Should FTTN kill the current copper network?

In its regulatory submission this week, Telstra says the new national fibre-to-the-node (FTTN) roll-out should not have to interface with current network technologies such as the copper ADSL2+ network, because of impacts on performance.

"The government should not force the network operator to accommodate old and new technologies, which are not compatible," Telstra said.

According to a spokesperson for the telco, having the existing DSLAM network running in parallel "compromises the actual performance of the new technology" since the node power would have to be reduced.

"The whole point of going to the new system is that it's fully integrated," the spokesperson added.

Optus sees Telstra's stance as competition choking: "This is a continuation of them wanting to strand existing competition in DSLAMs," Maha Krishnapillai, Optus director of government and corporate affairs said.

Internode MD Simon Hackett sees no reason why the older network should not run in parallel: "The 'old' (competitive ADSL2+ services) and the 'new' (node-based VDSL2) are in fact technically compatible. They can coexist with appropriate software configuration settings in the new VDSL2 equipment," he told ZDNet.com.au.

In a presentation in April, Hackett said that it is technically possible for the two networks to coexist using commercial-off-the-shelf hardware, and that the know-how is also at hand to connect lines from ADSL2+ to VDSL2 and back again via software remote control — requiring no labour.

"To claim they are not compatible is a Telstra excuse that tries to avoid admitting that their real agenda for the NBN is re-monopolisation of the access network and driving up access pricing to bolster their profits," Hackett said.

Retaining the older services is necessary for competition, he added, and "It avoids throwing the bay out with the bathwater."

It's currently technically possible for the two networks to exist, according to Paul Brooks, MD for Layer10 advisory, and member of the Communications Alliance VDSL working group, however, some performance constraints remain.

"Coexistence is possible; the thing is whether the industry or providers or customers are willing to accede the performance decrease," he said, adding that having both networks can reduce VDSL speeds around 10 to 20 per cent.

However, technical issues shouldn't decide the issue according to Brooks. "The technical aspects can work either way — the choices more often come down to higher level social issues."

Like this article? Click below to send it to your mobile for free!

Talkback 68 comments

  1. *sigh* Anonymous -- 27/06/08

    Just another example of Telstra attempting to choke its competitors out of the market.

    Can you smell that? It's the burning smell of hundreds of lawyers rubbing their hands together in wide eyed anticipation...

    1. Simon says Anonymous -- 27/06/08

      Yes just put your hands on your head, sheep, because Simon says.

    2. Spend, build, and compete. Sydney Lawrence -- 27/06/08

      Telstra is legally bound to take decisions that are in the best interests of shareholders as are all the competing companies. Why should Telstra keep an old and outdated network in operation if it is in their interests to close it.

      Telstra opponents who fight to continue the parasitical ride on Telstra go to hell and build your own networks.

    3. Ethics Frank -- 28/06/08

      Sydney, large monopoly companies like Telstra also have an ethical responsibility to the nation not just to it's foreign shareholders pockets.

    4. Ethics? SJT -- 01/07/08

      Ethical?

      You tell ethical to a particular building products company who tried tooth and nail to avoid paying compo to their dying asbestos victims.

      Makes your dig at Telstra pale into insignificance really, doesn't it?

    5. LOST THE PLOT Larramee Rimmer -- 28/06/08

      Now I know you REALLY have lost the plot Sydney Lawrence. As your quote says "Telstra opponents who fight to continue the parasitical ride on Telstra go to hell and build your own networks.", you know that in a country the size of Australia with it's small population density you just can't build EXTRA national networks for the sake of competition. This is not Japan, South Korea etc with high population densities.

      You sure don't have a clue as what is really involved in having an open accessed network for the benefit of all Australians and not just Telstra shareholders. You would have to be one of the most one-eyed Telstra (shareholders) around who only sees $$$$ signs in front of his eyes.

      Let's all hope that the right decisions are eventually made for the good of everyone and not just for a minority few with personal/financial agendas

    6. Good old Te$tra Whatever -- 29/06/08

      Uh huh, and not a ad point, but recall the OPEL project and the fact remains it was was doing exactly that!

      Umm let me think, what happened? Oh yeah, that's right - the current Federal Government elected to terminate the project.

      Nice one Kevin & Co.

    7. Oyxmoron SJT -- 01/07/08

      Terminate the mystical hOPELess project which never started! Now theres an oxymoron for you - lol!

    8. .... Anonymous -- 29/06/08

      "Telstra is legally bound to take decisions that are in the best interests of shareholders as are all the competing companies."

      Yep, so it makes no sense to get rid of the cu network if people are still wanting to use it, or in areas where the NBN won't reach.

      "Telstra opponents who fight to continue the parasitical ride on Telstra go to hell and build your own networks."

      Indeed they have. Look at the prices for Optus ADSL2, or Vodafone/Optus/... 3G networks. Higher reliability, lower price. Even Burgess is on the record as saying people in remote areas should avoid Telstra NextG.

