Re: The only part that is debatable is the level of intelligence behind the mask.
So answers from kids about who stole the lollies from the jar are likely to be more trustworthy / consistent?
661 posts • joined 29 Sep 2011
So answers from kids about who stole the lollies from the jar are likely to be more trustworthy / consistent?
Two people I know living in different cities have had boxes placed on the side of their walls with HFC cables, However the ready date given by NBNCo is not until next year. I would assume that the lead-in to the house is the most significant part of the work.
By installing the lead-in it might be reducing the options for changing the network to FTTC or FTTP prior to completion.
I was sceptical of Labor overbuilding the HFC network and I still don't understand how NBNCo have taken a working network and broken it.
> And average revenue per user shows no signs of heading higher, probably a legacy of last year’s wholesale discounting to get users onto higher speed tiers
The biggest discounting has occurred for CVC pricing. First the price was cut from $20/Mbps to $8/Mbps and then NBNCo started bundling CVC with 50Mbps speeds.
Labor's stated intention in the NBN Corporate Plan was to grow revenue through data usage (CVC). The Liberals have reduced the revenue growth from data and supported the RSPs selling unlimited plans. The consequence of this is that faster internet speeds will be ever more costly.
> One of nbn™'s most intractable problems is how to grow its monthly average revenue per user (ARPU)
Increasing ARPU is not an intractable problem. Labor had the solution: usage based charging via CVC. Those who use the network more pay for it (like tolls on roads and fuel excise) avoiding the tragedy of the commons. The coalition have cleverly thwarted this by first reducing CVC from $20 to $8 and then bundling CVC into plans.
RSPs offering unlimited data plans have little incentive to offer faster plans because those paying extra for faster plans are likely to be more demanding and capable of monitoring performance.
> My apologies to my fellow commentards for the length and for going off topic but mathew42 and his continual broken record rants really give me the shits.
How about apologising for your fibre fanboi rants which lack evidence?
> I also think Labor miscalculated the percentage of users who would have taken up a 1Gbps plan. Many business I know would like to have those sorts of speed NOW! and not in 2026.
I suggest reading the ACCC NBN Wholesale Market Indicators report for the real figures, which show Labor were overly optimistic on take-up of speeds. (83% on 25Mbps or slower!).
If you statement had a hint of truth thousands would be connected on 1Gbps plans, not the 176 of which ~100 are on MyRepublic's marketing promotion plans.
The reality is that if a business can justify the monthly cost of 1Gbps, then technology change is not a huge expense. The harsher reality is that demand for 100Mbps services has fallen since the early days of the NBN and only a few RSPs offer 250Mbps in very limited areas.
> The people of Australia and their GRANDCHILDREN have been cheated out of a high class Information Highway. Where this country would have been one of the world leaders, it is now close to scraping the bottom of the Information Highway barrel.
The single factor that cheated most Australians was Labor's decision to add speed tiers. That decision resulted in 83% on 25Mbps or slower. Labor's NBNCo Corporate Plan has a chart showing how speed tiers will cause Australia to fall behind.
> The increase in GDP caused by the NBN would had added additional revenue
The average speed on FTTN is 68Mbps. That means if LNP removed speed tiers on FTTN, the average speed would be higher than FTTP with Labor's speed tiers.
The GDP growth predictions are based on increases in average speed (e.g. 1Mbps increase results in x% GDP increase). If you accept the reality of Labor's speed tiers reducing that potential 1Gbps down to slightly over 25Mbps, then the additional revenue is theoretically still coming into the budget.
> Labor also ordered the two Skymuster satellites, you know the ones Turnbullshit said weren't needed because there was sufficient capacity available
I think you are misquoting Turnbull. The argument was not about the need for more satellites, but buying capacity from private operators versus building satellites. By purchasing 2 satellites, Labor have trapped NBNCo. Instead, NBNCo could have had multiple options including Project Loon & SpaceX which will deliver faster cheaper services.
New pricing structure is a brilliant political ploy by LNP. They've set the pricing so that for included 2.5Mbps CVC on 50Mbps makes it the best value for an RSP. Unlimited data plans are pretty much the only option and this means RSPs have a great disincentive to offer plans faster than 50Mbps due to the extra load faster users will place on the network. LNP have cut the price of CVC from $20 to $8 removing NBNCo's major source of revenue growth under Labor plan meaning that NBNCo cannot cut AVC prices further suppressing demand for faster speeds.
