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

National broadband data: who's late

By Suzanne Tindal, ZDNet.com.au

22 August 2008 04:11 PM

Tags: telstra, optus, conroy, national broadband network, information, nbn, deadline, instruments

update Today is the deadline for Australian telcos to hand over information on their networks so that the federal government can use it in its process to build a $4.7 billion national broadband network. ZDNet.com.au investigated who's on time and who's late.

Potential bidders to build and operate the network needed to have the information, such as where fibre cable existed already, to be able to complete informed bids for the NBN tender.

Ten days ago, acting Communications Minster Anthony Albanese, filling in for Stephen Conroy, released final documents detailing the information carriers needed to supply by today.

Once the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy has verified all the necessary information has been provided and has reached proponents, bidders will have 12 weeks to finalise their proposals.

ZDNet.com.au investigated which carriers outlined in the Department's document had given their information in to the government.

Carrier	Information In?
AAPT	Yes
Agile Communications	"Absolutely"
Amcom	Unknown
Digital River Networks	Will be coming in today
Macquarie Telecom	Yes
NextGen Networks	Unknown
Optus Networks	Yes
Pipe Networks	Unknown
Primus Telecommunications	Yes
Soul	Unknown
Telstra	Yes
TransACT	Declined to comment
Vodafone	Yes

Telstra said it had already received written confirmation from DBCDE that it had met its information provision requirements.

However, a spokesperson for Commmunications Minister Conroy has as yet been unable to confirm this. Telstra said it had submitted its information sometime before 7 August.

"Last week, Optus CEO Paul O'Sullivan claimed Telstra was holding up the NBN by not complying with its network information requirements," Telstra's incoming group managing director for public policy and communications, David Quilty, said today.

"This confirmation demonstrates that O'Sullivan's claim was a falsehood and he should now apologise for misleading the Australian public," he said.

"We look forward to assessing the quality of Telstra's information — after its numerous attempts to get it right," an Optus spokesperson said.

Ravi Bhartia, CEO of Primus Telecom said: "In this particular case, beauty is in the eye of the user," meaning that the proponents will be the judge of whether the information is useful or not.

The documents the department issued only defined the format and the actual content of the information, he said, and not whether it could actually be used by someone.

Matt Healy, Macquarie Telecom national executive regulatory and government, agreed with Bhartia.

He also, however, dug the boot into the department for its lack of transparency, being unable to tell ZDNet.com.au which parties had lodged their information already and whether Telstra's information had been approved.

"One party says I just got a letter, na na nee na na, and the department can't even acknowledge that. It's crazy," he said.

He said he thought Conroy was committed to a transparent process, but that the department was "stuck in a paradigm of the past".

Talkback (38)
Print
E-mail
Share
- del.icio.us
- Digg
- Reddit
- Slashdot
- StumbleUpon

Talkback 38 comments

Add your opinion

Financial and technological disaster awaits. Sydney Lawrence -- 22/08/08

The blowtorch goes onto the belly now. The smoke and mirrors are cast aside and truth in its shining honesty must reign supreme.

Firstly the deceipt that TERRiA can obtain finance must be admitted.
The untruthful suggestion that TERRiA has the capacity to build the NBN must be exposed.
The request that TERRiA be allowed a monopoly without competition must be denied.
The disaster to Australia's communications that could be caused by an attempted TERRiA build must be avoided.
Over to you Senator Conroy.

"Tierra" Anonymous -- 22/08/08 (in reply to #320110343)

Fact or Fiction??

Tierra it sure is Another anonymous posting -- 22/08/08 (in reply to #320110361)

They are an ever changing entity which is reinventing and self replicating itself, also known as a virus. Take a look at what the word means. They tried to spell it Terria but we all know the truth.

"Tierra" Anonymous -- 25/08/08 (in reply to #320110368)

LOL...your right..this would have been a more apt name!

