We need the NBN because business does

Full Duplex

David Braue

A view from the trenches of Australian telecommunications. As the name implies, it’s a two-way conversation and we ask you not to pull any punches ... we won’t.

The NBN is here: it's being used in Tasmania, it's about to be rolled out on the mainland, and it will — unless Tony Abbott is elected — be coming to your home or business within the next few years. Yet as far along as we are into the NBN, it's still amazing to me that I can sit at a table with a group of intelligent and experienced IT experts and have more than one voice dredging up the same tired arguments against the NBN: it's only for downloading movies, it's too expensive, it's too ill-considered, it's just a big expensive gift to Telstra.

These myopic, knee-jerk reactions are no better than Stephen Conroy's habit of branding anybody who opposes Labor's internet filter as advocates of child pornography. Just as there are perfectly valid arguments against the filter that have nothing to do with pornography, there are perfectly valid arguments for the NBN that have nothing to do with movie downloads. Ignoring them does a disservice to everything that the NBN promises, and will deliver — which is nothing less than a generational leap forward for every business in Australia.



Online economies will bring businesses into blue-sky territory, but they need the NBN to eliminate communications tyrannies of distance once and for all.
(Credit: David Braue/ZDNet Australia)

Even if you don't own a business, you probably work for one. And that's why it's important that every voter understand that the NBN wasn't designed just for everyday Australians' internet usage. Sure, it will become your home's primary communications lifeline to the world, but that's just fleas on an elephant compared with its total use. Unfortunately, consumer uses for the NBN are also the thing that gets the most attention, because the discussion has been directed by politicians trying to make the network relevant to the voters whose support they depend upon.

For whatever reason, those politicians have struggled to step back from the consumer discussion enough to clearly articulate why it's important that every one of Australia's millions of businesses — from mom-and-pop shops to the rarefied end of the ASX — have access to fast, reliable broadband. And this isn't just so their bored employees can download movies when things are slow: today's world of electronic payments, paperless shipping, on-site Wi-Fi, and so on all but demands that every business have reliable broadband.

Even if you don't own a business, you probably work for one... Unfortunately, consumer uses for the NBN are also the thing that gets the most attention, because the discussion has been directed by politicians trying to make the network relevant to the voters whose support they depend upon.

The biggest companies can shell out for expensive fibre-optic services available in specific parts of our largest cities: Telstra, for example, just announced it will install extensive fibre throughout South Brisbane in a move that will slightly expand the footprint of business-ready fibre services.

Millions of small and medium businesses (SMBs), however, can't afford the complexity or expense of such solutions. This has left them relying on whatever service they could get through conventional means — typically, whatever ADSL2+ is available in their region (remember that Telstra and Optus focused on households for their hybrid-fibre coaxial (HFC) network roll-outs, not business areas, so any cabled-up small businesses are more by accident than design).

With an absolute maximum of around 20Mbps download and a paltry 1Mbps upload, it's a big stretch to call ADSL2+ business-ready. The limited upload speed is of particular concern: while it's easy for businesses to set up 1Gbps networks inside their four walls, they've constantly had to compensate for slow wide-area network (WAN) connections. In the past, this meant figuring out how to link branch offices over ISDN or Frame Relay services running as slowly as 64Kbps; the answer, often, was to back up a branch-office server to tape, then physically courier the tape to a capital-city office for archiving.

If you think that's inefficient, today's systems aren't much better: 1Mbps uploads, like those provided by ADSL2+, are still just 0.1 per cent of the likely speed of a company's internal network; rarely-used synchronous flavours of DSL are no better, working only at 1, 2 or 4Mbps. And, unlike in a download-heavy home situation, upload speed is essential for businesses to seamlessly network their offices without suffering from WAN bottlenecks. In practice, linking branch offices using ADSL2+ is like racing your Ferrari down the freeway most of the way to work, then getting out and carrying it on your head as you pick your way through city gridlock.

Unlike in a download-heavy home situation, upload speed is essential for businesses to seamlessly network their offices without suffering from WAN bottlenecks. In practice, linking branch offices using ADSL2+ is like racing your Ferrari down the freeway most of the way to work, then getting out and carrying it on your head as you pick your way through city gridlock.

