* Posts by mathew42

588 posts • joined 29 Sep 2011

Page:

nbn™ adds premises to FTTC, HFC, slims down FTTN build

mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: FTTN average speed faster than FTTP with Labor speed tiers

My position remains unchanged that your fanboi selfishness has resulted in >80% on 25 Mbps or slower not receiving the benefits of the NBN that Labor used to justify the project.

The reality is that if you are complaining about the cost of technology change then odds are you couldn't afford speeds faster than 100Mbps anyway.

> The minum speed was 100Mbps and was delivering this. But as you keep failing to understand it also gave the option for cheaper slower speeds for people who either don't need or didn't want to currently pay for the faster speeds.

As a response to Google Fibre, Labor upped the speed to 1Gbps. If 100Mbps is your benchmark then only FTTN is not delivering that consistently.

Slower speeds (<100Mbps) deliver none of the benefits that Labor used to justify building the NBN.

You seem to be ignoring the fact that way too many people find Labor's speed tiers unaffordable. The NBNCo Corporate Plan discusses affordabilty in detail.

> the taxpayer have to cover the cost of the next upgrade in 10 years time

Firstly, Labor's estimates on up-take suggest that those on the slowest speeds <25Mbps are unlikely to migrate to higher speeds. Moving or technolgy change are the options for those who can justify spending money for 1Gbps.

Secondly, as per Labor's plan, in five years time the NBN is likely to have been privatised, so it won't be a tax payer expense.

0
0
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: FTTN average speed faster than FTTP with Labor speed tiers

> Again rambling about a non existing digital divide of supplying 100mbps connection to everyone

Your argument appears to be that as long as a service exists then it doesn't matter that >80% have decided that it is too expensive. My counter argument is that technology change means that 100Mbps (and faster) is available as long as you don't consider it too expensive.

The logical conclusion to your point of view appears to be that fibre is the only solution and that even if >80% connected at 1Mbps as long as the special few could access the network at 100Mbps this is acceptable.

The alternative is that you develop an argument for the minimum speed on the network and insist that the government provides this. It appears that you and most others are content as long as you personally are able to afford your desired speed.

It should be noted that in the NBNCo Corporate Plan (2010) Labor defined the recommended minimum speed and then promptly ignored it.

0
0
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

> If we had it your way most people would get a dirt road and would have to pay to tar it.

The problem is that it isn't most people it is a very small number: four percent!

While I would prefer 1Gbps fibre to everyone, I'm also a realist. If >80% are choosing 25Mbps or slower and Labor's expectation was that this wouldn't change dramatically, then I accept that as the community standard this is all the government needs to build. If you look you'll find posts from me to when the NBNCo Corporate Plan was first delivered making the same point: that Labor expects speed tiers to create a digital divide.

The fact that some vocal fibre fanbois are crying over the outcome of their own selfishness makes it easier to stump up for technology change and/or cost of moving to a suburb with FTTP.

0
0
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

> Lol mathew will be in less than ten years when we require the faster speeds with out having to do a homeloan to get a FOD.

What are you basing that 10 years on? Labor predicted <1% would have 1Gbps in 2026!

As I've mentioned previously, technology change is the difference between the price of two business class (how the 1% tend to fly) and economy tickets to London.

> Thank good we dont build roads to your standards.

Roads are an interesting metaphor. Labor's pricing model is the equivalent of building a road system where >80% travel at 25Km/h or slower, 14% travel at 100Km and an empty lanes sit there for the mythical 1Gbps speeds.

0
0
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: FTTN average speed faster than FTTP with Labor speed tiers

> Becuase we both know it can or your doing is trying to misleading to make a point as usual.

RSPs have been able to sell 1Gbps plans since December 2013, but they've chosen not to sell faster than 100Mbps. >80% of customers on FTTP have chosen to select 25Mbps or slower. Clearly there is large gap between what is therorically possible and reailty. Since the only difference between the speed tiers is price, in the absence of other evidence the principle of Occam's razor suggests that people are choosing speeds based on their financial circumstances.

Labor designed a financial model for the NBN which as Labor expected in each revision of the NBNCo Corporate Plan to create a digital divide.

The reason FTTN is being rolled out is that the IT community were selfishly prepared to accept the creation of a digital divide, expecting they would be on the right side of it.

0
0
mathew42
Bronze badge
Holmes

Re: The NBN: Such bollocks

> something that should so obviously be bipartisan and for the people's benefit

It is a valid point, but unfortunately if you critique a plan based on it's merits, supporters respond with fear.

Labor's plan had a number of flaws and contradictions (e.g speed tiers versus minimum requirements for the applications Labor was promoting; overbuilding HFC first, growth in ARPU, etc.) but debate was stifled by fibre fanbois. At this point there remains a significant gap between what customers are prepared to pay for (25Mbps or slower) and what the power users expect everyone should have..

The promotion of renewable energy and clsoure of coal power stations has resulted in a state wide blackout, load shedding and a significant risk of blackouts during summer. Only after the blackouts is action being taken to make the necessary changes to the grid (e.g .frequency stability) to accommodate the differences between a few large generators with high inertia and a many small generators with low intertia. Listening to engineers coold have avoided this situations, but the Greenies degegrated anyone who dared to critique renewable energy, even if a solution to the identified issue was available.