LNP will be able to claim that for most users on NBN speeds have doubled from 25 to 50Mbps but that demand for 100Mbps is low and almost non-existent for faster speeds, justifying the MTM decision.
You might want it, but can you afford it? Labor expected <1% to be on 1Gbps in 2026. If you are in the 1% then technology change will be small change.
> FTTN model was doomed from the day it was even conceived
Considering that 84% are connected at 25Mbps or slower thanks to Labor's speed tiers FTTN will be adequate for a while longer. If you want faster speeds pay for an upgrade. However with unlimited plans becoming dominate in the market place, headline speed may not mean much.
Labor configured the NBNCo financial model to have revenue growth from CVC (data) and to keep AVC (connection fees) as low as possible. Under Morrow, NBNCo has discounted CVC to lower than Labor ever planned and encouraged RSPs to offer unlimited plans.
NBNCo don't have a revenue growth stream.
NBNCo have no incentive to provide a congestion free network because they won't see revenue grow.
RSPs have no incentive to offer faster plans because ACCC are hot on 'actual speeds'.
Labor's mistake was speed tiers.
Average speeds in Australia would not have changed much. According to the ACCC NBN Wholesale Market Indicators Report, 84% of fixed connections are 25Mbps or slower.
The LNP have responded to criticism of the NBN by reducing CVC prices down from Labor's $20 to $8, which is the lowest that Labor expected prices to fall to. This has significantly cut NBN revenue growth and limited it's ability to cut AVC prices, but you asked for it ;-).
> I speed tested multiple "providers" Not much difference.
Did you test any providers who don't sell unlimited data plans? A few RSPs (e.g. AussieBroadband) stake their reputation on excellent performance.
You can easily calculate the maximum RSP spend on CVC by using the NBNCo wholesale price list. The basic calculation is: Maximum CVC spend equals retail plan minus 1/11 for GST minus AVC charge.
Of course this doesn't take into consideration the RSP's other costs (backhaul, support, sales, profit margin, etc).
At that point it becomes clear that only a few users sharing your PoI who use their connections heavily will cause peak period congestion.
Have you checked if your new RSP sells unlimited data plans? If so it is very likely they purchase insufficient CVC. Try switching to an RSP that doesn't sell unlimited data plans.
Of course FTTP works, but you've placed too much emphasis on the technology and not the fact that you've chosen a first class regional ISP. Most people are choosing budget RSPs selling cheap unlimited data plans and experience crap performance even of FTTP..
$40/month won't cover the costs. Average revenue per user (ARPU) has to be higher than $100 to cover costs.
You could drop the AVC to $20, remove the speed tiers and restore CVC to $20 for 1Mbps and significantly more people would connect. Budget RSPs offering unlimited data plans would still be crap, but premium RSPs would offer world class performance.
The CVC discounts associated with 50/20Mbps plans should see that change significantly. Still nowhere near the 1Gbps that Labor promised. Interestingly some RSPs are dropping 100Mbps speeds.
The majority on 50Mbps or slower will suit LNP fine as most FTTN will support this.
However that doesn't solve NBNCo's revenue problem. CVC and quotas was Labor's answer to that, because as more people streamed video at increasingly higher qualities and more frequently, data usage would grow naturally and along with it revenue.
FTTN unable to achieve faster than 50Mbps: 30%
FTTN % of fixed connections: 40% = 12%
% of premises connected (final estimate):: 30% = 4%
Pretty sad when replacing FTTP by FTTN impacts only 4% of the population because of Labor's speed tiers. These numbers should indicate to you why LNP aren't worried about electoral backlash over FTTN.
NBNCo are on record that the the average FTTN speed is 68Mbps and that utilisation is 15%.
It is more likely that your issues are caused by selecting a budget RSP providing unlimited data plans with insufficient CVC.
Cost (NBN Build + NBN Operating + 7% ROI) = Revenue (AVC + CVC)
Labor's plan was always to see revenue grow from CVC income, and reduce AVC pricing = faster speeds.