"The computer programs in Tierra are evolvable and can mutate, self-replicate and recombine. Tierra is a frequently cited example of an artificial life model; in the metaphor of the Tierra, the evolvable computer programs can be considered as digital organisms which compete for energy (CPU time) and resources (main memory). Tierra is a derivative of the computer programmer's game Core War."

Monopoly? You sure? Terry Green -- 26/08/08 (in reply to #320110343)

Interesting that you brought up that Terria shouldn't be allowed to be a monopoly, it is after all the only bid on the table that is made up of multiple companies. It is in fact the only one that wouldn't be a monopoly.

Multiple companies or not John -- 27/08/08 (in reply to #320110638)

So what you are admitting is that Terria will not operate as an independent company buy as part of these 8 companies. That would explain my suspicions that these 8 companies would get preferential treatment and due to the sheer numbers could muddy up the waters making it difficult for the ACCC to investigate collusion whereas a single entity would be an easier target. I am sure this is not what they have previously claimed. That's for clearing that up and revealing the truth to us all Terry.

Terria's Objective James Bell -- 27/08/08 (in reply to #320110683)

The difference John is that Terria is welcoming other participants to join their consortium, including Telstra. They have even publically stated that should another bidder win the NBN tender which still ensures a competitive environment for them to operate in then they will be satisfied; however Terria is also supplying their own bid to ensure this occurs.

Nobody with half a brain questions that the key objective of any of these businesses (Telstra, Terria etc.) is anything other than to make money. None of these companies want to build the NBN out of the goodness of their hearts or for the better of our nation, but the crucial difference is how their proposals will impact the prices consumers have to pay and the services we receive for years to come.

Telstra wants to cement its monopoly and unprecedented profit margins, while many of the Terria companies simply want to remain in existence and fear a Telstra win will severely hinder their ability to do business. The Terria model will guarantee lower prices and improved competition due to its joint ownership by multiple parties and a functionally separated operating environment. Telstra's supposed open access model will essentially fortify a monopoly in fixed line infrastructure, and ensure we hear plenty from the likes of Dr Phil and similar Telstra personalities whinging about regulation, governments and evil Sigaporeans for another couple of decades.

"Tieras" motives Anonymous -- 27/08/08 (in reply to #320110697)

Its simple..they are in it to simply stall or hold up the NBN so as to they get a "favourable" regulatory outcome for their own interests.

Meanwhile Telstra is ready to go!! If they are not serious they should get out the way as they holding up progress!!

The comments from Michael Egan highlight they are not funded and are an $8 shelf company!!

Telstra's motives James Bell -- 27/08/08 (in reply to #320110720)

A favourable NBN tender and regulatory outcome is in Australia's interests.

The only thing Telstra is ready for is to send competition in this country back to the 80s, and charge us all a premium for the priviledge with puny download allowances and outrageous excess usage charges.

Great paid comments James Bell Anonymous -- 27/08/08 (in reply to #320110697)

As usual

You idiot James Bell -- 27/08/08 (in reply to #320110726)

Even though you like to keep trolling with your name hidden you still stand out like a turd in a punch bowl. Don't worry I'm sure if you continue trying you're bound to one day say something remotely intelligent.

And thanks for the compliment, but I don't need you to tell me my comments are great.

Jumping to conclusions are we Terry -- 27/08/08 (in reply to #320110683)

John, you're really jumping to some big conclusions here, I haven't even said who I personally would want to get the NBN. To answer that, no I don't think Telstra should and that's only based on the fact they own most of the last mile infrastructure now and waste some much money in court fighting competition. I've got no issue with a company defending it's profits, but it shouldn't do so at the hindrance of technology advancement.

Do I think Terria should get it? Well although they are a better alternative to Telstra due to the simple fact it's made up of multiple companies, I'm not 100% sure Terria is the answer either.

The best option would be for a bid who has no relationship to end customer delivery at all and would operate purely as a wholesale business.