It should be noted that the unusually quick action by the South Austrlaian government might be related to the upcoming state election on 17 March 2018. potential electoral backlash if widespread blackouts occur over summer.

0
0
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: FTTN average speed faster than FTTP with Labor speed tiers

> Apparently the average of FTTN is 78Mbps but only 60% of FTTN users can get faster than 50Mbps

If those unsourced numbers are correct, then it means that the 40% with lines delivering < 50Mbps must be closer to the 50Mbps speed to result in a 78Mbps average speed.

> laiming FTTP cant even deliver 100Mbps now.

The full quote points out that the cause is the speed tiers which mean only a small shrinking minority (14%) are accessing 100Mbps speeds.

Of course you continue to consider yourself one of the special ones who will connect at 100Mbps and in doing so, provide evidence of your lack of care for the other 86% and fail to understand that 1Gbps will be reserved for an even more special group (the top 1%).

0
0
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

FTTN average speed faster than FTTP with Labor speed tiers

> You mislead in your statements claiming fttn is faster than fttp.

The point of observing that if speed tiers were removed from FTTN the average connection speed would be faster than FTTP is to point out how Labor's decision to implement speed tiers put a ball and chain around the performance of the NBN, resulting the FTTP network being unable to deliver the recommended 100Mbps speeds for the applications that Labor championed.

I refer you to Exhibit 9.26 Broadband Speed Requirements Vary for Different Applications in the NBNCo Corporate Plan (2010). The source of that information was the Cambridge Strategic Management Group.

0
0
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

CVC revenue to rise pushing up ARPU

> cvc price would fall under labor fttp

Agreed, but what you clearly don't realise is that while the unit price falls, that the total quantity rises sharply, so total revenue increases. Very clever Labor spin: CVC pricing will fall, but omit to mention that data usage is required to rise much more quickly, so that ARPU can rise.

> even though i shown you cvc does not come close to making the same revune as avc

You quote numbers from another fibre fanboi and consider this credible? Do you think that just once you could quote from a primary source that is publically available?

I refer you to Exhibit 9.3 Revenue Components of tne NBNCo Corporate Plan, where it clearly shows that CVC as a percentage of revenue starts very small and quickly grows. I refer you to the previous quotes from the NBNCo Corporate Plan that show the intent to grow revenue via CVC.

Note that I consider the plan to grow revenue via CVC one of the better ideas by Labor, because it reduces the digital divide and matches the charging model for other types of infrastructure.

0
0
mathew42
Bronze badge
Facepalm

Re: Feed the nbn my icon.

> He MTM olf % claim like 30% on 100mbps by 2021. Where AVC revenue of $1.4B vs its CVC of just $0.8B

Cutting the CVC revenue is a brilliant strategic move by the LNP. It menas that NBNco will be unable to cut AVC pricing because of the CVC revenue shortfall. This supresses demand for higher speed tiers, justifying the government's position that demand for higher speeds doesn't exist.

The reason I say brilliant is that the fibre fanbois complaining that FTTN can't deliver 1Gbps, fully support the cuts in CVC which make higher speed tiers more expensive. I suspect some LNP strategists occasionally have a chuckle over the gulibility of fibre fanbois.

0
0
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: Feed the nbn my icon.

> Would you agree that using tech in your fanboi model that cant deliver the same speed to everyone is creating a digital divide

I'm not a fan of the FTTN deployment. I'm merely pointing out that due to Labor's decision to implement speed tiers the fibre fanbois are over-reacting.

Technology change offers the ability for anyone to upgrade their FTTN connection. Labor's expectations as recorded in the NBNCo Corporate Plan that <1% woudl have 1Gbps in 2026 make it very clear that only the rich could afford 1Gbps connections. For the top 1% in Australia, the cost of technology change means premium economy seats for their European Holiday instead of business class seats, assuming that they cannot arrange for the cost to be paid for by work.

Today, I could walk into the Tesla dealer and order a car, but only if I have the means to pay for it. Labor's speed tiers have created exactly the same situation. Theoretically, I could have a 1Gbps connection but the reality is that <14% are willing to pay the cost for 100Mbps and RSPs have determined demand doesn't exist for faster connections at a price that will be profitable.

0
0
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: Feed the nbn my icon.

> Btw cvc price [falls] under labor as demand rises but then some make a profit on it acording to you

If you missed the word falls then the first half of your statement is correct, however there is a catch. When you read the NBNCo Corporate Plan (2016) on page 67 you will find a chart, if you study the chart two facts become clear:

  • Starts at $20Mbps/Month when the average data usage is 30GB/Month and falls to $8Mbps/Month when the average data usage is 540GB/month.
  • Price falls by 2.5 times, while the average data usage grows by 18 times = growth in revenue from CVC of 720% when accounting for price falls.
Further on in the document is a chart showing the growth in revenue from CVC.