Liberal's plan is to reduce CVC income and keep AVC prices high = slower speeds
Today we see unlimited data RSPs (e.g. Boom & MyRepublic) dropping or discussing dropping 100Mbps plans while quality RSPs (e.g Aussie Broadband) are increasing the number of locations with 250Mbps connections.
I find it ironic that the fibre fanbois criticising the government for FTTN are campaigning for unlimited data plans and CVC prices to cut which means higher speeds will cost more and hence there is less justification for FTTP or even FTTC.
The prices quoted by Tim are for backhaul between heavily serviced areas, whereas the NBN has a costly last mile build.
Agreed. At UNI, I purchased a second hand locked filing cabinet. I didn't even need to drill out the lock as a friendly locksmith was happy to cut me a new key based on the lock design and key number. Turned out the filing cabinet was full of client files from a legal practitioner who had retired. Passed the documents onto Law Society to be taken care of properly.
However, one would like to hope that our government might take better care of documents.
The biggest performance issue with the NBN is RSPs selling unlimited data plans with inadequate CVC. Pick an ISP like AussieBroadband who don't sell unlimited data plans and performance shouldn't be an issue.
FTTB performance should be close to 100Mbps unless you are in an exceptionally large complex or your building wiring is very old.
When you look at how the core Labor policy of a national network with speed tiers with the lowest speed pricing equivalent to ADSL pricing, the LNP changes haven't impacted that much.
Surprisingly the reduction of CVC from Labor's $20 to $8 which is the cheapest Labor expected doesn't get much press.
The committee's recommendations don't address the more basic issues of
The public have overwhelmingly determined that they prefer a cheap 25Mbps unlimited data plan to faster plans with a quota. A few quality RSPs only sell plans with quotas and customers don't experience congestion. For those on FTTN who want 100Mbps, the technology change process exists.
You are using the device incorrectly. All devices should be on at all times to accumulate information and help the cloud become smarter.
Router coding doesn't seem significantly better when a flood of packets will fill up the router's memory and require a physical report.
In summary, any (malicious) code on the network with access to generate UDP packets can cause most routers to lock-up.
I've spent the last week looking at some horrible SQL stored procedures with needless outer joins, excessive use of views, temporary and updating individual fields in the temporary tables. Unfortunately I don't have the original requirements and I'm doubtful that the code was bug free. I'm not looking forward to UAT.
The variability of the copper is a good argument for the removal of speed tiers on FTTN, and to simply charge everyone the 12Mbps wholesale speed.
The arguments in parliament about why FTTN average speed of 68Mbps is significantly higher than FTTP with speed tiers would make for some very interesting watching.
What is to stop an RSP buying the cheaper bundled 100Mbps product for the ~14% connected at 100Mbps and reducing their CVC spend for 12 & 25Mbps plans?
It would be interesting to see the cost breakdown for your service. 100Mbps AVC wholesale price is $38 + GST, so most likely you are sharing a connection. Let Lets assume that 100 units are connected that is $3000 / month + GST in revenue. Lets assume a small business plan with a premium ISP like Aussie Broadband is $195. That is a significant gap between what you are being charged and the cost of the service. Now it may not be unreasonable when you consider the cost of connecting each unit and ongoing maintenance.
So your contention ratio is 150:1. The fact your worst recorded speed is 28Mbps is remarkable. I suggest not mentioning video streaming to your neighbours because that speed could plummet rapidly.
> The CVC pricing bears no relation to the network cost of providing the transmission that represents
It costs the same to deliver a 12Mbps speed and a 1Gbps speed connection. What the above statement misses is the need to upgrade backhaul (including routers & switches) to cope with increased traffic.
The pricing model for the NBN is entirely an artificial construct defined for price recovery and the political constraint that a 12Mbps plan should cost no more than an ADSL plan. The basic equation is that AVC + CVC > costs.
Labor cleverly decided that revenue growth would come from data growth. RSPs by offering unlimited plans have undermined this. Unlimited plans only benefit a small number who are heavy downloaders. The majority who are below the mean would save money on a plan with a quota. The problem is that a small number of people will thrash the network impacting on everyone. Data quotas effectively control this scenario and push costs on to those who make the most use of the network.
If Labor hadn't added speed tiers we wouldn't have FTTN, FTTB & HFC. Instead today 84% are connected at 25Mbps or less and those on faster speeds who foolishly select a provider with unlimited data plans experience congestion in the evening.
