irrelevant to this thread, if you are quoting in relation to the topic at hand, simply out of spite, because of a previous, irrelevant altercation with Telstra.

    More conspiracy theories Lord Watchdog -- 08/06/08 (in reply to #320103608)

    Another clown making irrelevant and misleading allegations. Attack the issues, not people you dont happen to agree with.

    For the record there is no and has been no "altercation" with Telstra or other ISP. I've been connected to the Internet for around 12 - 13 years an in that time I've used a number of ISPs. Some have been better than others. I always jump ship when someone else offers a better arrangement and if you Telstra fans have a problem with that then you are spending too much time on the computer and not enough time outdoors.

    As a guide, I currently use Spin/Comcen. I pay 1/3 less for ADSL2+ than I would if I connected with Bigpond. I also scored 6 months free line rental, which Bigpond couldn't offer if they wanted to - that alone saves me 25% on the phone component of the contract. I'll finish by saying that on the single occasion I have had to ring them up I spoke to a person licketty split instead of listening to lift music for half an hour.

    Practice what you preach! SJT -- 08/06/08 (in reply to #320103609)

    You say, attack the issues, not the people! Yet you call me a clown?

    Perhaps you should heed your own advice.

    No apology required, Einstein!

    No apology would be forthcoming Lord Watchdog -- 08/06/08 (in reply to #320103610)

    Get out of the kitchen if you can't hack the heat squire. It will teach you to base your posts on facts instead of petty rumours. heh.

    All I did was tell the truth and my motives behind that is not relevant, no matter what those motives may be.

    Hypocrite! SJT -- 08/06/08 (in reply to #320103611)

    No you said, attack the issues not the people then you conversely, did the exact opposite, by attacking the person, by calling me a clown, you hypocrite.

    Don't try to squirm out of it now, just simply be man enough to admit it and move on!

    I admit it Lord Watchdog -- 08/06/08 (in reply to #320103613)

    I attacked you for not attacking issues instead of personalities. Happy? Again, next time base your comments on facts instead of urban myth. And again, all I've done is tell the truth about Telstra. Obviously the truth hurts sometimes. :-p

    Ok SJT -- 08/06/08 (in reply to #320103615)

    Ok, let's move on.

    We'll argue about the "truth" another day - lol!

    Telstra James -- 06/06/08 (in reply to #320103421)

    Telstra, whilst negotiating with the Howard Government, wanted a twenty year free reign - free of ACCC involvement, Government regulations - and fixed prices along with an 18% ROI. Now they've publicly dropped the 20 year demands - publicly. We know what Telstra was like years ago, and we see what they're trying to do now. Not a long bow to draw..

    The previous Government rejected Telstra because of these sorts of ludicrous demands; then Telstra didn't bother tendering for the job until it was too late. But the whinge machine has been in full swing since then...

    18% is still fact James -- 06/06/08 (in reply to #320103421)

    Yet, the 18% after tax return still stands.

    Great if they can get it, but it sets the stage for the price gouging that Telstra hopes to get away with..

    Right, it was a permanent exemption, not 20yrs James -- 06/06/08 (in reply to #320103421)

    http://www.itwire.com/content/view/3554/127/

    Yes, you're right - it wasn't 20 years it was a permanent exemption. Track down Coonans speech for an interesting read as well.

    This is unacceptable behaviour from a CEO Anonymous -- 06/06/08

    This is unacceptable behaviour from a CEO of a company. He said that he will not drive his company to improve and innovate because his competitor has not done so either. He sees "dark clouds on the horizon" for the whole industry - then take advantage of the situation and make a product that is better than the competition. If he thinks that Telstra will not " innovate" then Optus should do so and take the lead in Australia. Optus shares - sell, sell, sell!
    There is not a monopoly the telecommunications industry - one started before the other and the others have decided that it is too hard to build their own. Rent a buldozer, buy some wire. It is that simple.
    Also - if a monopoly is so bad, why is there only one ACCC?

    "true competition" jon -- 06/06/08 (in reply to #320103423)

    If Sullivan spent his time leading instead of Whingeing, OPTUS would not be in their predicamnet!!

    Well said!!! What Australian needs is "true Competition" not the regulated type OPTUS love!!

    Hmmmm xBeanie -- 06/06/08

    In the Telecom days, customer service was woeful but the technology was world leading. Now, to some extent that situation has reversed.

    It seems obvious to everyone except the government and Telstra that the government need to take back control of the network (the part that should have never been sold) and put our money directly into its development rather than to companies who just want to take a big chunk out of it and to position themselves to gouge the consumer even more.