    9. PFFT Anonymous -- 30/06/08

      Telstra didn't build the network the GOVERNMENT did with TAXPAYER money. Furthermore the cost of a non government network rollout is prohibitvely expensive. There's too much land in Australia and noone has access to conduits in every suburb except telstra. Learn about last mile and the costs involved before you try to tell people about how broadband works.

    10. RE: PFFT SJT -- 02/07/08

      PSTN was built with taxpayer money, but following budget appropriations in 1975, Australia's telecommunications, since 1901, was found to be in DEBT (see, I can shout too - lol) to the tune of $4b. $4b in 1975 - think about how much that is in todays terms?

      PSTN was then vested to Telstra Feb 1 1992 (along with the DEBT).

      Sept 29 1997, the Telstra float was launched, then the subsequent T2 and T3, where the $4b debt (plus interest since 1975???) was repaid by Telstra shareholders.

      The PSTN was actually bought/paid for (certainly not gifted as the anti-Telstra urban legend would have us believe) via debt repayment!

      So $4b in telecoms debt (amassed since 1901) repaid, some $60b from the sale, plus billions more in dividend payments. As such, we the taxpayer have been repaid many times over for whatever Telstra actually cost!

      Learn history and facts before you try to tell people about the last mile!

      But let's not let the facts stand in the way of a good ol' fashion'd Telstra hangin'!

    11. True, but.... Anonymous -- 02/07/08

      Is it in Telstra's best interests to risk possible litigation by stranding so much competitive equipment? Surely compensation would be required if they did? And given DSL lines are regulated, pricing would need to stay exactly the same under FTTN for competitors or again, compensation would be required.

      I don't think the law suits and payouts are necessarily in Telstra's or their shareholders' best interests.

      And one more time - building competing infrastructure is not economically feasible and would ultimately be bad for Australia. If we have two networks, then we have half the number of subscribers for each - and then we need to double prices to justify network upgrades. How is that good for consumers? Infrastructure must be regulated - just like power, water and gas. Market forces don't apply.

    12. Why keep ADSL2???? Anonymous -- 09/07/08

      Does anyone really believe that the rest of Australia should be held to ransom and miss out on all of the benefits that a truly national high-speed broadband network will deliver just because Internode wants to protect its small investment in putting DSLAMs into exchanges?

  2. Split them up, for gods sake. Anonymous -- 28/06/08

    gah. how hard is it to see the bloody obvious?

    Make - It - Law - WHOEVER wins - must - be - seperate.

    Australia needs "affordable" internet more than it needs "faster".

    Every sector of business will be affected by the price point. Read that again. "ALL" businesses. This has much greater implications for the economy than simply looking after the financial interests of the minority.

    Yes that's right, the minority. Millions notwithstanding, this will cost every single Australian more, on so many levels, that whatever you hope to earn from your share dividend, you'll lose twice over in increase costs of every other part of your connected life.

    Please don't be so blind for short term gain - whatever happens from this is going to affect all Australians for the next generation.

    Just think past your portfolio for a minute.

    Seriously, Sydney you must have a LOT of shares in big-T.

    Great, you'll make a packet if they get monopoly. Shame your kids school fees will go up, hospital fees, bank fees, add to that pretty much every internet using business in Australia.

    Wow, you winner.

    All these "parasite" arguments are irrelevant to the NBN.

    ANYONE who wins the bid, should be split up. It's completely obvious. Then EVERYONE uses it equally - which is surely in the best interests of everyone in Australia, no?

    1. Split them up? I_Work_For_An_ISP -- 28/06/08

      "ANYONE who wins the bid, should be split up."

      Well, only sortof. The entire point of the Terria pitch, is that Terria will *only* do the "running the network/selling wholesale" side of things.

      Effectively they're *already* "split up".

      In fact, isn't Telstra the *only* party interested in the NBN who has this particular conflict-of-interest?

    2. "True Competition" Anonymous -- 04/07/08

      What we need for the new NBN is "True competition". Not the over regulated stuff OPTUS has come to love under the previous Government. Separating Telstra would only be beneficial to Singtel/Optus and would discourage investment and hinder the building of this new NBN.

      Ultimately this will harm all Australians. Telstra has been quoted as saying the new network will be "open access" so I fail to see why they Singtel/Optus are scared of "True Competition"

  3. We don't have to Always Disagree with Telstra Anonymous -- 28/06/08

    Sure, Telstra - we can allow the FTTN to be a complete replacement for DSL technologies and the current wholesale regime. But in the interest of FAIR PLAY we will need complete and absolute 100% structural separation of Telstra. The Wholesale side running the FTTN and selling fair and equal access to all, and the Retail side selling access to end-customers. MANY of us in the industry are willing to be reasonable, the question is are you willing to do the same?