On page 118 of the NBNCo Corporate Plan (2010) this statement appears:

Despite the movement of residential consumers up the speed curve shown in Exhibit 9.12, the growth in AVC (PIR) ARPU is relatively modest. This reflects the small price differential between AVC tiers, and the decline in prices for the higher tiers. However, the consequence of more End-Users moving to higher speed tiers is reflected in the significant rise in the contribution of the CVC to overall ARPU, as increased speed drives increased usage.

It is this statement that lead me to my position that if Labor had been bolder in their plan, they could have eliminated speed tiers and by their own assertion this would have resulted in higher usage, resulting in higher CVC revenue. Sadly, Labor chose the medicore timid option of speed tiers and data charges leading to the current situation.

Statements like this make me think that your knowledge of Labor's NBN plan barely extends beyond the headline '1Gbps FTTP' and fails to grasp all the compromises Labor made.

0
0
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: Feed the nbn my icon.

> Consider this if speed tiers were removed on FTTN, the average speed would be higher than CURRENT SPEED TEIR AVERAGE OF FTTP.

The current speed tiers have barely changed in 4 years and RSPs are not offering plans faster than 100Mbps. Labor expected that those on the lower speed tiers wouldn't migrate up and with the current market demand for unlimited plans RSPs have no incentive to offer faster plans.

> Wow the is copper fan boi again I didn't know labor was doing FOD wow

The digital divide was created by Labor's speed tiers and was expected by Labor as documented in the NBNCo Corporate Plan.

0
0
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: Feed the nbn my icon.

> So if nbn wasn't making any money from the 12Mbps of $24 it would be making $3 from 25mbps connection and so on. So using current uptake figures

Wrong assumption. NBNCo is loosing money on AVC. It is CVC where Labor intended for NBNCo to make it's profit. If you drop the speed tiers, then more people connect because it is cheapr and everybody downloads more because data arrives more quickly and at higher quality (e.g. 4K instead of 720i).

0
0
mathew42
Bronze badge
Meh

Re: Why so hung about speed tiers

It is a philosophical view point basied on my experiences of ADSL when Telstra was the only provider and the options were 256/64Kbps, 512/128Kbps or 1500/256Kbps. Most people opted for the slower speeds and this limited even VoIP without careful QoS configuration.

Secondly, Labor's justification for the NBN was services like eHealth & eLearning, but as the 2010 Corporate Plan points out the minimum recommended speed for this is 100Mbps. Currently in Australia on the fixed NBN <14% have these speeds.

Thirdly, the FTTP network is capable of delivering 1Gbps, but the pricing model puts those speeds out of reach of all but the very wealthy. As outlined by Labor the NBN should source the majority of it's revenue from usage not connection fees, as this is the area of greatest growth.

> We have speed tiers in NZ UFB, and it hasn't seemed to have damaged the system in the way you describe.

The Kiwis have a very different model to that established by Labor, including structural separation of the monopoly provider instead of creating a new monopoly. I've not looked at NZ in depth, because first people need to acknowledge the mistakes Labor made in the pricing model and then we can look at solutions.

> those who want it can get 1000/500 for not a huge increase in the wholesale price from Chorus

The wholesale price difference in Australia between 100Mbps ($38) and 1Gbps ($150) is $112, which some would consider reasonable. However since NBNCo made plans faster than 100Mbps available in December 2013 not a single RSP has made plans faster than 100Mbps available at retail. MyRepublic have run a marketing stunt for 1Gbps limited to 100 customers but that is it.

1
0
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: Feed the nbn my icon.

> You know planing for the future not for what people are choising now.

The problem with that argument is that Labor were very clear that they expected people on the lower speed tiers to not migrate up to higher speeds. In fact we find the demand for speed less than what Labor anticipated.

Greater than 80% of the community has determined that 25Mbps is an acceptable speed. I do not see you presenting a single argument to change this.

0
2
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

> People who are in the areas that already got connected with FTTN have been having lots of issues with loss of synch low synch speeds & poor throughput due to the poor condition of the old copper.

According to this article, only 6% of FTTN connections are less than <25Mbps. Interestingly 32% are > 75Mbps.

I'd suggest that congestion caused by ISPs not purchasing sufficient CVC to sell unlimited plans.

If you have a problem with FTTN, first mount a convincing argument why the minimum speed should be 100Mbps. This would then exclude FTTN as an option.

0
0
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: Feed the nbn my icon.

> No the reason you the copper fan boy switchef was becuase more people where choosing faster speefs than labor expected

The only speed tier that is higher is 25Mbps. The 100Mbps is half what Labor predicted and 250Mbps connections are tiny.

Consider this if speed tiers were removed on FTTN, the average speed would be higher than FTTP. Does that not demonstrate how badly Labor bungled the artificial NBNCo financial model.

> But then you copper fanboi supportof trying to blame lanor for the copper mess is humorous

The difference between the two plans will have little impact on end-users. >80% aren't ordering speeds greater than 25Mbps, so they will be fine. The small percentage requiring 100Mbps or faster have options: move or technology change. Considering the fact that technology change will almost certainly be less than stamp duty, staying put is an option.

I blame the selfish fibre fanbois who belieived Labor's promise of 1Gbps, failed to read that it would be for <1% in 2026. I blame the selfish fibre fanbois who don't care that only 14% and shrinking are on the minimum recommended speed for the applications (eHealth, eLearning, etc.) that Labor used as justification for the NBN.