    USO James -- 06/06/08 (in reply to #320103425)

    "It seems obvious to everyone except the government and Telstra that the government need to take back control of the network (the part that should have never been sold) and put our money directly into its development rather than to companies who just want to take a big chunk out of it and to position themselves to gouge the consumer even more."

    And this is a WIN for Telstra. Suddenly, the USO becomes a Government obligation that it should be. The Commonwealth could then contract out that support to the best tenderer. Telstra could even stop wholesaling their network if they so desired and point people towards the Commonwealth built network.

    But their dirty little secret is that for all of the whinging and moaning, the USO and wholesale access to equipment actually makes Telstra money. Wholesaling access to their equipment made them about 40% ('06) of the income. They're not going to give that up in a hurry. Regardless of what they whinge about.

    once upon a time. Anonymous -- 06/06/08 (in reply to #320103492)

    sell it, then simply take it back? which planet are you from? 40% profit in 2006, i'd like to see the actuals. sounds like a fairy story.

    Lies, damned lies and statistics James -- 06/06/08 (in reply to #320103495)

    "Telstra's wholesale division, which sells network services to other telcos, suffered a sharp fall in revenues of 4.6 per cent for the six months to December 31. Income fell 5 per cent to $1.26 billion. Wholesale earnings before interest and tax were down 4.9 per cent to $1.23 billion."

    http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0,24897,23270366-15306,00.html

    Even better, according to this report,
    http://www.reportbuyer.com/telecoms/fixed_line/2007_australia_fixed_mobile_statistics_tables_only.html
    Telstra has 70% of the Australian wholesale market (worth ~$3b).

    They ain't giving that one up without a fight. No matter how loud they whinge about the "unfair" situation. Telstra loves the "unfairness" of it all, taking billions out each year.

    And they could make billions more if they worked with the other players in the market instead of whinging, fighting and spinning every chance they got.

    Since when was it about jobs?!? Anonymous -- 06/06/08

    Do you keep jobs unnecessarily in an environment that is bloated, slow and inefficient - primarily due to the civil service mentality still prevalent in Telstra? Or do you cut unnecessary jobs (yes, unfortunately people will be negatively impacted), make the company more efficient in order to deliver a more efficient, cost-effective service to the customer? Irrelevant to this discussion regardless.

    Telstra was given the in-ground network that was paid for with taxpayer money. If Telstra was to start from scratch today, there is no way they would ever rebuild this network - it is simply no economically feasible. Shareholders would revolt as Telstra management would effectively be throwing money away for horrible returns. With this unnatural advantage, Telstra effectively has no competition.

    We shall see. Sydney Lawrence -- 06/06/08 (in reply to #320103459)

    It is my fervent hope that if Telstra does not win the NBN tender they continue with their fibre rollout and give challenge and competition to whoever does win the tender.

    Another possibility is for Telstra to wait for advancement in technology and then build the more advanced system for Australia. This would allow Telstra to retrieve all their copper cable to be sold for scrap.

    I do believe that Telstra will win the NBN tender as what Australian Government worth their salt could gift a foreign owned company control of Australia's vital communication network when an Australian company was available and able to satisfactoraly build the system?

    Bring on the lawyers James -- 06/06/08 (in reply to #320103468)

    "they continue with their fibre rollout and give challenge and competition to whoever does win the tender. "

    The only winner out of that happening would be the lawyers - the resultant shareholder lawsuit against the board would be a cash cow for years.

    The lawyers are already rubbing their hands - they've seen Telstra fight the losing battle in the High Court a couple of times and they can see the future for a non-Telstra built NBN as an open cheque-book for litigation.

    "I do believe that Telstra will win the NBN tender as what Australian Government worth their salt could gift a foreign owned company control of Australia's vital communication network when an Australian company was available and able to satisfactoraly build the system?"

    Spot on - thats why they'll end up giving the tender to Macquarie Bank et al. Why give it to Telstra when they can't even sort out the mess they were given when they were privatised? The banks have already said they'll share the network with anyone who wants it regardless. All Telstra does is whinge and moan about "foreign owned companies", or spam forums repeating the same diatribe that was wrong three years ago and never got any better.

    Come clean James. Sydney Lawrence -- 08/06/08 (in reply to #320103491)

    James I do appreciate the enthusiasm for your cause and can imagine your horror at the thought of losing your sneaky bludge on Telstra facilities, but you argument does show many deficiencies.

    For instance, you push for the NBN to be very low return on investment for the Tenderer. Then you name the Macquarie Bank as preferable to Telstra. James believe me the Macquarie Bank is no philanthropic organization. They would require the maximum return on investment and rightly so.