According to ACCC, 84% are connecting at 25Mbps or slower, and of those only 3% on 25Mbps couldn't achieve 25Mbps. That means for >80% this is a non-issue. Meanwhile unlimited data plans with insufficient CVC backing are causing most people to be impacted by slow downs.
I'm still hoping that NBN will abolish speed tiers on the FTTN. This should see the average speed rise to 68Mbps significantly faster than FTTP with speed tiers.
> Now, years later, people need better connectivity, so they order faster speeds than what was projected by Labor all those years ago.
For the past 4 years people have been ordering slower speeds than Labor predicted.
> But instead, to please Rupert
What does Rupert gain? Netflix recommends 5Mbps for streaming HD & 25Mbps for streaming 4HD. Both speeds are easily achievable by FTTN which has an average speed of 687Mbps.
> If they had done anything near the right thing, nbn subscribers would have the option of ordering multiple fibre connections to their properties
Multiple fibre lines? Why would someone want to do that? NBN pricing makes zero sense for 99% to do that.
> Given what we needed
We as in the 14% ordering 100Mbps? Not the ordinary 84% ordering 25Mbps or slower. At the start you mentioned price sensitivity, yet propose building a more expensive network than Labor planned which would push up costs.
Can you not see the gap between fibre fanboi fantasies and the real world?
I'll assume that those negative votes are from people wanting speeds faster than 25Mbps.
If so, what policy changes are you proposing to fix the mess?
FTTP won't change the fact that 84% are on 25Mbps.
Adequate broadband according to Labor NBNCo Corporate Plan was 50% connected at 12Mbps and <1% at 1Gbps in 2026. Today 84% at 25Mbps or slower (ACCC NBN Wholesale Market Indicators Report). FTTN, HFC, FTTB & FTTP won't have much trouble delivering to those speeds.
Of course peak speeds are irrelevant when Australians are predominately buying budget unlimited plans with congestion during peak periods.
> We got exactly the 3rd world solution Turnbull engineered to appease Rupert and Foxtel.
Netflix recommends 5Mbps for HD streaming, so I seriously doubt that FTTN will protect Foxtel from competition.
If you think that the issue is high CVC pricing, but the Liberals have cut the price of CVC from $20 to $14.40 far quicker than Labor planned.
> I don't know how Turnbull can sleep at night,
I wonder how Conroy, Wong & fibre fanbois can sleep at night knowing that one foolish decision to add speed tiers has meant that 84% are connecting at 25Mbps or slower.
> I would figuratively kill to get a 100/40 connection (that would have been upgradeable to 1000/400?
So you expected to be in the <1% that Labor expected would be able to afford 1Gbps in 2026? If so then the cost of technology change shouldn't be of concern. To be on a 100Mbps plan puts you in the top 14% of Australia.
Does knowing that speed tiers have denied 84% on 25Mbps or slower the minimum recommended speed of 100Mbps for the eHealth & eLearning applications that Labor used as justification for building the NBN concern you? If you are happy with speed tiers then expect to move or pay more for the fast speeds that only a small minority can afford.
> We get congestion not due to insufficient CVC but due to insufficient bandwidth to the bloody Node.
Do you have actual evidence of this claim? Getting the balance right on building the nbn™ network states that for FTTP 3000 premises are served by 10Gbps, while for FTTN, 384 premises are served by 2Gbps and this could easily be upgraded to 20Gbps simply by changing the transceivers. NBNCo also state that only 15% of capacity is typically used and that the distribution links are upgraded well ahead of congestion..
> You keep blaming Labor for the CVC "debacle"
I think that Labor's CVC pricing was one of their smartest decisions related to the NBN, because as a usage charge it appropriately means that who use the NBN most pay the most. It also has the great benefit of providing increased revenue as loads on the network increase and incentive for NBNCo to run a congestion free network so that RSPs receive value from purchasing more.
The LNP reducing the price of CVC from $20 to $14 is actually going to make it significantly harder to reduce the price of AVC and hence it will suppress demand for higher speeds.
> This is obviously rubbish as too are your "statistics" above.
Rather than claiming that the figures are rubbish with zero evidence. Please at least attempt to put forward an argument for your position. As part of that thought process you might want to consider the history of leaks from NBNCo and the fact that this hasn't occurred.