If you are complaining about technology change bieng unaffordable then sadly you are destined to be on the poor side of the digital divide created by Labor's plan, which is appropriate judgement for your selfishness.

0
1
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: Feed the nbn my icon.

> Cant understand why customers had to be more down speed tiers because fttn cant deliver said speeds lol.

Except that the percentage on each speed tier has barely changed since the additoin of FTTN, FTTB & HFC to the network. Sure a few people have been impacted, but as I've explained previously this is 14% on 100Mbps * 40% on FTTN * 70% estimated final connection rate = 4% of population. This 4% have options like moving or technology chnage.

> Tell me again why there isnt 50% on 12/1 right now cant use Telstra as an excuse.

The reason I switched to using the 25Mbps figure is that Labor planned for the 25 & 50Mbps speed tiers to shrink in size to a neglible amount. That hasn't happened. Secondly it highlights more succinctly the digitial divide that Labor's policy has created.

How about you explain why >80% on 25Mbps or slower is a great achievement for a 1Gbps capable network? As you do, remember that it is the fibre fanboi support of Labor's speed tiers that has lead to FTTN.

1
3
mathew42
Bronze badge

May not be as big an issue as you fear with >80% ordering 25Mbps or slower thanks to Labor's speed tiers.

0
3
mathew42
Bronze badge

> I guess the Federal government is in "damage control" mode regarding the NBN at the moment considering the mess that Malcolm Turnbull has made of it.

I suggest you ignore the political spin and actually consider the facts:

  • Labor designed the NBN with speed tiers (AVC) & data usage (CVC)
  • Labor designed the NBN so that as data usage grew, people would pay more
  • MTM delivers speeds that are faster than >80% of speeds being ordered
  • CVC price has dropped from $20 under Labor to $14.40 average under Coalition at a faster rate than Labor planned.

The biggest complaint with the NBN is congestion as identified by ACCC.

Now, I'm going to guess as a fibre fanboi you are in the priviledged shrinking minority of <14% that are ordering speeds of 100Mbps.

1
3
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: Feed the nbn my icon.

> Usual copper fan claim with no facts behind it

I could retort by responding usual fibre fanboi comment who still dreams of Labor's empty 1Gbps promise, however I'm not a copper fan. All I've ever done is point out that Labor's choice to implement speed tiers has meant that >80% will be adequately served by FTTN. If we want to change that situation then the first step is working out how to reduce that number, to a figure that justifies FTTP.

> The SR had it 6 months behind.

Which version of the SR? The NBNCo Corporate Plan (2010) on page 15 states the following figures for premises passed - 2011: 48,000, 2012: 259,000, 2013: 1, 2,69,000). The NBNCo Corporate Plan (2013) on page 105 states that in 2011 18,000 premises were passed and in 2013 predicted 205,000 passed, placing it 2 years behind plan.

In the 2013 NBNCo Corporate Plan there is this gem of a comment:

During FY2013 the average number of premises passed per day by the FTTP Access Network has increased quarter-by-quarter. However, the rate of increase has been slower than forecast in the 2012-15 Corporate Plan, resulting in a revised estimate of 155,000 to 175,000 Premises Passed by 30 June 2013, representing an expected shortfall of approximately 111,000 to 131,000 premises passed to 30 June 2013, which NBN Co expects to recover before FY2021.

> Usual copper fan tripe commented before on couldn't be bother tto do it again

Do you see how I've responded with facts from publications approved by Labor that can be easily verified versus your unverifiable opinions? Might be time to learn how to research and separate wishful thinking from reality.

1
3
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: Feed the nbn my icon.

> Incompetent twats. Morrow should have his 457 visa cancelled and replaced with someone who is up to the task of rolling out the fibre.

Would you suggest Quigley who was years behind the original plan?

Did you happen to notice that NBN is ahead of targets set in earlier plans? Something never achieved by Quigley.

> Why is the FTTP connection $4,400 when NZ FTTP costs about that same as OZ FTTN? Is morrow even more incompetent than originally thought?

Possibly because of the way that Quigley under instruction for Labor planned the build?

> ... usual tripe

The fact that the percentage on 25Mbps or less is close to where it was before the first FTTN connection.

How about you offer some suggestions for the changes (beyond FTTP) which won't have any impact on >80% to resolve your concerns?

0
5

Google puts the last coat of polish on Chrome 61

mathew42
Bronze badge
Flame

> It may sound scary, but is it more scary than having to download an exe to update your drivers or an app that will update them automatically over insecure http?

YES. At least when I download an exe, I can verify the website belongs to the manufactuer. With this feature I could visit a random website and find that I've been owned. The only uncertainty in my mind is will I need to wait for DEF CON 26 for the first public exploits. Don't forget that Web Bluetooth is also included in this.

Currently I use several browsers and tend to reserve one for important stuff (online banking, email, etc.). With this development, I'm seriously considering devoting a VM to general browsing. Updates are a hassle, but one that is becoming more bearable.

3
0

Intel ME controller chip has secret kill switch

mathew42
Bronze badge

Re: I guess I know what architectures to avoid...