Any thoughts on that?

The blowtorch goes onto the belly now. Anonymous -- 23/08/08

Well Sydney Lawrence I must admit that I have read quite a few of your posts and I don't think that I have ever seen such one eyed bull dust in my life!
Having said that I must applaud you for your convictions (right or wrong) if that is what you truly believe? my only wish is that you would make a stand on your own( your own thoughts and words) and not repeat the endless drivel that that is propagated by a P.R. machine. At times almost verbatim
The fact that you can not post a reply or comment without the use of P.R. drivel is a sad comment on your true thoughts( and/or the ability to think for yourself) obliviously you sir you are either in the pay of or have an exceeding amount of funds tied up in in shares in your beloved Telstra.
If you do truly believe what you preach then at least be original in your wording .
Please note that I am not condemning your views
If you truly believe what you write?
just your lack of original wording and tact.
I personally do not agree with you but as the saying goes
" Thems the breaks"
Sir the way you come across in your posts is that of a paid stooge
Awaiting your reply
Brudda

From each according to their ability. Sydney Lawrence -- 23/08/08 (in reply to #320110372)

Anonymous how kind you are to reflect that my limited education could produce writings that may be mistaken for the production of a professional PR machine.

If what I write has some merit it is because it is my sincere belief expressed in the hope that it may be of value to my country, Australia. While Telstra is not perfect it is Australian and many Australians are dependent on it for their survival.

It would be nice to be (as you describe it) a paid stooge of Telstra but alas I remain a burnt-out Aussie who after fifty years of toil in hard physical work enjoy no such luxury.

I am puzzled by your reference to my lack of origional wording and tact and somewhat hurt. Please believe me when I tell you that all my expressions are mine and it is always my intention to be tactful. Every best wish to you.

according to their ability Brudda -- 23/08/08 (in reply to #320110381)

From each according to their ability.
True but may I also add "with a true belief of what one says"
I sir am of a limited education and as such have trouble conveying my thoughts/intent to others so please understand that this is not a personal attack upon yourself merely my observations and perceptions
The idea that you are a P.R. machine for telstra comes about with your style of writing in that you tend to use telstra P.R. drivel verbatim with little other personal thoughts/reasoning added to clarify your stance
Bye the way I do apologize for the "Stooge " reference as it was uncalled for
I have perceived you to be a one eyed supporter when it comes to telstra in that you will take every chance possible to belittle the "foreign owned" "leeches" that are the opponents to telstra
yet you consistently neglect the fact that telstra is not an wholly Australian owned company (I believe one third owned by foreign interests) and complain if the other companies so much as look like getting any government funding for infrastructure to oppose telstra and applaud when telstra gets the funding instead
Not to mention that the things telstra complain about with these " foreign leeches" is the exact same thing that telstra does in there offshore markets!
I also do not believe that telstra is wholly bad but they could and should do more the Australian people and thus the economy.
The idea that the short term benefit of its shareholders is more important then the nation as a whole is both self centric and irresponsible.
Yes they have a responsibility to their shareholders but also a responsibility to this once great nation of ours and the two responsibilities can co-exist and indeed enhance each other in the long term which is where any companies goals should be aimed ( long term future not just present short term gains)
As for the other players on the whole I do not think that they are any better or worse then telstra
I am by nature a cynic but I do try to look from both sides of the argument although I admit that I am not always successful .
As you said "Telstra is not perfect" but you should not ignore the imperfect bits in the hope that they will go away you must address them as well in these public debates to be seen as even handed and at times maybe even question some of what telstra says and the way it acts
So having had my say I will once again state that this post is not meant as a personal attack upon yourself
I am sorry if it is perceived as such
Brudda

Re Brudda - "according to their ability" Tassiturn -- 31/08/08 (in reply to #320110394)

I'm sorry that you're pulling out Brudda. Your posting under the above heading was one of the most rational, logical and conciliatory that I've read in the whole debate.