    1. Q. What do the Telecoms experts, SingTel and Telstra all agree on? A. Structural Anonymous -- 28/06/08

      Funny how all the "Telstra bashers" are mindlessly mimicking the Optus/TERRiA line by demanding structural separation of Telstra, when they have absolutely no idea of the consequences - lol! In fact do you know that in Singapore, Optus' parent company "SingTel are claiming the exact opposite to what Optus is claiming here"? - lol. They are arguing against their own structural separation saying it ... "Would result in costs that significantly outweigh the benefits (IF ANY) from separation, to the DETRIMENT of infrastructure based COMPETITION and END-USERS"... They believe it will force prices higher!

      http://www.ida.gov.sg/doc/Policies%20and%20Regulation/Policies_and_Regulation_Level2/20080417153248/SingTel.pdf

      But even once these Telstra bashers realise that it's not so cut and dried and that structural separation perhaps isn't all that great after all, they simply then try to turn it around again and point the finger at Telstra, but in NZ - lol! They claim Telstra is doing an Optus/SingTel and contradicting themselves too, in NZ. But no, Australia's situation is nothing at all like that NZ and Telstra aren't doing like Optus/SingTel! In relation to the avenues of separation the NZ government (not the incumbents competitors), were looking to implement, Telstra in fact submitted a paper to say structural separation of Telecom NZ WASN'T needed. But if separation was going to go ahead as per the act, it should be operational separation!

      http://www.med.govt.nz/templates/MultipageDocumentTOC____27043.aspx

      In fact TelstraClear (the access seeker) and Telecom (the incumbent) have been conducting real unregulated business and have signed commercially negotiated agreements. Such as the agreement signed in August 2007, allowing TelstraClear to access/wholesale Telecoms mobile infrastructure/product at an agreed price! This is real business, carried out without all the crying and bleating via regulators, like is done here by access seekers.

      http://www.itwire.com/content/view/13985/127

      As for the experts, Independent Telecoms analyst Graeme Lynch said (Oct 07): - "Structural separation, be careful what you wish for"!

      http://www.commsday.com/comment/reply/193

      And also said (June 08) - "A structurally separated carrier doesn't have the ability to charge a retail rental price and thus recover line costs that way. The current LSS price is cross-subsidized by retail revenues that would be unavailable to a wholesale-only carrier, thus the PRICES for line sharing, by definition, would RISE".

      http://www.commsday.com/node/239

      Another Independent Telecoms analyst Kevin Morgan said (May 08): "It would appear the G9 (now TERRiA) does not want a debate about regulatory change. G9 wants the Government to fossilise both regulation and the network by imposing structural separation so it will have continued access to the existing copper wires and Telstra's telephone exchanges to offer its current broadband service... Far from being the consumer's friend, the G9 threatens to stifle investment in fibre and seems content to consign Australia's broadband future to the vagaries of an ageing and decaying copper network"...

      http://business.theage.com.au/g9-cant-win-but-can-fight-for-a-copper-future-20080514-2ed9.html?page=2

      And finally the best till last, perpetual Telstra basher Lord Watchdog! ZDNet 20/5 (in relation to another topic) "The issue here is not about separation, which I do agree is a bad idea".

      Seems it's unanimous!

    2. A. Structural separation is no good. SJT -- 28/06/08

      Seems my heading was too long - yeah I know, as was my spiel - sorry.

      But check and read the links please, it may enlighten you, as it did me!

      I also accidentally put anonymous - doh.

      Cheers to you all, SJT!

    3. Not quite unanimous James Bell -- 29/06/08

      Well actually SJT the verdict is not quite "unanimous". In what's quickly becoming the infamous SJT trait you put things out of context (as you often do) by comparing SingTel's situation with Telstra's. For those who may be interested to know there is a tender process taking place in Singapore right now, only the Singapore Government are following a far more comprehensive and competitive bidding process than Australia where multiple companies are participating. SingTel (unlike Telstra) has submitted its bid as part of a consortium of companies (very similar to what Terria have proposed in Australia) which highlights SingTel is not even attempting to retain a vertically integrated monopolgy like Telstra, but rather is prepared to join forces with others.

      Then you quote from your "independent" bum cum Kevin Morgan as if his writings were some kind of biblical scripture. Even my 3 year old daughter can differentiate independence from unequivocal journalistic bias. You may as well quote from the slobber of motor mouth Phil Burgess if you're going to keep using Kev in your arguments.

      This then only really leaves you with Graham Lynch who's posted a couple of misguide blogs in the past on his opinions of structural separation; however he's not the only analyst in this country. Paul Budde, who's one of the more respected analysts, believes "Structural separation will be a quantum leap forward for competition and innovation". He's even gone on furthe to say that "A totally separated company... will have a great incentive to maximize its infrastructure assets. They therefore will be able to eagerly sell access and other wholesale services to whoever wants to use it. It will also set itself up to be able to work together with others to share and expand infrastructure either on its own, or in partnership."

      But of course SJT, as you always do you choose to leave out important facts and arguments from your pro-Tel$tra rhetoric. If you really were merely a "messenger" as you've claimed so in the past it would be completely illogical for you to go to such effort. You're clearly spending a great deal of your time on various forums defending what's probably the largest corporation in this country. I can only hope you're in a position which pays you well because if not.. honestly why do you bother?