> it remains to be seen software-wise what the uptake will be.

For the target audience, the question is most likely to be 'how good is the linux build and compiler'?

5
0

Australian telcos promise to be better NBN helpers

mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: Voter imact < 4%

> government owned NBN, just let them self regulate, the marketplace will sort out any problems

The marketplace cannot sort out problems when it is controlled by a monopoly that Labor created and the only competition is wireless plus limited FTTB.

> But he was dithering a lot through the show, so I don't think even he knew what he was saying. He was pushing slogans, when he could have been selling quality fibre.

Possibly he understands that as a result of Labor designing the NBN with speed tiers that for >80% of voters FTTN, FTTB, HFC & FTTP deliver the same result.

> I'm sure there will be efforts in the future to bring the whole network up to a good standard.

What do you define as a good standard? If it is fatser than 25Mbps then why should only a small rich minority receive the benefits of the 'good standard'?

0
0
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Voter imact < 4%

If the government wants to avoid many of those customers making the NBN an election issue, it needs a lot more action than it's managed so far.

The voter impact will be marginal.

  • Only 14% and falling are ordering 100Mbps plans
  • Of those only one third will be on FTTN = 5%
  • Only 70% of premises are predicted to connect = 3.5%

Labor have moved away from FTTP so that is not a vote winner.

Cheaper NBN pricing is what voters care most about. Arguably the LNP don't care. Labor could write off >$30 billion of NBN build costs to enable NBNCo to reduce wholesale prices, but the LNP would have a field day labelling Labor 'poor economic managers'.

0
1

Groundhog Day! ACCC again calls for truth in broadband advertising

mathew42
Bronze badge

Unlimited data plans at risk

Only a few (~5%) heavy downloaders on unlimited quota plans can create congestion very easily especially iwth most ISPs purchasing ~1Mbps per user.

It will be interesting to see if ISPs remove unlimited quota plans or introduce acceptable use policies allowing them to cancel the contracts of the top 10% if they are deamed to be having negative impacts on the network.

1
1

Following flat financials, Telstra pins hopes on NBN renegotiation

mathew42
Bronze badge
Facepalm

Mobile plans less than 1/3 of a home phone

Fixed services other than connections to the National Broadband Network (NBN) continued their collapse, ditching $347 million

Hardly surprising when mobile plans with unlimited calls are now under $10/month. A home phone from Telstra is $27.95 and calls are extra.

1
0
mathew42
Bronze badge
Unhappy

Telstra deceived ACCC on cost of copper network maintenance

In a world where network infrastructure is often painted as worthless compared to the bits that traverse the infrastructure, the “re-nationalisation” of network under the National Broadband Network is going to be a burden on Telstra's profitability.

Contrast this statement with Telstra's repeated claims to the ACCC that maintaining the copper network was significantly more costly than the ACCC's estimates. According to the ACCC NBN Wholesale Market Indicators Report, Telstra have close to a 50% share of NBN Connections, so they are still the dominent player.

Labor missed the opportunity to structurally separate Telstra. It would have saved billiions in payments to Telstra and reached the same point as we have now, the last mile controlled by a monopoly with an artificial pricing model. I'm still not sure why Labor saw it as necessary to compensate Telstra when customers churned from the 'obsolete copper' to the sparkly fibre NBN.

As Labor predicted, the main competitor to the NBN is wireless. It will be interesting to see if Labor's prediction of 14% abandoning the NBN for wireless because it is cheaper will be shown to be pessimistic or optimistic.

2
1

Schoolboy bags $10,000 reward from Google with easy HTTP Host bypass

mathew42
Bronze badge

Re: Hmmmm....

I'd suggest membership of EFF might be a reasonable insurance policy if he does plan to travel.

12
0

Commonwealth Bank: Buggy software made us miss money laundering

mathew42
Bronze badge

Re: Probably play the "We are too big to fail" to defense as usual.

There are reports that other Australian banks accept a maximum of $5,000 via similar ATMs. I suspect management at those banks were much happier after finding this out.

6
0

nbn™ blames cheap-ass telcos for grumpy users, absolves CVC pricing

mathew42
Bronze badge
Unhappy

Re: Aussie Broadband support NBN CVC position

Totally agree, but most people have voted with their wallets for slow speeds and unlimited quotas.

0
2
mathew42
Bronze badge

I would assume they are talking about Cat5 and better copper cables support 1Gbps upto 100 metres.using 1000BASE-T standard.

It is the direct buried copper from the 1930s that has been cut and repaired multiple times that will be the most challenging for FTTN deployment.

0
0
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: Balancing community benefit with cost

> When every would have the option of those benefits not like the lotto we have now

In exactly the same way that everyone has the option of purchasing a Tesla S?

Hypothetically everyone within the FTTP rollout can connect at 1Gbps. The reality is that only 14% have decided that they can afford the cost of the 100Mbps NBN plans. The ACCC reports that on 31 March 2017 of the 1,080,761 connections only 77 where 250Mbps.

There is absolutely nothing in the data that indicates demand for 100Mbps and faster plans is likely to grow in the future. By waxing lyically about uber fast FTTP while ignoring this reality of speeds that people are selecting fibre fanbois are becoming increasingly irrelevant in the discussion.