The most important thing about the NBN isn't its speed — even though its fibre-optic services will easily provide 1Gbps or eventually 10Gbps connections for those who need them. No, the value of the NBN is that it will raise the lowest common denominator and allow every business in the country to link with every other branch office, business partner or telecommuting employee at the same speed as they would use over their internal network. When even your remotest offices have 1Gbps access to the rest of the company, your data can live in Sydney and be backed up there, and remain instantly accessible by your remote staff as if they were sitting in the same office.

As a WAN, in other words, the NBN will resolve decades of compromise to enable businesses to implement the applications they want, where they want them, as their growth and strategy demands. Consider something like cloud computing, which is offering businesses significant promise as a way of providing access to high-end applications without spending millions on infrastructure.

Cloud computing is quickly becoming the way businesses will compute, but Australian businesses will miss out on its possibilities if they can't get reliable WAN links that are fast enough to let them participate in the cloud. The other bottleneck for cloud computing is Australia's international fibre links, but investments such as the $447 million recent Pacnet-Pacific Fibre undersea cable will go a long way towards improving that part of the equation.

Business needs better broadband and most businesses are already painfully aware of this fact. That's why the Australian Information Industry Association and industry bodies of all stripes have come out wholly on the side of the NBN, noting that it's critical for industry and business development and calling for a bipartisan approach to the network.

I shouldn't have to write this column, but the persistence of uninformed comments makes it necessary. The only people I really hear arguing against the NBN any more are those who dismiss it offhand as too expensive or useless for anything outside their own narrow home use; but they are out there, and they do vote. And if they vote for Tony Abbott and his minions, they will be voting against nothing less than the future of Australian business.

Perhaps the biggest irony of all this is that Tony Abbott's abstruse resistance to progress, in the form of his blind determination to axe the NBN, will hold back business development in a time when we really can't afford it. For a party that's supposed to be all about private-sector promotion, light-touch and hands-off policies, Abbott's Liberals seem happy to tie one hand behind the backs of Australian businesses by taking from them one of the primary things they need to succeed.

What anybody weighing in on this debate needs to understand is, firstly, that the private sector will never deliver the kind of NBN that Australia really needs; and, secondly, that the real benefits the NBN will provide lie not in its speed, but in its ubiquity. Raising the bar for all Australian business communications, regardless of source or destination, business or home use, will pay off in ways we cannot even imagine.

Talkback

You are exactly right with your NBN views.

The business I work for, currently has five offices across Australia with our HQ in Sydney. We pay just over $10,000 PER MONTH for an awful 2mbps connecting these offices.

We cannot perform centralised backups of the "remote" servers. Staff at the other offices constantly moan about the slow speed of just loading an email, sending an email, opening a spreadsheet file, browsing the web and so on.

The amount of work, time and money I spend every day trying to squeeze just a little bit more optomisation out of our WAN is quite wasteful.

GTR42GTR42 August 3rd, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (+4) (0)

David, while I agree with the thrust of your argument that a multi billion dollar investment by taxpayers should ultimately deliver faster, cheaper and more ubiquitous broadband for small business, the picture today is perhaps not as bleak as you suggest.
I refer you to this recent announcement from Telstra http://exchange.telstra.com.au/2010/05/27/better-broadband-for-business-and-why-it%e2%80%99s-important/
Private enterprise can deliver (- and could deliver more cheaply and widely with some Govt incentives.) I welcome your support for an informed objective discussion.

Rod BruemRod Bruem August 3rd, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (-6)

No disclaimer from Mr. Bruem that he is an "official Telstra Spokesman"? Or in laymans terms a paid purveyor of Telstra's propagandist spin and FUD.

RSRS August 3rd, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (+5) (-2)

I find it interesting that your claim for the most improvement is for SMB's, yet how many SMB's have multiple sites let alone a need to transmit large amounts of data between sites? Does your local green grocer need it? What about the hairdressers or the local newsagent? I doubt any of them have multiple premises let alone large data sending needs.

Granted there are businesses (like the one GTR works for) that could save a lot of money and have increased services from a national high speed network. One question that hasn't been answered is how many NEED this (either now or projected to over the next 10-15 years). By need, efficiencies can be considered a NEED as it makes the business more competitive.