    4. Creep off when the going gets tough then return - lol! SJT -- 29/06/08

      Firstly - a challenge was put out to you on the 7/6, to put up or shut up in relation to Mr. Morgan. As usual you crept off tail between your legs, not to be seen. So the challenge was repeated about a week later and still nothing? But now after 3 weeks you return as if nothing ever occured - lol!

      Once again you make snide innuendo in relation to Mr. Morgan and now Mr. Lynch. It must be such a burden for you ("the special one") to know more than all the experts, Telstra, SingTel and I guess according to you, God himself!

      So once again, if you wish to accuse Mr. Morgan (and/or Mr. Lynch - lol), don't beat around the bush, DON'T AGAIN JUST IGNORE ME, be a man and do it! So cya in 3 weeks - LMFAO.

      Next, as usual I have supplied many links to back my arguments and you have not (what a surprise). But we belive "you" James.

      You also mention Mr. Budde. Yes he is another expert analyst who apparently has a different opinion to the other experts. But unlike you with Morgan/Lynch etc, I will listen to Mr. Budde's reasoning and learn why he believes so, rather than libelling him, as you do the others.

      But funny you should now herald Mr. Budde, because August '07, I forwarded an article by Mr. Budde which said ! ..." Over the last two years Telstra has become the leader in competition, and companies such as Optus have had to follow.

      And Mr. Budde also said..."Telstra is certainly forcing the rest of the industry to pull up its socks and to concentrate at least as much on business as it is currently concentrating on the regulatory environment"...

      In closing Mr. Budde also said "Full marks to Telstra and to their sales and marketing teams, who are definitely having a competitive impact on the market. This is good for customers, good for the industry and, obviously, good for Telstra itself."..

      But guess what? Surprise, surprise! At the time you denounced Mr. Budde for making such claims and daring to disagree with you - "the special one", much like you are again doing now with Mr. Morgan and Lynch - lol! So obviously, Mr. Budde is only a knowledgeable expert when he agrees with you "the special one" - lol!

      Also SingTel are fighting structural separation in Singapore, the links is there read it and understand it. They also say prices would go up under a structurally separated system. My point was to highlight that to those who may not have known this and who might want to learn. You know, those unlike you, who don't conceitedly think they know more than everyone else.

      So, place a little piece of cheese in your right (or left) ear. This will give the little mouse in there enough sustainance to do his bit and just maybe you will finally comprehend. I am not in Telstra's employ in anyway whatsoever, I do not get paid by Telstra, I do not even know or are related to anyone who works for Telstra.

      This is in contratry to you, who has been linked as an integral member of the T4 and claimed to be on the payroll of a TERRiA company. One who has made now probably 300 odd comments in 12 months!

      So unlike you - the accused, cheques in the mail James, I do this simply because I believe Telstra in the end will give all Australian's the best technology at a realistic price. It may not be cheapest, but it will actually exist, unlike TERRiA's hOPELess-esque proposal. After all, if TERRiA really wanted to win and thought their structurally separate proposal was "superior", they keep their mouths shut and just let Telstra submit their "inferior" proposal and then TERRiA would win, wouldn't they. They certainly wouldn't give Telstra the heads up ( as they have done) on their superior proposal if they truly wanted to win, would they?

    5. Ah yes the "challenge" James Bell -- 29/06/08

      SJT, My apologies for not responding to your "challenge" with due diligence as I have been overseas and not had the time to participate in these forum discussions. If Kevin and yourself genuinely don't understand why I believe he's on the Telstra payroll in some way, shape or form I offer you this advice and hopefully you'll find your answers. I simply recommend you read every single opinion piece he's had published over the past 24 months with an open mind. This is all that's required and one can only hope you'll then see that literally everything (or at least everything I've seen) is fraught with bias on Telstra's behalf and quite frankly it's an insult to readers for the word "independent" to be in his job description at the end of his commentary. The very fact he's written articles to be published on the heart of Telstra's propaganda Machine (NWAT) is a real disappointment. Do you think if he had something to say that wasn't so nice about Telstra they'd still publish it? I'm sure you know the answer to that question.

      As you have pointed out I don't always agree with Paul Budde either, just as I'm sure you don't blindly agree with every action your idol Sol Trujillo makes, but what you've also highlighted is that Budde, unlike Kevin (in my opinion) is truly independent.

      Sure SingTel isn't keen on being structurally separated, and even if we do put aside for a moment the substantial differences between a small, densely populated island like Singapore which could in fact support multiple fixed networks to the extremely large and mostly barren Australia, SingTel is still open towards building Singapore's FTTNx network as a member of a consortium of companies which if successful will effectively end its monopoly. Telstra is not, and on top of that is demanding an extraordinarily high rate of return on its investment. Who do you suppose is going to be left paying the price?