> But then 56% of Telstra customers on 100Mbps can not get 100Mbps.
Interesting number, but the reality is that for Telstra only 14% of their customers are willing to pay for 100Mbps.
> Hell there are even customers that cant get min 25Mbps or even the 12Mbps you have claimed nbn has to deliver
Agreed. 6% last time the numbers were published. NBNCo are expecting significant improvement 18 months after an area is ready for service and non NBN connections are disconnected.
good reason why many subscribers would be opting for the cheap tier, cause they'll never get the speed of the expensive ones
>80% were on 25Mbps or slower when the network was entirely FTTP. The ACCC NBNCo Wholesale Market Indicators report shows this has increased to 84% and the take-up is similar across all fixed line technologies. So in terms of many, that would be <16%.
If 14% of Telstra's customers were impacted then that would give them a total number of customers on FTTN at 300,000 which is around a third of active FTTN connections. Except that is wrong because at the end of Jun Telstra had 532,805 FTTN connections, which means it is less than 8% of connections.
This is not surprising when NBNCo stated in August that the average FTTN speed is 68Mbps and 65% can achieve 50Mbps or faster.
consumers arent paying for the 50 - 100mbps speed tiers
The congestion has nothing to do with speed tiers. The primary cause is RSPs selling plans with unlimited quotas and purchasing 1Mbps of CVC per user.
The simplest way for NBNCo to respond is to remove the speed tiers on FTTN & FTTB and charge the 12Mbps rate. Hopefully RSPs would invest the savings in more CVC, but I doubt it.
> Labor started building what would have been a world class NBN
A 1Gbps GPON network is close to world class. Direct fibre is one step better and offers symmetric connections. However Labor expected (see NBNCo Corporate Plan) that <1% would have 1Gbps in 2026, which is definitely not world class. Currently speed tier take up is well below Labor's expectations (FTTP, FTTN, & HFC are all similar).
> so his media mates in Foxtel would not have competition
Netflix recommends 5Mbps for HD streaming and 25Mbps for 4HD streaming. HD is easily serviced over FTTN and 65% of FTTN can sync at 50Mbps or faster (average is 68Mbps)
> Experts tried hard and long to educate Turnbulland have him reverse his 3rd world NBN, and warned anyone who would listen, to no avail.
That would be the experts hoping to be in the 14% with 100Mbps who might actually be impacted by FTTN. Labor's decision to implement speed tiers on the NBN means that 84% don't care because they are choosing 25Mbps or slower and FTTN easily supports that.
Where were the experts when Labor published the NBNCo Corporate Plan with the glaring digital divide that speed tiers would create? Silent because they were to afraid to critique the plan and see the issues exposed. The consequence of this selfishness is FTTN.
The biggest step the Liberals have taken to ensure a low speed NBN is to discount CVC faster than Labor planned (down from $20 to ~$14). This reduces NBNCo's future revenue which makes it almost impossible for NBNCo to reduce the price of AVC to make faster plans more attractive.
Complaining about RSPs buying inadequate CVC leading to poor peak performance, but not taking action is a good strategy because it further tarnishes the reputation of the NBN and what is point of paying for a faster speed when it slows to a crawl during peak periods when you want to use it?
What about the $800 dollars each Labor negotiated with Telstra to transfer each customer from the 'worthless' copper network the NBN and the rent for ducting?
Labor had the option of splitting Telstra into a retail and wholesale company (NZ model) but lacked the will.
> Unlimited plans aren't the source of congestion.
If a world without constraints that is the case, but we are in a real world.
> Data limits are a construct designed to take the focus off the fact they the ISPs, Wholesalers, NBN, etc do not have enough bandwidth to supply their clients needs and to provide a way to charge clients more for using their connections.
This might surprise you, but it actually costs money to run an ISP. $100 including GST is a common pricing for an unlimited 100Mbps plan. NBNCo charge $38 AVC and ~$14/Mbps in CVC.(excluding GST) Considering just the NBNCo Wholesale charges, purchasing more than 5Mbps of CVC (inc. GST) will cause the RSP to lose money. We know the majority of RSPs allocate only 1Mbps per user. I very much doubt that you are willing to pay double or more for better performance. If you were then you would move to an RSP with quotas.