The more important question is at what COST. Worse case scenario, let's say GTR's workplace is the only one that needs the NBN. Is it right for taxpayers (you & me) to be paying in excess of $43 billion dollars (not to mention potential cost blows outs!) to have this one company connected to a superfast network? Sure- there's more than one company in real life that would benefit, but if there were so many to make it financially sound, why wouldn't the government just commission a cost-benefit analysis to shut up all would be critics for once and for all?? That's right, if they actually thought it would come back with a positive report, no government would hesitate to throw praise on themselves, but all governments want to avoid embarrassment, thus uncertainty is the best defence for an incompetent government!!

I for one would LOVE to have a 100mbps connection at my house and work. But NEVER would i want that to come at the expense of other more important and valuable contributions that the $43billion+ could pay for.

* Currently struggling along on a 1.5mbps service... so yes, i'm not one of the lucky few on a great 24mbps connection...

AWYAWY August 3rd, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (-3)

AWY, Your local Markets are probably connected upto servers, thus would need a stable connection anyway, not to mention any data backup's.

And you said it yourself, your one of the lucky few that get anywhere near 24mbit, so your view is very biased.

What about the percentage of Australians who are less than

ZeroNutZeroNut August 3rd, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (0)

Maybe you should re-read my post... i said i'm on the 1.5mbps plan... as in the SLOWEST broadband plan available today. So yes, i have broadband (and i don't insinuate that those without broadband available should be neglected) but those of us with even the slowest broadband can get things done. AKA i am that percentage you speak about :p

The point was that if $43 billion+ worth of investment was worth it, the government would've completed a cost-benefit analysis... i mean it's not like they've lacked hiring consultancy firms already for the NBN... adding a cost benefit analysis would've been childs play.

Furthermore, as far as i'm aware the $20 billion spent by the coalition is currently funded by savings aside from the NBN. Furthermore i heard a report that said the NBN (or at least the majority of it) isn't even listed on the budget. I'm yet to go through the budget papers myself (i certainly will before the election), but if both points are true - then it makes for an interesting read :D (please note- not stating this as fact; and if you've got some sources that prove or disprove either of these
by all means reference them :D - mind you i'm picky and don't consider newspapers as legitimate sources... just good starting points
On one hand- you have to wonder whether the liberals think labor is 'wasteful'. On the other, how can we possibly be "back in surplus" in 3 years, if they're meant to spend a significant portion of $43 billion dollars that they've yet to declare (on the budget).

AWYAWY August 3rd, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (0)

The big QUESTION is - Can we afford to spend $43 billion which we do not readily have and need to borrow it?

A sure way to run the economy headlong into quicksand.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/treasury-still-getting-it-wrong-on-china-20100802-113di.html

Vasso MassonicVasso Massonic August 3rd, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (-2)

Hear, hear.

What really annoys me the most is when people keep harping on about the expense (as above), like we will be paying off this thing for the next 40 years. Get a grip. They are building something that will actually pay itself off. It is an investment in the truest sense of the word. It is a wholesale network that retail ISPs will buy into. Read those previous words again - buy into.

The government could even if they wish (and there was chatter originally) sell off this asset, but of course as we have seen with selling off Telstra, this is possibly not the best idea and it should, like any true national service (Australia Post etc) stay in public hands.

nomadtalesnomadtales August 3rd, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (+2) (0)

Vasso Massonic,

SkyNews just said, that Coalition already spending $20 Billion, 10% of that on policies. How is it any different from Labor spending money? (And this is not including any Broadband Announcements!

On top of this, RBA Interests just been decided to put on hold.

Low Unemployment
Low Interest rates
Infrastructure Spending
Low Debt
Low Inflation

Your selective in your articles Vasso.

How

ZeroNutZeroNut August 3rd, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (+2) (0)

As far as I'm concerned, if the government can get us back to surplus by 2013 or whatever they said, then where is the "expensive, we have to borrow money to pay for it" argument coming from?

I can understand if you simply don't believe the government when they say we'll be back to surplus by 2013. But you can't just say "we have to borrow money, and we can't afford it".

But the other point to consider is the fact that the Libs ran the economy at surplus for years and still didn't build anything like what we're getting. If a few years of debt is what it takes to get ubiquitous, fast broadband, then bring it on! Government is not like business, it does not have to turn a profit for it's shareholders.

I'm usually in favour of smaller government, but I do believe that certain things need to be a public monopoly: things like health care, the postal service, utilities, transport and so on. The internet is fast becoming a utility.