      You can believe I'm a member of T4 if you really want to, but as I'll say now and I've said previously I honestly don't care who wins this tender process provided the necessary competitive framework is in place and I as a consumer am not going to be forced to pay significantly more for the services, speeds and download allowances I'm already receiving today. Yes I'm not terribly excited about the prospect of Telstra winning because given their behaviour over the past decade towards competition, much of which is well documented on the ACCC's website, I simply don't believe they can be trusted as a wholesaler. This is a stark difference to your attitude which is essentially Telstra's way or the highway. If you really don't work for Telstra you need to get out more because let's face it your post count must be at least double if not triple that of mine, and I'm apparently getting paid! ;)

    6. Once again, put up or shut up! Anonymous -- 29/06/08

      Put up or shut up James!

      Don't try to weasel out of it by asking me to read Mr Morgan's opinion pieces, either make an accusation against Mr. Morgan or retract your previous comments - period!

      Also I don't care if you're a member of T4, so what. I am simply jealous that you do and I do not get paid for our comments - lol!

      Regardless, please read my factual links as I will do of yours, if you ever actually have any.

      BTW - Hope you enjoyed your holiday!

    7. lol Unaminous indeed James Bell -- 03/07/08

      I have an opinion about the motivations of certain individuals which is shared by others. You seem interested to know how this opinion has been formed about Kevin and I've simply revealed to you how this occurred. i.e. I generally try to read what people write with an open mind. You it would appear simply scans the net for extracts to use as ammo to support your futile arguments. No I don't have a dossier containing undercover photos of secret deals, but this certainly doesn't disallow me to have my own point of view, which I also happen to believe is quite logical.

      Oh by the way I see in the newspaper today that even Google wants the owner of the FTTx network to be structurally separated. So who have we got now calling for either some form of structural/functional separation?

      Pro Separation: FairFax, the QLD State Government, Vodafone, Google, JP Morgan Analyst Laurent Horrut , Comms Consultant Paul Budde, Skype, BT Global Services, The WA State Government, Economist Chris Doyle, The Communications Expert Group, The Internet Industry Association, The Internet Society of Australia, The Australian Telecommunications Users Group, The Tasmanian State Government, NextGen, all the members from Terria and a long list of other ISP's & Telco's, etc. etc. etc.

      Against Separation: Telstra, Kevin Morgan, Graham Lynch and the devoted members of the NWAT forum.

      lol yes SJT it certainly seems unanimous!

    8. Yes, they all want what is best for us - LMFAO! SJT -- 03/07/08

      Thanks for skulking back after everyone else has gone. But good for you, more cheques in the mail and you're also finally on the attack - ooh - lol!

      Yes the separation-ists certainly seemed to have come out of the woodwork haven't they? But after browsing through what most have them have submitted, they don't really seem to have conclusive justification as to why they are recommending separation, other than to simply break Telstra up, just for the sake of it - which I guess according to the likes of you is justification - lol! But, if as you claim James, you aren't anti-Telstra per se` say, and just want what is best for the consumer, wouldn't you be at least asking these groups, ok, I actually agree with you, but why do you believe separation is best? Also, really for opposing bidders to dictate to another is a bit rude - but where does it leave your precious buzzword competition if Telstra walks away and invests elsewhere? Anyway...

      Thing is though, how many of these championing separation are truly independent? Yes I know you hate that word independent, because all of you info is always based on insider vested interests or hearsay. But how many of the submissions really want what is best for us and not what is best for their businesses? How many have no vested interest in seeing Telstra separated? Let's get fair dinkum now, seriously!

      So let's revisit your strategically compiled list (with notable omissions on the Telstra side - lol) and "strike off all the obvious ones, who really are bit too involved, shall we say"! Start with Telstra if it makes you feel good. Then move on to all the other Telco's/ISP's! Then Telstra's other competitors (like Fairfax) and vested interest internet groups. Those commissioned by Telstra's competitors! The attention/vote seeking governments - pfft! Also, do you know that JP Morgan nominees Australia are Optus' #2 FPO and Def Group shareholders (with 10.04% or 47,008,442 shares). They also come in at #14 (with 0.99% or 4,658,477 shares) - that's even more than the shares Sydney "doesn't" have in Telstra - and he is apparently biased because of his zero shares - lol!

      If you want to include Mr. Doyle, then at least have the decency to add Prof. Cave to Telstra's list, and also before the cull, you forgot (cough, cough) to add Telstra's extra special anti-separation spokes-company SINGTEL, to the Telstra tally - lol!

      Basically your entire list has some sort of vested interest, in wanting Telstra separated imho. And why do you think that might be James, because they are all great guys/girls who want us to have affordable BB and live happily ever after (as you seem to naively believe)? No, to either manipulate the outcome through separation for their own agendas and/or to separate Telstra into small chunks, primed for take over!

      Yes, once these vested interest groups dupe the government into structural separation, then they might as well try for relaxing of the foreign ownership laws. So let's break Telstra into 3 pieces - 1 piece for SingTel, 1 for Vodafone and the other for Fairfax - brilliant. Only problem is, you'd then have no one to blame James - lol!