    James do you or do you not want true competition? Do you want a situation in Australia where the Optus plan for a competition ban for twenty years will deny the Australian consumer new technology and the choice of provider for that time.

    I know it gets boring James but it gets boring simply because you will not answer the question.

    Come on Sydney James -- 08/06/08 (in reply to #320103575)

    "James I do appreciate the enthusiasm for your cause and can imagine your horror at the thought of losing your sneaky bludge on Telstra facilities, but you argument does show many deficiencies. "

    My tax dollars go to Telstra so that they can honor their USO as part of their sale agreement. My tax dollars go to Telstra to help them maintain the copper network they were given at the time of privatisation. "sneaky bludge" I think not.

    "Then you name the Macquarie Bank as preferable to Telstra"

    Sorry, you've missed the point. Anyone is preferable to Telstra. They have a history of over-costing, over-charging and under-performing. Very rarely do you see a Bank getting caught like Telstra has over the years in fickle regulation disputes, or whinging in public to try to sway public policy. Banks (and most other companies) get down to business and work through regulation. These companies cooperate because they know that cooperation can bring them in more $$$. Telstra has forgotten this. Their idea of cooperation is "our way or the highway".

    I've seen "competition" from Telstra in the last twenty years, consisting of high prices and low innovation.

    Fresh blood is what the industry needs - not tired old rhetoric from the incumbent, 800lb gorilla. Maybe this could still be Telstra if the board was significantly changed and they decided to play nicely with all of the players in the Australian market.

    The competition bashing for Telstra supporters is fine - hell, if I had thousands of share in Telstra I'd believe the Telstra spin machine as well and go out into the world trying to convince others. But in reality Telstra has asked for - and was rejected on- worse conditions to be imposed on the NBN; who in their right mind would give Telstra a permanent, exclusive, regulatory free regime. Optus might be arguing for a guarantee that they are the only ones to build a fibre network, but at least they're willing to separate in such a way that they cannot give preferential treatment to their own clients. Telstra has never said that they'd do that - they're fighting tooth and nail against structural separation of the NBN.

    "I know it gets boring James but it gets boring simply because you will not answer the question."

    Its okay, I'll repeat it here again - sometimes it takes a couple of goes for things to sink in, eh Sydney :-)

    Sydney, you've got the blinkers on so tight that you can't see that the other tenderers have valid points and concerns about Telstra. Understandably, if you've invested your life savings in Telstra then you'd want them to crush their opposition in every restpect. But look at history - when Telstra was in that position they got big, bloated and innovation stopped - and thats how we got to where we are now, facing a massive bill to upgrade core telecommunications infrastructure.

    Practice what you preach - hypocrite! SJT -- 08/06/08 (in reply to #320103583)

    "sometimes it takes a couple of goes to sink in, Sydney"?

    I thought you believed in playing argument not the man?

    Seems you are nothing more than a hypocrite, James.

    Selective quoting James -- 08/06/08 (in reply to #320103589)

    Geez, SJT, selective quoting now. Notice the ':)' at the end of the statement?

    Clearly your after an argument based on attacking people, not facts. I apologise now - I'm not into those sorts of cheap shots. If you think that will convince people of the strength of your arguments for Telstra, then go for it.

    I'll leave you with this .. "Don't feed the trolls".

    Simple queston. Simple answer. Sydney Lawrence -- 08/06/08 (in reply to #320103595)

    James, I do appreciate your fervor but please, simply answer this one question.

    If Optus were to be granted the build of the NBN, and when it was completed, Telstra decided to compete and challenge Optus by building their own fibre would you agree or disagree. Simple answer James, yes or no.

    Facts you say, well let's go, boy! SJT -- 08/06/08 (in reply to #320103595)

    Ok James (I have a feeling of deja vu) if you want to talk facts, let's do exactly that.

    Firstly we'll assume that you just don't know all the facts and as such are simply naive and gullible to the T4 rhetoric. As such, we'll also give you the benefit of the doubt that you aren't simply a compulsive liar.

    So you have seen competition from Telstra in the last "20 years". Optus became Telstra's sole competitor in 1992 (only 16 years ago), following a tender where we only received one bidder - Optus, who incidentally were given every incentive under the sun at Telstra's expense and artificially created, simply to fit the "buzzword competition". They also purchased (one would assume at a giveaway price) the AUSSAT satellite. So James, there was no such thing as competition 20 years ago, how could you have possibly seen it? - lol!

    Then you say Sydney has the blinkers on but also say 'anyone is preferable to Telstra" so who really has the blinkers on?