Dean HardingDean Harding August 3rd, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (+1) (0)

For someone who likes big words like "ubiquitous" it's strange that you don't know what "surplus" means! In 2013, the govt "claims" it'll be in surplus, not that it'll have $0 net debt. You do know what a surplus is, don't you. It could take decades for the Liberal Party to pay off the Labor debt. At that point could they start putting money into an infrastructure fund that could be used for something like an NBN. It took Liberal about 10 years to pay off Labor's debt last time. Given that, I'd expect we'll be looking at around 2020 before we're a net creditor nation.

Flem SpawnFlem Spawn August 3rd, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (-2)

Flem there are a few things you should keep in mind...
-The liberal party didn't pay off a damn thing.. they used our tax dollars to do it then after that used the money to entrench middle class welfare.
-Public debt isn't neccessarily a bad thing.. conventional wisdom is that governments should borrow during a downturn when tax receipts drop off.
-Australias public debt is very low as a percentage of GDP however private debt is very high... It will a lot later than 2020 before we are a net creditor nation regardless of what any government does.
-Assuming the level of debt you carry is servicable the key thing is that the what you are spending the money on is worthwhile. In this case I think an asset that will encourage growth and productivity for the next 50+ years clearly is. By your argument no one should by a house until they have saved the full amount.

kneelokneelo August 3rd, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (+2) (0)

Conventional wisdom IS that governments should borrow during a downturn and typically invest in large infrastructure projects such as roads, schools or in this case the NBN. The problem is that this government spent the surplus up on pink batts and school halls, then wanted the NBN. The spending has to stop somewhere.

mwil19mwil19 August 4th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (-2)

Perhaps it does have to stop, but why here? The NBN is the one government initiative that will actually deliver concrete benefits to every Australian for the long term; what they do with those benefits is up to them. Governments that aren't prepared to wear a little risk in the name of progressing the country, are doing us all a disservice. If the funding doesn't go to the NBN, it will just end up disappearing in one pork-barrel or another.

brauebraue August 5th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (+2) (0)

I don't know if you're a homeowner, but if you are, you have probably taken out a whopping big loan over 30 years to ensure you and your family have a comfortable place to live. That is an assumption of significant debt to ensure your lifestyle and your future, and you will not be in surplus for decades to come – yet that is OK, and the government doing it is not? Sure the numbers are bigger, but as a percentage of income I think you would find the NBN expenditure compares quite well.

brauebraue August 5th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (+1) (0)

David you have been the only other person I have seen to bring up the same point I keep making, which I think is the greatest thing about the NBN and the reason why ADSL2+ is not the right technology now or ever.
That being - that the NBN brings up the lowest denominator and makes everyone have a minimum standard of speed. HD Telepresence for medical reasons or Uni lectures (just a example) will never take off if only 4 people by the exchange can use it.

DarianDarian August 3rd, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (0)

If I had a dollar for each time I have heard someone say "I'm getting 20Mbps on my ADSL2+ connection and I don't see the problem; the NBN is a waste of money", well, you know. But ADSL2+ is inherently a best-effort technology and with the copper network falling apart around us, its best effort is getting increasingly bad. As I wrote about earlier this year, my copper deteriorated so much I had to jump ship to cable – but not everyone has that option. Back when everybody was using 1200 baud modems we all had access parity, but these days you are 100% right – there isn't enough consistency to ensure any of these new services will be anything but privileges for broadband's upper crust.

brauebraue August 5th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (+1) (0)

To each his own.

Spending $43 billion on top of our current massive debt level is a luxury we, clearly cannot afford.

'surplus by 2013' in the prevailing economic climate is a fairy tale.

Broadband is different to other essential services, in that, NBN will only provide the bare essential service which would require costly enhancements affordable by only a few big retail providers to create the goodies you wrote about.

What will happen to the traditional 600, or so ISPs?

Vasso MassonicVasso Massonic August 3rd, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (-1)

What will happen to them is that they'll be able to pay a consistent wholesale rate for access to customers around the country. Knowing that their available menu of services isn't limited to whatever poxy ADSL2+ services they can squeeze out of the local loop in their regional area, they'll be able to sell bundles combining high-speed fibre access, resold pay-TV packages like FetchTV, third-party VoIP services, and perhaps resell on-demand business apps like Microsoft BPOS. Because their credentials will no longer be tainted by the condition of their local network environment, they'll be able to compete on a national basis – even in country areas where they've got snowball's chance of doing any of this using current infrastructure.