      New tally (well back to where we started tally, anyway)

      Pro separation INDEPENDENT - Paul Budde
      Against Separation INDEPENDENT - Kevin Morgan and Grahame Lynch

      Finally, for the 4th time now, no more weaselling, please! Are you or are you not, man enough to put up or shut up in relation to Mr. Morgan? Yes or No!

    9. Sorry 5th time - lol! SJT -- 03/07/08

      CORRECTION - the above should actually read for the "5th" time!

      My we are being coyly evasive, aren't we!

      Do we need 6?

    10. James Bell kevin morgan -- 01/07/08

      "James Bell" is getting a bit potty mouthed - bum indeed a very naughty word - too much time around the toddlers?

    11. Fanbois of the world.. unite! Anonymous -- 29/06/08

      "I also accidentally put anonymous - doh. "

      Yes, "accidentally". Perhaps you two are the only two Telstra fanbois here and the other "anonymous" fanbois are really you two..

    12. Anonymous SJT -- 30/06/08

      Yes thank you "anonymous Optus fanboy" - lol!

  4. - Anonymous -- 29/06/08

    James bell you are my hero

    1. Truth will out. Sydney Lawrence -- 29/06/08

      James Bell you make me laugh. You ask why SJT "bothers". He bothers James because all it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. The argument that prices will fall if Telstra is separated is a nonsense. All companies must get a satisfactory return for their investment and TERRiA etc are no different.

      You may argue that Telstra make billions profit and this is true but consider Telstra's gigantic capitalisation James and the fact that Telstra has to borrow to pay its millions of Australian shareholders a reasonable dividend. It is a fact that the Australian Government sold Telstra to the Australian people for 60 billion dollars and the Australians who now own it do not want to see it destroyed to assist a company owned by the Singapore Government.

    2. Evil Davo -- 30/06/08

      Dont you realise that Teslra is the evil that is triumphing?

    3. Nope Anonymous -- 02/10/08

      Obviously not

  5. no are no aussies left Anonymous -- 29/06/08

    really there are no true australians left to build this country there is only money hungry ********, who only care about themselves and there pockets, its funny, they say inflation is high yet they put interest rates up, taxes up, costs of everything up and leave the wages exactly the same for most workers. hmm this just creates more inflation if you ask me as it make more people want higher wages!!!!!!

    so whoever builds this network must realise 1 thing most australians actually don't want better internet speeds they want the cost to be reduced! telstra has never got this to there head, i always show people on the telstra network how to reduce costs via switching isp's and every single one of them is happier as they have better plans at a cheaper rate, with better support. telstra is not a premium service and it never will be! telstra don't like whirlpool yet there are still $t supporters on the website but go to the forums and see alot of people still have problems with telstra. and for telstra saying it is too hard & costly to allow the old network to run is utter bull**** as they could use whats called a manslam! SJT & sydney if you love telstra so much why dont you go marry it? its not a true australian company anymore heck most big companies aren't australian anymore. also most people now don't read your comments as your always promoting a company. also i liken sol to hitler. also who cares whats going on in another country i only care about 1 country and thats australia and its people not the buisnesses & not shareholders. i care about 1 thing reduced prices and severly increased competition on all levels. which is better for the consumer and all australians.

    i call for every bidder on this to join terria and improve there bid even further even knowing its allready a great bid.

    1. RE: no aussies left SJT -- 29/06/08

      My friend imbecilic comments don't help your cause and we can see why you refused to put your name to your comments

      You say "SJT & Sydney if you love Telstra so much why dont you go marry it"? Are you 11 years old?

      You liken Sol to Hitler - lol. Sorry you must be 10 not 11.

      Personally I believe "all" CEO's are ridiculously overpaid and that includes Sol.

      However are you aware that the world economic forum recently took place, whereby a 16 member steering committee got together to formulate a plan for climate change?

      Sol Trujillo was the only Australian CEO invited to sit on this committee, which formulated a statement signed by 100 CEOs from some of the worlds biggest companies! This statement was then handed to the G8 (no not TERRiA the real G8 - lol) President, Japanese Prime Minister, Yasuo Fukuda.

      So my friend, whilst 10 year olds like yourself and Telstra haters don't like Sol, it seems as though he is very highly regarded both here and overseas by those who actually know. Also appears as though, Sol is in fact regarded as perhaps one of the top 16 CEO's, worldwide!

    2. no aussies Anonymous -- 29/06/08

      ha ha you only care about one country and that's australia. then you call for every bidder to get behind the singapore led terria. ha ha again. you must be taking the p***!

  6. Nexus Anonymous -- 29/06/08

    Technology is overtaking these arguements - Telstra's asset base is not worth what they claim. It should have been written down significantly as many of the assets probably have no book value.
    In reality you would close down the older network and replace it with a single network based on a new generation technologies - this fundamentally reduces the network operating costs.
    If Telstra continues to run their old analogue technologies it will be to the detriment of all - consumers, business, etc.