0
2
mathew42
Bronze badge
Holmes

Aussie Broadband support NBN CVC position

In Telcos are putting NBN customers on a voice-only speed, Morrow tells committee this statement appears:

But, chief executive of Aussie Broadband, Phillip Britt, rejected the claims from larger telcos that NBN's wholesale pricing makes it too expensive to maintain fast speeds during peak periods.

"That's just bullshit," he said.

"If we can do it as a small internet service provider, they can certainly do it as well. They're just trying to deflect attention from their strategic choices not to provision more bandwidth."

Interesting Morrow describes 12Mbps as a voice quality product and that it could be removed:

Mr Morrow said it was possible NBN Co would remove the 12 Mbps product so consumers are forced onto a speed higher than today's internet, but it did not want to be "too prescriptive".

Based on the reports of congestion caused by inadequate CVC purchase for unlimted plans, I'm not sure this will improve the performance for most people during peak times.

0
2
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: Oh FFS

> You won't get any argument from me on that one (although "mediocre" is probably overselling this polished turd) - but that is all the MTM is delivering for a lot of people.

FTTP also has >80% on 25Mbps slower. Does that mean it is also a polished turd?

> That is a joke, right?

No. I'm very serious.

> Are you seriously arguing that something in the order of $10,000 - $20,000 (or more) "is not significant" for a home owner who would like to upgrade to FTTP to get a decent internet connection?!

I'm not saying that is an insignificant sum of money, but that when included as part of the purchase of a house it is not that expensive. People move house for a number of reasons. For a small minority NBN speeds will figure in that decision. A house down the road sold recently. Prior to moving in the new owners have renovated extensively, replacing new carpet with wood, replaced all the applicances and more. Adding a technology change would be less than 10% of the cost of the revovations.

This might sound expensive to the average Australian, but remember Labor's plan was for <1% to have 1Gbps connections in 2026. For the top 1% in Australia, $10,000 is small change, especially when it is tax deductable.

> If they can change the technology, they can also change the funding model.

Fair call. My proposal is that speed tiers should be removed because this would highlight the differences between technologies. However the herd are campaigning for slashing the price of CVC gutting NBNCo's future revenue. Do you have a different position?

0
2
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: Oh FFS

> To address your point regarding 80% subscribing at 25Mbps or less, I suspect that is because many of the customers on FTTN realise that they are still going to have trouble with the copper connection from their house to the node and that paying extra for the higher bandwidth is a waste of money.

How about instead of wild speculation you look at the data provided by ACCC in the NBN Wholesale Market Indicators Report. It shows that speed tier take up is relatively similar across all forms of fixed connection. It is the ignorance of fibre fanbois that has lead to the current situation.

> They are bombarded with advertising saying that they need to be on the NBN and so take the cheapest plan that they can get.

So you are suggesting that most of the >80% on 25Mbps or faster don't care about their internet connection?

0
3
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: There is no N in NBN

ACCC was acting in accordance with the legislation. At the time Conroy could have stepped in, but he refused to acknowledge that there was even a problem,even when the NBN Points of Interconnect and the future of competition blog post by Simon Hackett clearly identified the issue.

Fibre fanbois ignored the evidence and acted as cheer squad for Conroy.

> This will NOT be an NBN until traffic can get from Perth to Sydney without leaving the NBN network.

The NBN uses virtual circuits to deliver traffic from the end point direct to the RSP. If you are connecting to your neighbour's computer and you are on the same RSP, the packets will still travel to the RSP via the PoI and back again.

0
2
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: CVC pricing is still insane

If you cut CVC revenue to 1%, the AVC revenue has to rise to compensate. Effectively this means that high speeds will become even more expensive and less obtainable.

The NBN financial model is based on a few princples as documented in the NBNCo Corporate Plan:

- AVC being low to encourage people to connect and CVC is higher to cover costs.

- Cross subsidisation between high density fixed, low density fixed, wireless and satellite services.

In NBN: Internet providers say controversial CVC charge for bandwidth is too expensive appears this statement:

Independent telecommunications analyst Paul Budde said politicians were going to have to admit they made a mistake, and write off half of the cost of the NBN.

The fibre fanbois are still claiming that Labor's plan was perfect, so I don't expect this to happen.

Effectively most RSPs are offering discounted unlimited plans with hgh congestion because this is what the marketplace demands. If RSPs implemented reasonable prices and quotas the congestion problem would disappear. Instead the RSPs are pressuring the Government into subsidise their operations. Telstra wholesale pricing for AGVC (similar to CVC) is $65/Mbps. At $14.40 NBNCo CVC is cheap. Government subsidies should be for people on low incomes not big business.

In the same article there is also the clueless customer blaming FTTN for slow speeds:

When she checked her speed at around 6pm on Monday night she was getting 16.4 megabits, but she said that was the fastest she had seen it in a while. Ms Wray said her average download speed was just 7 megabits, slower than when she was on ADSL.

If the problem was FTTN then speeds would be consistently slow. Speeds fluctuating indicates congestion. What is the bet she is on an unlimited plan.