Of course, many will take the opportunity to exit the market; presuming there won't be natural consolidation is probably naive. But those ISPs that want to survive will be able to do so based on their service and their ability to value-add – which will be seen as a refreshing opportunity by many.

brauebraue August 5th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (+1) (0)

Dean, getting the budget back into surplus does not mean that the debt we have racked up will be magically paid off. Whilst we may get back to surplus by 2013, it will be many years after that to pay off the huge debt levels we've made in the past couple of years.

I'm not against an NBN, but I think that 43 billion is excessive. It's even scarier that the real cost will be much higher, as admitted to by the head of NBN.

mwil19mwil19 August 4th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (-1)

mwil19, achieving a budgetary surplus by 2013 with a possible faltering of our main source of revenue - COMMODITIES is scary business indeed. In the real world, even in our neck of the woods, retail activity is not at all hot. Harvey Norman has a store-wide 40% discount, with nothing to pay till 2014, from memory.

Vasso MassonicVasso Massonic August 4th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (0)

There are a number of ways in which you can argue the pro's and con's of the NBN debate. At the end of the day the technology shuttle has already left the platform and Australia needs to decide now whether we make a run for that shuttle or we stare up into the sun as the shuttle slowly disappears.

Even the US Government have recently released their own plans for a National Broadband - http://www.ictliteracy.info/rf.pdf/national-broadband-plan.pdf

At the end of the day, it is about bringing better minimum standards and minimising the digital divide amongst all Australians which, let's face it, will benefit not only our current business but the future generations of our proud nation.

Nunya77Nunya77 August 4th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (+1) (0)

I agree Businesses need faster connection we struggle at times especially with up loads and during peak time our rim sucks. But Being as we are rimed there is a much cheaper path to faster broadband and that is the newer versions of dsl and an upgrade of the fibre to the rim. But even if we were in need of fibre why run it to all the Mums and Dads? Why not start by rolling the system out to business areas? Wouldn't that be smarter if that is where the return is? The answer is simple to this. The voters live in residential areas and the labor party would be loathed to put in something that would help businesses so they give to to those who don't need it. and will never use it to make there supports (the Unions) happy.

ChrisS9ChrisS9 August 4th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (-1)

@Nunya77,

You link to a pdf which you says show America is doing the same thing but in actual fact they are doing EXACTLY what people who are against the NBN are saying here. Let private enterprise build the network. An put legislation and subsidies in place that will encourage them to do so. The market will decide the best form of action and for this point Tax payers will not have to foot the massive bill for something like the NBN. Remember The Liberals before the last election had a full funded plan for the bush which would have cost a fraction already have been implemented and be run by private enterprise... (not that the end of that funding has stop Telstra or Optus from providing the service anyway, we will see this competition really heat up over the next 2-3 years as Optus moves to have the same foot print as telstra and lte is released)

In the last 3 years investment in infrastructure by ISPs has fallen because of the NBN is this good for Australia? Innovation has basically stop with bonding being the only thing which has been added to a ISP's product line up.

ChrisS9ChrisS9 August 4th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (-3)

David,
This is the most intelligent and considered thing you have ever written. Keep up the good work.
Phil.

PhilCollinsPhilCollins August 4th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (+1) (0)

@AWY "yet how many SMB's have multiple sites let alone a need to transmit large amounts of data between sites?"

Lawyers, accountants, archetects and IT firms are an example of small businessess that often have multiple offices and a need to centralise and transfer large amounts of data. The costs of running such networks are prohibitive, and anyone who uses these types of networks will tell you how slow and frustrating they can be.

Just because your home connection is more than you need doesn't mean it is useful and sufficient for networked businesses.

MungbeansMungbeans August 4th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (+1) (0)

Wasn't Telecom (telstra) sold off by the government because private industry can do it better and cheaper?

mweavermweaver August 4th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (0)

@mweaver... nope! Telstra was sold by Howard and Co so that they could bank the $60 odd billion and say, gee look at us and all the money we have, we are such great managers of the economy... and you and your mates here all swallowed it ...LOL!

If the bottom line $'s received for Telstra wasn't why Telstra was sold and it was as you suggest, about private industry doing it better, why didn't they separate Telstra first and make it better all round for private industry?

RSRS August 6th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (+1) (0)

@mweaver... yep! The link to the American plan actually show how WE should be doing it!