Quotas provide a very fair and reasonable way of controlling congestion. If you are downloading large amounts of data then you pay more to cover the increase in RSP costs. Off-peak quotas provide an incentive to schedule downloads to a quieter time, reducing the RSP's costs. If you download more than average then other customers of the RSP are subsiding you. If you download less, then you are subsidising the heavy downloaders who are causing poor performance in the weeknds.
Other utilities tend to charge for usage. The exception to this is mobile phone plans, but the terms and conditions are interesting. Consider amaysim which 'Unreasonable Use' states Leaving a call connection open for purposes unrelated to making a call, or while in an unattended state for a prolonged period of time eg. as a baby monitor. Are you sure you want to head down that path?
While the ACCC decision has had significant impact, RSPs choosing to offer unlimited plans is the significant cause of congestion. The tragedy of the commons has been known since the 1800s.
Your mate on Dodo is simply lucky, but that could change very quickly if a few heavy users join his PoI. A couple of short posts naming the PoI and claiming good performance should achieve this..
IoT is a great way to take an appliance that should last a minimum of 10 years and make it a security risk and obsolescent in 12 months.
TVs are another example. Spend $6000 on a nice OLED TV running Android and it is obsolete before you purchase it, while the screen should be good for 10+ years. If I could buy a TV with an upgradeble Android component, I would pay a small premium. In a couple of years you can overcharge me again for the Android component, but at least I won't have to replace the TV.
Why didn't you point this out when Labor announced the NBN with speed tiers and created a financial model which relied on ARPU rising steeply to above $100 for targets to be met?
Labor's financial model was based on increased data usage driving CVC revenue growth pushing up ARPU and slowly discounting AVC. The Liberals have cut CVC pricing to $14 reducing CVC revenue growth which curtails NBN's ability to discount AVC. Smart plan if you are building a FTTN network and want to suppress demand for faster speeds.
The rumoured uncongested 50Mbps plan will put further upward pressure on the cost of faster plans.
If we assume Murdoch is concerned about people streaming cutting into his profits and accept Netflix's recommendation of 5Mbps for HD and 25Mbps for 4K HD then FTTN will has just a big an impact.
In Not happy with the NBN? You're not alone. The number of complaints has jumped 160pc there is this quote:
Dr Kay said they got better speeds from the old ADSL than with the NBN fibre to the premises. "Our download speeds can get down to 2.2 megabits a second and uploads speeds can be zero. That happens fairly regularly — it might even be daily," he said. He said every six months the whole connection dropped out, which was not just frustrating but also life threatening.
At one point, Dr Kay said his patients were calling Telstra to try and reach him, and the telco requested he give them a mobile number to reach him on. "We said no, why don't you fix the NBN? So we actually have the service we contract you to provide."
It will be interesting to see some more facts, but the first assumption has to be that erratic speeds are an RSP (Telstra?) issue.
> But in your delusional mind thats not a digital divide lol.
I have never said it is not a digital divide. The rich will always have more money to spend. The point I'm making is that >80% of Australians have selected 25Mbps, so that should be considered the baseline. The question I'm asking you is why are you so special that you deserve the benefits of a government funded network that you deny to >80%. Are you special enough to be in the 1% connected at 1Gbps in 2026? I doubt it, because if you were, you wouldn't be complaining about the cost of technology change.
> Lol no you claim it was going down.
The percentage on 100Mbps dropped sharply from the first connections to stabilise at 14%. This steep drop under Labor's governance is easily explained by the early adopters selecting faster speeds and late adopters choosing slower speeds.
Internet Connection Speed Recommendations from Netflix are 5Mbps for HD & 25Mbps for UHD. Now you might think 25Mbps indicates those on 25Mbps will need to upgrade, however I expect most will bauk at the cost increases to deliver 25Mbps during peak hour. 25Mbps of CVC at $14Mbps = $350.
> Another spin and liie with nothing to back it up with
I suggest reading NBN: ISP Congestion and speed tiers which explains why when RSPs purchase inadequate CVC resulting in congestion there is little value in purchasing faster speeds. Simply calculating NBNCo Wholesale costs, RSPs cannot sell the current plans at a profit and provdie a congestion free network.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018