0
2
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: Oh FFS

> It was supposed to make Australia a WORLD LEADER with the best broadband network on this planet and propel this country and their people into the 22nd century and beyond.

This is what the Labor spin doctors wanted you to believe.

- 1Gbps has to be the minimum speed for a world leading. >80% on 25Mbps or slower should be considered mediocure.

- The best broadband networks are direct fibre not GPON.

Charts that Labor included in the NBNCo Corporate Plan (2010) showed that Australia would fall further behind on the curve.

> It’s NATIONAL infrastructure. It doesn’t need to produce a ROI.

Labor chose to make the NBN off budget and set a 7% ROI target. Labor could have easily cherry picked some think tank reports showing that for every 1Mbps increase in internet speed, GDP was boosted by X% to justify the NBN being on budget.

> This fantastic infrastructure project was fucked up not due to financial considerations but for political considerations. Political reasons were used to deny Australians prosperity and wealth.

Labor promised a string of community benefits (eHealth, eLearning, etc.) but then chose to setup a finanical model which denied those benefits to current >80% of the population. Realistically less than 5% have been impacted by MTM because FTTN is ~30% of rollout and only a shrinking 14% are choosing 100Mbps.

If you accept that a technology change is less than a kitchen renovation or moving house then it is not that significant for owners. Renters have the simpler option of moving to a location with FTTP / HFC.

> I am not annoyed that I am going to be stuck with this clusterfuck of a technological mish-mash and slow speeds.

By slow speeds you meant the <25Mbps speeds that >80% of Australians are ordering. This is entirely due to Labor's policy decisions not MTM.

> Actually surprised you haven't copy 'n pasted you usual 78% on the 12/1 plan bullshit.

By bullshit, do you mean the reality that >80% are odering 25Mbps or less and the percentage on 100Mbps is shrinking? If so it is time to face reality and suggest what policy changes need to be made to resolve the mess. Switching from FTTN to FTTP won't change the >80% on 25Mbps or slower.

0
8
mathew42
Bronze badge
Happy

CVC funds future investment in NBN

The CVC Primer (pdf) contains this statementon page 3 in the 'Key takeaway":

Furthermore, networks are constructed with shared bandwidth and a finite amount of capacity. As end-users require more data or speed that exceeds this limit, more investment will be needed to expand the network.

The brilliance of CVC pricing being the source of revenue is that it encourages NBNCo to run a congestion free internal network, because:

- RSPs will not order additional CVC if that is not the bottleneck

- The cost of upgrades (e.g. GPON2.5 to GPON10, backhaul, etc.) will deliver a fast ROI from adidtional CVC

Labor designed it this way, but the Coalition by reducing CVC pricing more quickly than planned could well be sneakily gutting NBNCo's future revenue.

1
5
mathew42
Bronze badge
Facepalm

Balancing community benefit with cost

Healthcare and roads are frequently evaluated based on financial models of questionable accuracy. A few examples:

- A preventative treatment (e.g. vaccine, diabetes monitoring) is evaluated based on cost versus the reduction in cost of future treatment

- Surgery for soft tissue injuries is evaluated on the cost of surgery now, versus potential that the body with help from physiotherapy will heal itself.

- Part of the decision set for road funding is economic contribution (e.g. If a new freeway saves a truck driver 10 minutes and the truck driver uses the road 6 times a day, then the improvement in productivity means one extra delivery a day)

- Roads can also be funded based on reducing the cost of accidents to communities (e.g. replacing level crossings for trains).

Labor chose to put the NBN off-budget, that it should deliver a 7% ROI and that once the risky build was complete that privatisation should occur. For the NBN to be subsidised by the government community benefit would need to be shown. Labor promoted the NBN as delivering community benefits in areas such as health and education.

The NBNCo Corporate Plan (2010) guidelines for required speeds for tele-medicine and remote education at 100Mbps and preferrably 1Gbps. In the same plan Labor estimated that today 30% would meet that criteria. The reality is 14% and falling. 70% takeup * 14% on 100Mbps = 10% who received the promised benefits.

Now when you consider that this 14% are on the most expensive plans, I consider it reasonable to label this as middle-class welfare and delivering little benefit to the disadvantaged. This means that the NBN should deliver a subsidy and the government should limit it's exposure to providing funding at a discount to the commercial rate. To change this, the NBN financial model requires restructuring to deliver community benefits to the disadvantaged.

1
7
mathew42
Bronze badge

This is the exact quote from Morrow:

nbn has responded to industry concern over the cost of the CVC by reducing the charge on three separate occasions – from $20 per megabit per second per month to the current average across the industry of $14.40/Mbps per month and as low as $8/Mbps a month if they buy sufficient quantity.

Indeed, the average CVC being purchased across the industry works out to about 1Mbps for each end user – under our pricing model that could be doubled to 2Mbps for each end user for around an extra $5 per month.

*Key Poiints*

1. Average is ~1Mbps = $14.40 (down from $20).

2. Lowest cost is $8/Mbps

3. Extra $5 would result in ~2Mbps per user.

*Analysis*

1. ~2Mbps per user would require an RSP to spend $20, therefore average CVC would be $10 for 1 Mbps. This is very close to lower limit of $8 for CVC pricing.