@Mungbeans... What point are you trying to make? No one is saying businesses don't need BB and many businesses need to be able to link multiple sites but why do Residential areas NEED the same access? SHDSL is going to solve a lot of the business issues in the short term but a lot of ISP are not investing in good SHDL because of the NBN. As I said innovation has stopped because ISPs are worried about the return

ChrisS9ChrisS9 August 4th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (-1)

It's not whether the NBN will be beneficial or not to business (of course it will), but whether we're getting value for money. Could the money do more if spent in other areas?

Sure, we'll have great broadband coverage, but our rivers will be dry, our farming land over run with housing, and a barely functional hospital system.

But, at least our blogs on the issues will get there fast...

thesandmanthesandman August 4th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (-2)

The private sector will only invest in urban areas where there is a high density of possible customers. This is an area of market failure - which is precisely where governments should target investment.

9621mark9621mark August 4th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (-1)

Great article, David, factual and well balanced.

One of the main reasons we need the NBN sometimes gets overlooked - that it will be our comms backbone for several decades to come, so we need to plan to have future capability built in now. Wireless tech simply has no possibility of meeting that need, though it will continue to develop as an adjunct to fibre.

It's easy for the Telstra trolls and other naysayers to claim we don't need future real broadband because what we've got now should be fast enough for anybody. But this artfully ignores what will be needed by the time the NBN build is completed, and for several decades after that.

Anybody like to chance their arm on our bandwidth and latency needs in nine years time around 2020, let alone by say 2050?

gnomegnome August 4th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (+2) (0)

A business charging more in an area where costs are higher or delaying investment until demand reaches a certain level is not market failure. It is the market doing what it is best at efficiently allocating resources.

If broadband is really so useful as a public utility then why not fund it like other utilities by charging rates and cost covering connection fees at the local government level and let each area vote on whether they want to incur the costs.

The only point of a national system is to cross subsidise remote areas and thus pork barrel regional electorates. sarcasm / If this is such a great idea I would like a national housing scheme where country people pay a an extra building fee which can be used to bring down the price of my inner city townhouse. Not too mention all the other things county people get cheaper. /sarcasm

jamespdeanjamespdean August 4th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (-3)

@schneider82 "why do Residential areas NEED the same access?"

Because many business now also include home based offices in their WANs. In the future (in fact now) many if not most businesses will have workers working from their home offices all or part of the time. There are no purely 'residential areas' any more from a network point of view.

Also many businesses themselves are run from home. WANs aren't fixed and the nodes can move and vary over time, especially if the access to those networks are equal, as they will be under the NBN. What can be done under current WANs is extremely limited at the moment because of the constraints imposed by the aging copper network. Any business who has tried to backup all documents onto a central server will understand how limited it is.

MungbeansMungbeans August 4th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (+2) (0)

"What anybody weighing in on this debate needs to understand is, firstly, that the private sector will never deliver the kind of NBN that Australia really needs;"

I like that summation at the end of the article because really that's what it is all about, the private sector could build the NBN whether it be Telstra, SingTel or a combined effort of Telco's/investors pooling their resources but it is a high risk, high cost infrastructure CAPEX and rolling out a fixed line infrastructure in the face of ever increasing use of wireless based broadband motivated by the seemingly insatiable demand of Smartphones and the likes of Ipad, netbooks etc would be foolish in the extreme.

Of course the sucker taxpayer can bankroll that one, $43 billion and counting, ISP's love the thought of the NBN at a highly subsidised wholesale price, no concerns about ROI on the NBN (taxpayer 'investments' don't have ROI's), and if it's not cheap enough they can still complain to the ACCC.

Selling internet plans to consumers on a product that those same consumers paid for in the first place with a decent markup of course, the economics of retailing doesn't come much better than that.

advocateadvocate August 6th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (0)

Of course we shouldn't invest in NBN. Thanks to Howard et al, we have shown that we are unwilling to invest in anything at all (infrastructure, education etc). So we pay off our debt. Then keep using all that money on our unskilled population as they age along with the infrastructure while countries all around us will have superior infrastructure and technologies.

Besides, why should business stay here and pay steep wages and bully unions when we can move our offices to other countries like Singapore and gain skilled labour, excellent infrastructure and government support to tap regional resources.