@the blowtorch yorrick hunt -- 23/08/08 (in reply to #320110372)

whether sydney lawrence has none, one or tens of thousands of telstra shares, as you say, does not mean is isn't entitled to his views. every so often he gets bagged because of shareholdings he says he doesn't even have. thing is the guys attacking him, or like you calling him a stooge, are probably employees or shareholders of telstra's opponents or have some interest themselves. in other words, they are stooges.

yorrick hunt Brudda -- 23/08/08 (in reply to #320110389)

Yes you are correct he is entitled to his views as we all are,
As for the stooge remark yes it was uncalled for and I have apologized for it and as for my being a shareholder or employee of one of telstras opponents I must say that I never have been a shareholder in or employed by either telstra or its opponents.
I am trying to survive on a disability pension so all that is debated about these companies effects me to a much greater degree then most
It is probably a given that no matter who wins the NBN the prices will increase but it is the amount and reasoning behind the increases that are to be questioned
It would appear that the use of broadband for extremely low income people like myself will most likely be out of reach and some people do actually need it for every day access to the outside world as it is imposable for them to venture out.
I at least am lucky in that the last does not apply to myself as I have full mobility

Whatever Whatever -- 23/08/08 (in reply to #320110395)

Nevermind their ignorant remarks Brudda...

Sydney & Co. have for been pro-Tel$tra supporters now for some time, come Hell or High Water!

Sydney claims to have done some 50 years of hard labour (perhaps a jail term?) - but having been a primary producer residing outside the 'urban fringe' for some time now, I have found the only real service providers who are interested in my community's needs for broadband internet has been anyone except Tel$tra!

Until any competitor was available to privide BASIC broadband access, the ONLY choice we had in my area was Tel$tra at a rate of $105 per month for 512Kbps/128Kbps and 3 Gbytes traffic - of which BOTH upload and download were assessed against the monthly limit!

Once the competing ISP's were made available to our community, we could get better access for almost 3 quarters the monthly price, and upstream traffic was not counted against our usage!

Sydney, I am as True Blue as the next 'Ocker' but your consistent one-eyed commentry certainly paints you as a Tel$tra shareholder or employee only interested in your end-of-financial-year-revenue. (Brudda should not have needed to apologise previously - you deserved the response he gave!)

I say: "Bring on the competition and the structrural separation" - but more importantly, let's hope the NBN services those that are the most in need - our outback mates.

I am, you are, we are Australian - right???

PS: If you ate a meal today - thank a farmer. If you can read this - thank a teacher!

@ whatever Bits & Bytes -- 23/08/08 (in reply to #320110413)

There is a thing called competition. Regardless of industry when there is none prices do not fall, when there is the prices fall. The difference with Telstra is they service the entire country and offer the same plans regardless of where you live. They did not drop the price just because there was competition in your area so don't think you are special (other then mentally). There are many companies that will not service 90% of the country simply because there is no profit to be made, why is it that Telstra has ADSL in over 2500 exchanges but most companies only fight for the top 300 - 400 exchanges?

p.s. I can read this thanks to my TELSTRA supplied broadband.

Same service/prices across the country... Anonymous -- 25/08/08 (in reply to #320110421)

This is the line that Telstra trot out when they are accused of abusing their monopoly on backhaul services to Tasmania. For retail services, it means they are ripping off Tasmanians just a little less than those in other areas, gee thanks!

Many other ISP's offer their services in Tasmania at national prices but with a far lower margin due to Telstra's stranglehold. Telstra wont even respond to the bacuhaul issue where they charge many times more for MEL-HBA than MEL-ADL bandwidth.

Bring on structural separation which will allow competition to flourish and let the consumer decide.

Tassie Anonymous -- 25/08/08 (in reply to #320110483)

If it wasn't for Telstra the "embellical" cord would not exist..you bet OPTUS will not switch on any capacity!!