    1. Life in Copper!! Anonymous -- 29/06/08

      Mate get your facts staraight...There has been no old analogue switches since circa ~ 1990. As to ripping the copper up...good luck. Still a very handy transmission Telstra has there!!!

      What this country needs is "True Competition" not regulated stuff Optus has sponged off.

    2. Optus(and the others) sponging? Big picture viewer -- 30/06/08

      I've yet to see Telstra lose money through wholesaling. Admittedly they want more, but as the ACCC keeps pointing out, the costs to Telstra aren't high (certainly less than $300 pa per line). As a matter of fact, wasn't Telstra Wholesale, one of Telstra leading profit drivers in the last few years? Good sponging.

      Oh, I forget, Telstra want to be a monopoly again, for the benefit of the shareholders. Nowhere in that sentence is "the nation" or "the customer" mentioned. Please, SJT and Sydney, remember that when you post. It's all about the shareholder, there is no altruistic or nationalistic motive in any of Telstra's plans. Admittedly, it's not in the competitors plans either, BUT the competitors are offering an open access model, not the "one rule for in house, another for the parasitic leeches" that Telstra is keen on.

    3. Do TERRiA want competition or don't they? Sydney Lawrence -- 30/06/08

      Big picture viewer please answer this question. Would you be happy if TERRiA was granted the NBN build and then Telstra, in the spirit of competition, proceeded to roll-out their own FTTN/H to stop TERRiA becoming a monopoly. Or do you support the TERRiA demand that should they be granted the NBN build no competition be allowed for twenty years??????????.

    4. Could it really be? Anonymous -- 30/06/08

      Could Sol Trujillo really be so stupid as to start building a 20 billion dollar network upgrade only moments after his competition got given 4.7 billion towards their costs to do the same? Or are you actually suggesting that maybe Telstra should be the Cherry Picker for once and only do this for major cities and towns where the profit will be greatest. If so, you know what they say about apples and oranges, and about the pot calling the kettle black.

      Sydney you know as well as the next person that if Telstra's bid for the NBN fails they will walk out with their tail between their legs. I'm sure they will march straight down to their Legal Office, but that really won't have any impact on the winner of the bid will it. Build a competing network, yeah right. Telstra might have lots of money, but 20 billion to compete with a structurally separated company that will probably already be operating on paper thin margins, I'd love to see what Telstra's investors would think of that. Then again I'd love to see Telstra as a crater. Which I probably would if they tried to pull a stunt like that.

    5. Competition Simon -- 30/06/08

      My answer would be a resounding YES!
      But if Telstra can roll out fttn to stop a competitor, then why the hell don't they just roll it out? Sounds like another adsl2 debacle to me, and thats the issue I have with Telstra. Telstra's interests are not the national interest, never have been and it shows.
      I would be happiest if the national infrastructure was administered by an independent party, govt or private.

  7. A big F U Telstra Anonymous -- 30/06/08

    Telstra is going to screw the consumers in a big way. If people have to be forced off their ADSL2+ for the new NBN and having to pay Tel$tra's crap prices I hope there will be a rebuttle. Some Telstra fanbois and shareholders are as bad as bloody politicans. Glad I am not a one eyed Telstra supporter cos they need a slap in the face with a big fish and get some reality into them.

    1. more "Telstra Bashing" Anonymous -- 30/06/08

      You can always go to whingepool with all the other whingers...you'd be at home there with the Telstra Haters lol lol lol

    2. 250k members Anonymous -- 30/06/08

      Yeah, 250k whingepool members all of 'em anti-telstra lol

      You've been sipping the NWAT kool-aid again..

    3. "whingepool whingers" Anonymous -- 30/06/08

      LOL - obviously a whingepool FANBOY

    4. Brainwashed Telstra fanbois Anonymous -- 30/06/08

      kissy kissy at sols butt.

    5. RE: 250k members Jon -- 01/07/08

      "Yeah, 250k whingepool members all of 'em anti-telstra lol"

      VS 9 Million Telstra customers

    6. Whirlpool Simon -- 01/07/08

      Why would anyone call this whingepool? This is a site for consumers (customers) to find out about and compare internet service offerings, service levels and costs.
      I have found this site extremly helpful in finding the best price service that fits my requirements. Further, a quick look at discussions will alert consumers to poor service levels and customer support. As with any forum, there are ranging views but basically a very useful consumer guide, the "Choice" for ISPs. Surely only carriers and ISPs would malign such a users group?

    7. wp or hacketpool as it has been aptly named Anonymous -- 13/07/08

      whirlpool would be as you say, if the ***khead element stayed on porn sites for 24/7 rather than 23/7, and not then going to wp for 1/7 to whine about how long it took to download the latest skin flick.

      theres the typical geek element at wp who only understand pc, mac, downloads, speeds and the latest stupid game. these people know nothing but staring at a monitor and their small, cocooned opinions clearly reflect this.

      they do not in anyway represent mainstream aussies and their bb needs.

    8. WP Anonymous -- 13/07/08

      Whirlpool is the largest web forum in the country. My *ss it doesn't represent mainstream aussies. You think NowWeAreJoking is a better indication of maintstream Australians with its 5 members?