I find it amusing that people actually buy into all these politicians talk about net surplus etc. Look at our national health system. These jokers were so adamant on saving money that poor women were giving birth on hallways and toilets. That is your tax dollars at work.

Lets face it, Australia as a country lost its vision a long time ago.

fred9999fred9999 August 10th, 2010
Report offensive content Reply (0) (0)
Add your opinion

In order to post a comment, you need to be registered. (Sign In or register below)

Post your comment

Terms of Service - As a ZDNet registrant, and by using this service, you indicate that you agree to our Terms and Conditions and have read and understand our Privacy Policy.

ZDNet Australia Live

Internet users certainly want the speed once they can get it#NBN

NBN users opt for 100Mbps http://t.co/JTQbWghv via @zdnetaustralia

It will be intersting to know what residences will sign up for when the NBN Co stops subsidising it all. 'NBN Co, the public-private par...

1 hour ago by advocate on NBN users opt for 100Mbps

RT @zdnetaustralia: NSW outs datacentre deal details: http://t.co/DmebN1on

Australian NBN subscribers are opting for 100/40 over 12/1 speeds: http://t.co/QsWk7u6Y That's the least surprising news I've ever read! :)

UK 'cookie law' takes effect: What you need to know http://t.co/u7LZZ1oM

RT @juhasaarinen: NBN users opt for 100Mbps http://t.co/T7uk1hbK by @joshgnosis

Poor Oracle, poor, poor Oracle, I feel so sorry for them. I really hope they don't go bust, for at least another 5 or 6 months. Sucked in...

3 hours ago by Rex Alfie on Google didn't infringe on Oracle patents: jury

The point of pilot schemes is to determine the best practice and save money in the broader picture. The Tasmanian rollout planning actua...

3 hours ago by GregoryB1 on NBN's Tassie upgrade to cost $1.3 million

I think that a CBA is unlikely because with the high proportion of customers now electing for the highest rate (50% of connections in Apr...

4 hours ago by GregoryB1 on NBN cost-benefit analyses are so 2011

Pentaho adds native integration with MongoDB http://t.co/uJCqDA9B

RT @pussyeatingclub: Why you should pay for porn. A good read. http://t.co/PfhedCQs

DDoS works because you have enough compromised machines to clog the pipe or servers of the victim. If, the victim's pipe is widened by a ...

4 hours ago by GregoryB1 on National Botnet Network coming: Earthwave

Please stop with the analytical, common sense and facts, Gregory. Those opposed to the NBN don't want to hear such things, which is why ...

4 hours ago by Beta on Blowing the digital dividend on wireless NBN

But, yet again, Turnbull is clearly in error when he says that other companies cannot roll out copper. In South Brisbane Telstra chose to...

4 hours ago by GregoryB1 on Copper greenfield dominance irrelevant: Conroy

Not much point running fiber back to the exchange if that exchange itself is connected by copper. It is access to fiber backhaul that de...

4 hours ago by GregoryB1 on Copper greenfield dominance irrelevant: Conroy

+1

4 hours ago by Beta on Copper greenfield dominance irrelevant: Conroy

So instead you want these estates wired up with fiber and then left, unconnected with no service, until the fiber rollout reaches them in...

4 hours ago by GregoryB1 on Copper greenfield dominance irrelevant: Conroy

@paulbrislen @juhasaarinen Prices compared here: http://t.co/WnZzXP5Z

RT @joshgnosis: @paulbrislen @juhasaarinen Prices compared here: http://t.co/WnZzXP5Z

Water, roads and electricity were all rolled out by government because there private companies weren't interested as the ROI in the early...

5 hours ago by GregoryB1 on Five pros and cons of the NBN

NBN users opt for 100Mbps http://t.co/T7uk1hbK by @joshgnosis

Chrome beats Internet Explorer in global Web browser race | ZDNet http://t.co/3XfMdUXM

The case you outline, South Brisbane, is in fact the coalitions prefered model. They WANT the incumbent telco, Telstra, to provide the f...

5 hours ago by GregoryB1 on Five pros and cons of the NBN

Cybersecurity #collaboration between the US & Australia. http://t.co/p2uKLSBi

So, over time, the Coalition policy will cost much much more than Labor's because they intend to subsidise the broadband of farmers and t...

5 hours ago by GregoryB1 on Malaysia held up as NBN king

Any form of science training counts against you as a politician, in the coalition parties, doubly so. There may be others who keep quiet...