Please explain same services/prices across the country... Brudda, mudda, fadder, sissta ... -- 25/08/08 (in reply to #320110488)

Why is it that the owner of a link between Melbourne and Adelaide has chosen not to switch it on? Instead they take a $5,000,000 payment from the Tasmainian government each year to subsidise the so called high cost of using the Telstra service. There is plenty of capacity that has never been turned on because they know that they will not make as much money running their own cable as reselling Telstra cable.

Who is this company you may ask? A 100% Singtel owned company. Do some research and you will find it could have been switched on 3 years ago saving the Tassie givernment $15,000,000 and helping to increase competition in the Tassie.

ignorant remarks Brudda -- 24/08/08 (in reply to #320110413)

I appreciate your support Whatever!
As for the apology it still stands !
I am a firm believer of say what you mean and mean what you say but also admit to errors.
I have worked hard (and played hard) all my life paid my taxes and have ended up on a disability pension so I and many others have a vested interest in what happens in regards to telecommunications and its price as it effect our our ability to interact with the world at large ( the same for rural people/farmers /businesses etc.)
I am bowing out of this discussion as I find it stressful and not good for my well being.

As for others who are tempted to say p*ss off you stupid old fart or insinuate that my mental capacity is somewhat diminished
Go for it
But May I just say careful what you say as you may be looking in the mirror.
Brudda

Any doubts on Sydney Lawrence's interest in Telstra Affle -- 02/09/08 (in reply to #320110389)

I don't agree with him but he does have a right to say what he wants. Anyone still unsure about his motivation behind what he says should go here

http://www.nowwearetalking.com.au/shareholder-stories/sydney-lawrence-from-manly-qld

At least he is open and honest Another anonymous posting -- 02/09/08 (in reply to #320111101)

unlike you Affle / Rex whichever one you are. He is always proud enough to show his name and stand by his comments. Please make registration compulsory (or show the IP Address).

Open and Honest means providing personal details?? affle -- 09/09/08 (in reply to #320111150)

I don't think so!! I happen to have a unique name and if anyone wanted to find out anything about me, all they would have to do is google my first name. Which is why I use this name, so crazy people reading this can't try and contact me in any other way - because let's face it, who want's crazy people talking to them.

I have trouble believing that a comment has more meaning behind it just because somebody has put their full name behind it.

And show the IP address?? Are you crazy?? I may be on the verge of sounding paranoid but why on earth would you want people to be able to see your IP address.

Just because it's on the internet doesn't make it any less real.

You just need to adjust from real life conversations to online conversations, I think you'll find that other than your personal details, everything else is the same.

PR Bashing... James -- 26/08/08

A point I'd like to bring up, I'm not sure if anyone else has noticed or if its just my imagination but telstra's PR department only ever bashes optus?, as a person who gets a heap of exposure to telstra's spin I've only ever seen it aimed at optus...especially on the topic of supplying NBN information, as the list in the article shows, theres plenty of NBN companies that havent handed theirs in yet, why the attacks on Optus?

Personal Vendetta or trying to take out the main threat to telstras own NBN bid?

Optus IS TERRiA. Sydney Lawrence -- 26/08/08 (in reply to #320110569)

James you say Telstra only "bashes" Optus.
James can you supply the amount of capital that would be available from the Optus partners in TERRiA for investment in NBN?

I would think the amount would be very small so as to indicate that Optus would be the only credible company in TERRiA and hence the Telstra concentration on Optus.

point is? james -- 26/08/08 (in reply to #320110577)

lol so the term Terria and Optus is interchangable, and telstra bashes both, hence my assertion, telstras concentrating on optus... or singtel if you'd like me refer to a big umbrella term?