    9. "Whingepool" Anonymous -- 13/07/08

      I think "Whingepool" is a more accurate name!! LOL

  8. ...... Anonymous -- 30/06/08

    TELSTRA FANBOIS CAN GO AND CRAM IT.

    1. Been cramming it for 2 weeks .... -- 13/07/08

      still plenty of room up your &ss

  9. Should they kill copper network? Tim -- 30/06/08

    Yes,
    People should be forced off their copper network to the new FTTN. And have to pay extra for it. This would improve the economy scale of the telecomunications and BroadBand.

    FTTN is very important to Australia and I think the redunded copper network should be gone.

  10. Great Anonymous -- 30/06/08

    Ok Tim if people should have to pay extra then they should send their bills to you so you can pay the extra for them. What is with Telstra fanbois do they have some sort of brain damage or something?

    1. Telstra or bust. Sydney Lawrence -- 30/06/08

      I think that if TERRiA did win the NBN build and Telstra challenged with their own fibre and copper someone would go bust and I don't think it would be Telstra.

    2. RE: Lord Watchdog -- 30/06/08

      Tim wants the copper network shut down so he can raid the conduits of all that nice scrap metal.

  11. WIreless all the way Anon -- 30/06/08

    If Telstra get their way and force everyone onto their expensive FTTN network, then I'll be switching to wireless, either Wimax or 3G.
    No way I'll be paying for 12mbps with only 200mb download limit and 18c per mb over.

    1. Ho hum Donna -- 30/06/08

      There's a large bunch of aussies who have lost interest in the internet and are simply giving it up. The cost keeps going up, at odds with every other technology around. Save your $50 per month and spend it on something real.
      And guess what, none of us are missing it at all! More time spent with mates and back to interacting with real people again. So when was the last time you asked yourself whats the point of it all? What do you get from the internet thats so important? Maybe growing edible, non-poisonous food is a better way to waste your time?

    2. There is more to the Internet than wasting time Lord Watchdog -- 30/06/08

      "What do you get from the internet thats so important?"

      I do many things with the two broadband connections I have. I host numerous websites, run my own mail server, run an IRC server, run two DNS servers, talk to people, send e-mails, read the news, pay bills and carry out research.

      The above is why I am so pedantic about quality, value for money and being able to communicate with my ISPs.

      To take one activity and compare it with the old way of doing things - paying bills, including the rent, takes less than five minutes per fortnight as opposed to about two hours the old way which involved going to the post office, banks and other places and standing in long queues.

      So rather than wasting time, the Internet gives me at least 50 hours a year to spend doing other things.

    3. But what? Donna -- 01/07/08

      So you save 50 hours per year, to do what? Is your time really that prescious? Maybe if you walked around paying your bills you wouldn't need that expensive gym membership? BTW, I've noticed there are no longer queues at Banks. Maybe change your life so that you no longer need to be frustrated by the steady decline in telecoms services and hate filled arguments about how great Telstra is. Remember, you only have one life, dont waste it on trivia.

    4. What what? Lord Watchdog -- 03/07/08

      Yeah, line up and the bank and cough up to them with extorionate fees for over the counter service - that makes a lot of sense.

      I think the point I am trying to get across, however, is that I am paying X amount for two connections. Disregarding for a second who I pay to supply them, I think I am doing myself a good service by making sure they are used as efficiently as possible with the end goal of saving money and time overall. It leaves me more time to soak up the sun and enjoy life instead of being continually stressed out like a lot of other people are.

      Also, I have never been a member of a gym. I am quite fit enough though I am flattered by your concern for my health. :-)

  12. No Real Surprise Here Anonymous -- 10/07/08

    As the public is now being educated on why Telstra wants a FTTN network (a pure monopoly play) it is really obvious how this whole soap opera is panning out.

    1. If Telstra really wanted to provide Australain's with fast BB then why did they delay the implemenation of ADSL2+ for so long ???

    2. Telstra are now lobbying to turn-off the copper network - for performance reasons???? you have to be kidding me ????

    The only reason they want to do this is so that Optus', iiNet's, Primus' and Powertel's DSLAM equipment are all stranded. Goodbye competitors.

    So "performance reasons" disconnects all of the competitions investment - WHAT A GREAT SURPRISE !!!!
    Telstra are really quite despicable , I don't know how their senior execs sleep at night - maybe they stuff money in their pillows to make them more comfortable ?

    1. no real surprise = more crap Anonymous -- 10/07/08

      thank you mr forman, nice try, but you aint foolin' no one, with this crap

    2. A load of .... You loser -- 12/07/08

      Think of an animal with horns that is runs through the streets of Pamplona each year.

      Now think of something solid that is flushed down the toilet.

    3. A load Anonymous -- 13/07/08

      your mum

    4. Your mum Anonymous -- 13/07/08

      no ... that was last week

Add your opinion


Sponsored content

Power Centre - Content from our premier sponsors