5 hours ago by GregoryB1 on NBN FUD: will Abbott ever learn?

Qld govt IT to be cleaned up by audit http://t.co/r4oNuNW8 #qldpol

Travel Tech Q and A: Skyscanner's Ewan Gray http://t.co/7ZfXZk19

Microsoft is serious about open source: 10 proof points | ZDNet http://t.co/2OtDR11D

Sorry HC, what is meant by "Cinders "?

6 hours ago by Doubt on NBN users opt for 100Mbps

Thanks Beta, I could hear the nurse walking down the corridor as you posted. Much better now.

6 hours ago by Doubt on NBN users opt for 100Mbps

гайд

7 hours ago by Evonresee on AVM Fritz!Box 7390

Sex Tech: Faceporn win, Parental revenge porn, Google: No Porn ...: Google opposes UK porn filters, a fake porn ... http://t.co/0OR87oEt

Q&A of the Week: 'The current state of the cybercrime ecosystem' featuring Mikko Hypponen http://t.co/6lUYFs0X

You say that the golden age of cyber crime will be over by 2014/2015. I would like to differ. I believe that cyber criminals are getting ...

8 hours ago by Staden on Cybercrime golden age over in two years?

Before accusing me of fudging the figures, that was the percentage in April, the latest available. It seems that as the advantage of the ...

11 hours ago by GregoryB1 on NBN FUD: will Abbott ever learn?

Currently about 50% of connections are at the 100Mb/s rate.
As a consequence, ARPU is significantly higher than the projected figures.

11 hours ago by GregoryB1 on NBN FUD: will Abbott ever learn?

RT @DellEnterprise: Dell Secureworks talks with ZDNet about Android's biggest #security flaws - http://t.co/LSFLQVFq #infosec

NBN users opt for 100Mbps: Customers are picking the top fibre plan that is available on the National Broadband ... http://t.co/sjtFSU3g

"Customers are picking the top fibre plan that is available on the National Broadband Network (NBN), more than a... http://t.co/M3P24Htn

RT @CorrieB: An iPad for every child: Inevitable or impossible? http://t.co/I7uS8l9s Thx to @timbuckteeth for this; http://t.co/jxkqIRIp

RT @MADinMelbourne: roxon "will enable more families to access credit" @MLolderandwiser: Privacy Act amendments http://t.co/Mv4c7PC2 via @zdnetaustralia

NBN users opt for 100Mbps - ZDNet Australia http://t.co/fLfHMzPn #australia #technews

RT @konradski: Whaddayaknow - turns out Wi-Fi CAN interfere with a plane's navigation systems http://t.co/ospQCU2S

This story has been voted 5 times in the last 24 hours!

18 hours ago, NBN's Tassie upgrade to cost $1.3 million

NBN users opt for 100Mbps - Communications - News - ZDNet Australia: NBN users opt for 100Mbps - Communications ... http://t.co/btB9gKWg

NBN users opt for 100Mbps http://t.co/xKqEb4bE via @zdnetaustralia

Biometric bugs too dangerous for public? http://t.co/8JLz5tdF via @zdnetaustralia

Exploring: http://t.co/rT7RPZLA

War talk dominates #AusCERT 2012 - http://t.co/SlBpMj0c - #security #cyber

Travel Tech Q&A: Skyscanner's Ewan Gray http://t.co/vYexrDwu #ipad

Exploring: http://t.co/YNVjdrct

Exploring: Travel Tech Q and A: Skyscanner's Ewan Gray: Ewan Gray, Skyscanner's director for Asia ... http://t.co/bNLCyobv #ICTChallenge

Exploring: Travel Tech Q and A: Skyscanner's Ewan Gray: Ewan Gray, Skyscanner's director for Asia ... http://t.co/HEPuJgyt #ICTChallenge

#NewSouthWales ditches registration stickers 4 light #vehicles in favour of #technology http://t.co/xX5N0Rp9

Anonymous hacks Reliance's Internet filtering server - ZDNet (blog) http://t.co/uObU1HBP http://t.co/0UBXxwX4

This story has been voted 12000 times in the last 24 hours!

2 days ago, Is Bill Gates a great leader?

Facebook Activity

Keep up with ZDNet Australia

ZDNet Events Calendar

ZDNet Events Calendar