"I would think the amount would be very small so as to indicate that Optus would be the only credible company in TERRiA and hence the Telstra concentration on Optus."

my point exactly, telstra's PR department is focusing on the only credible threat...? thoughts people?

point is.. Anonymous -- 26/08/08 (in reply to #320110589)

Its just part of the telstra strategy to consolodate their monopoly position in Australia. There are two main obsticles to this strategy, losing NBN and structural separation. Hence they attack the most competative threat to NBN - Optus, with any and all sorts of rehtoric in the knowledge that if you throw enough mud, some of it sticks. Keep shoutiong mindless "brown shirt" slogans such as "foreign owned" "leeches" etc.
To protect the monopoly they attack the Govt (ACCC) and spread disinformation about how separation will increase costs and reduce performance. Quite funnry as they do this all by themselves anyway!

Corporate dream jamed -- 26/08/08 (in reply to #320110593)

well it certainly would be a corporations dream to hold the only functional Fibre Network in Australia, especially if the only other telco players in australia dont have the capital to invest in a network themselves, but i want to see what the pro-telstra camp got to say 1st... hopefully not a rebutal but more of an opinion on the seeming focus on optus/terria/ singtel,

Dream on Anonymous -- 26/08/08 (in reply to #320110595)

These sites are a way for insignificant people to post their one eyed comments and conspiracy theories and nothing more. There are about 100 people that will decide the future of communications in Australia, 20 that work for the top 4 companies and 80 politicians and analysts. In other words we are all part of the 99.9995% of people that have delusions of self importance.

Some of you work for a telco, some are simply passionate bystanders and some are disgruntled about their sad lives but ultimately all of these words are meaningless and ignored by those who really have a say.

ZDnet, Australian IT and many others have lowered their standards to cater to those who don't truly understand the issues and those who would watch Channel 7 and Fox News for the same twisted perception of reality.

There you go James, no mention of any of the candidates for the $250 per citizen government joke.

The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world. Sydney Lawrence -- 27/08/08 (in reply to #320110641)

Perhaps we do "dream on" as you say Anon and it may also be true that our comments are insignificant but if the Government makes the mistake of awarding the NBN tender to TERRiA the ensuing disruptive disaster to Australia's telecommunication system will prove the importance of us "little" people at the next election.

Insignificant Simon -- 29/08/08 (in reply to #320110641)

How insignificant can you get that you need to table your comment anonomously.

I take it you get all your info from 60 mins?

Disaster Lord Watchdog -- 15/09/08

The disaster will be the network itself, not who ends up building it.

Are we going to sit here and willingly accept the Commonwealth spending our money on subsidising an FTTN network when the guaranteed speed is well under that of ADSL2+? Many other countries have already allowed their telecommunications companies to begin building FTTH where speeds either match or exceed 100MBs. We want it here but the Commonwealth, or should I narrow this down to our dud of a Prime Minister, KRudd, and Telstra aren't interested in doing the same thing.

I fail to see why we all continue to speculate on what will happen and when since what we are going to end up with isn't worth looking forward to.

I, for one, will not migrate from a 24MBs network to a 12MBs network. Who do all these morons in their suits think they are kidding?

"Sour Grapes" Anonymous -- 19/09/08 (in reply to #320111964)

I think you are being a bit harsh Lord Lapdog!! This whole thing has been political however Rudd is doing a better job than the terrible days under Howard/Coonan where broadband was a backwater....

Lets hope they can also get the regulation right so it will not stifle investment in the NBN!!

@ Disaster james -- 19/09/08

Agreed, but hopefully once the backbone is out, the competition will force them to offer higher faster speeds to outdo each other, which surely couldnt be that hard with fibre to the node, ADSL2/VDSL will surely cover the last mile for our 24Mbs+... I'm just hoping that this means the end of the ridicoulous download limits, everyone says 1gig does the average websurfer... perhaps the avg websurfer hasnt heard of youtube yet? or movie previews, game demos, hell legal movie downloads god forbid the speed permits, the speed doesnt bother me, I'm happily cruising at 8Mbps on my ADSL2 (im using an old router) just please! the download, and dont count the upload