    Sydney also asked you questions and you still didn't answer them, although you snidely pussyfooted and made a smart***e comment. So just answer the questions! The questions being - 'do you want true competition'? Or do you promote TERRiA's proposal to build our NBN with a "no competition" monopoly clause?

    You also say "fresh blood is what the industry needs - not tired old rhetoric from the incumbent, 800lb gorilla". Maybe this could still be Telstra if the board was significantly changed and they decided to play nicely with all of the players in the Australian market".

    "Fresh blood... incumbent 800lb gorilla" - words straight from the T4 bible of stupidity! What fresh blood, like hOPELess? All show and no go - hellooo... "Play nicely" - LMFAO. This proves your gullibility. Businesses are not nice to each other. What, do you believe Pepsi's latest slogan should "nicely read" - "Pepsi, the greatest drink ever, apart from Coca Cola" - wake up, this is the real world James.

    In case you aren't aware the Telstra board has won many international awards for excellence. So although you (or your paymasters) don't like the board they are recognised worldwide as a leading executive team. Just a few recent awards include - best practices/service provider - nice France. An innovation award from Portugal and another from Berlin (and we all know about Germans and precision).

    It's no wonder you and the rest of the Hel$tra haters want them replaced; obviously they make your guys look extremely amateurish!

    Lastly, this is a doozy! "My tax dollars go to Telstra to help them maintain the copper network they were given at the time of privatisation".

    This is a joke right? No normal rational human being still actually believes this BS, do they? Firstly the PSTN was vested in Telecom (now Telstra) Feb 1, 1992. Telstra privatisation (T1) was launched 29 Sept 1997. So the PSTN was vested 5.5 years prior to privatisation, not at the time of privatisation - so wrong! The network they were "GIVEN" - lol. Please do at least a little homework and learn actual history (not T4's twisted version thereof)!

    So unfortunately once again, a quick history lesson is required! In 1975, the total value of the (PSTN) assets was determined by aggregating budget appropriations, for telecommunications since 1901. The resulting "DEBT was about $4b" ($4b in 1975, what's that worth in relation to today's $ value?). Anyway, from 1 February 1992, the assets of the PSTN were vested in Telecom (Telstra) and as such, Telstra also became responsible for the "balance of this DEBT"!

    So when Telstra was privatised in 1997, the $4b debt (plus one would assume years of added interest since 1975, accrued as well) was repaid by Telstra shareholders. So not only did Shareholders purchase Telstra for some $50b (with another $6b odd, just paid May 2008 too), they also paid $4b (+ interest?) for the PSTN, by repaying "OUR taxpayers" telecommunications debt! So GIVEN James?

    Please, in future before

    The rest??? SJT -- 08/06/08 (in reply to #320103605)

    the rest lost somewhere..

    Please, in future before coming here to tell us how much you know, please educate yourself on how "little you know" first. Thanks.

    Free and open competition please. Sydney Lawrence -- 09/06/08 (in reply to #320103606)

    SJT that was a very impressive lesson in history and one that I hope was digested by James.

    I have noticed that James, and others, sometimes add fiction as fact in the belief that some may accept their fabrications as truth. To tell the truth I expect that most, if not all, the Telstra Haters speak from fear that by honest competition Telstra will destroy their businesses.

    The ultimate and logical result of competition is for the company supplying the best product at acceptable pricing to win the favour of consumers and if the customer chooses one company over all others then I say BUTT OUT ACCC and don't try to artificially manufacture competition by assisting those whom the public have rejected.

    Re: Lord Watchdog -- 26/06/08 (in reply to #320103631)

    "then I say BUTT OUT ACCC and don't try to artificially manufacture competition by assisting those whom the public have rejected."

    Add to that the loss of funding for the USO. That would save the taxpayer a few bob and mean far fewer trees being cut down to make unwanted phone books.

    All or nothing - can't have it both ways.

Add your opinion

Latest Videos

Sponsored content

Power Centre - Content from our premier sponsors

Blogs

  • Brad Howarth The key Topik is always money
    One of the big problems of the internet is that is practically impossible to keep up-to-date on preferred topics. You can limit your sources, but this can mean missing a lot of valuable data.
  • Array Do we need the legislative blackmail?
    Virtually everyone in the telecommunications industry has their say in the Senate Standing Committee's public hearing into the pending legislation to split up Telstra, in this week's Twisted Wire podcast.
  • Array Give Tax a break for a Change
    Considering the circumstances the Australian Taxation Office's (ATO) Change Program has been operating in over the last few years, it really hasn't been going too badly.
  • More blogs »

Tags

Back to top

Featured