2. Average speed on NBN is ~32Mbps, which means a contention ratio of 1:32 which is not too bad for those on 12 & 25Mbps speeds.

3. Packets are not prioritised based on AVC speeds, so for 50Mbps & 100Mbps the impact of congestion are significantly worse.

1
5

Retailers would love an NBN backhaul tariff restructure

mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: NZ Model

> So if that 14% would be make more money for nbn than the 80% you bitch on about. But you have turn it in to class ware far with you speed lotto fanboi support.

It is not class warfare. It is very clear that 100Mbps is recommended as the minimum internet speed. Labor's NBNCo Corporate Plan explained this. My focus on speed tiers is because the NBN benefits should be for all Australians not the elite 1% on 1Gbps under Labor's plan who could most likely afford to install direct fibre if they so desired. As an exercise take the benefits that Labor promoted for the NBN (e.g. eHealth, eLearning, remote working, etc.) use the recommended throughput from the 2010 Corporate Plan for these activities and determine how many are viable at 12Mbps, 25Mbps and 100Mbps.

As previously explained you might be in the <5% who are truely impacted by the FTTN decision, but being willing to pay for a 100Mbps service almost certainly means you are privileged group that should be able to stand independently and not require a government subsidy.

> Lol no they haven't. Plus the coalition said there fttn plan cost would be half the cost of fttp but it cost the same.

Please understand that the Coalition have not changed the wholesale prices charged by NBNCo, except to reduce CVC pricing faster than Labor planned. Significant changes to wholesale pricing require approval from ACCC, so it is a non-trivial exercise.

You haven't provided any evidence on how the Austrlian NBN model can be changed to match the 'success' of the NZ model. Instead all you offer is Lol. Please realise that a new argument is required to restore FTTP, especially now that Labor have realised that the NBN is no longer a significant vote changer.

> You would think since it's claimed to be cheaper than fttp the whole sale cost would be cheaper too.

The independent MPs required that NBN wholesale plan prices for the same speed tier would be the same across all service types. This is the opaque cross-subsidy model developed by Labor.

0
1
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: FTTN average speed is 70/30Mbps / 76% don't care

> So the average is 70Mbps When only 65% can't get about 50Mbps lol.

What is your evidence for this statement? The quote from Consumers expect too much from the internet, says ombudsman containing 65% is "It estimates about 65 per cent of FTTN lines can get between 50 and 100 Mbps".

Lets unpack that a little to help your comprehension:

1. Only 35% of FTTN cannot achieve 50Mbps, and that will decrease further when the transition is complete.

2. 65% of connections on FTTN are 50Mbps or faster.

3. Only 14% are ordering connections faster than 50Mbps

4. At most 5% are impacted by FTTN (35% slower than 50Mbps * 14% who would order faster speeds)

This number reduces further when you consider that Labor estimated that <70% would connect to the NBN because it was too expensive. Adding FTTC reduces the FTTN rollout.

When the percentage impacted is small and the overwhelming majority are from higher socioeconomic groups it is easy to see why internet speeds faster than 25Mbps could be considered middleclass welfare.

Of course if Labor hadn't designed the NBN with speed tiers, then my whole argument falls apart. However the fibre fanbois supproted speed tiers and now have to suffer the consequences of that selfishness.

0
2
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: NZ Model

> Much like they plan for 50% to be on 12Mbps to estimate on what revenue but you keep implying that they built it to only deliver 25Mbps

Instead we have a signficantly worse result from an AVC revenue perspective where >80% are on 25Mbps or slower. The point about Labor planning for 50% to be on 12Mbps is that Labor planned that a decreasing number would have truly fast internet (>= 100Mbps) and that over time Australian internet rankings would fall. If you read the 2010 NBNCo Corporate Plan you will find a chart showing exaclty this.

> Looks like you believe fttn deliver 80Mbps to everyone

Please find a quote from me that supports that position.

> Much like how your condfused to why Telstra had to move people down speed teir because fttn could not deliver the speed poeple where willing to pay for.

I'm not confused about that. This number of people is <14%, which I'll discuss later.

> Yes not unlimited plans you where trying to blame

An RSP offerring unlimited plans has to purchase significantly higher CVC for the network to not have congestion. It is very clear that none of the RSPs offering unlimited plans are pricing them at a level to purchase sufficient CVC. Contrast this with Aussie Broadband who don't offer unlimited and by all reports have a congestion free network.

> Lol why should they when under labor they would have been about to get the speed they where willing to pay for.

My position is that this number of people is <14% which when >80% are on 25Mbps or slower means that this miniority is expecting a government service to provdie beyond what most people are receiving. This small minority who have the option of paying for a technology change or moving. Alternatively when Labor announced speed tiers they could have raised their concerns then that 25Mbps was too slow, but sometimes life teaches hard lessons to the selfish.

0
2
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: NZ Model

> It does when fttn can't deliver those aka Telstra having to move people down teirs.

Please stop considering a very small minority (<14% willing to pay for 100Mbps, zero for 1Gbps) with the general community. Every house has good / bad points and people have made choices based on this for a millenium. The NBN is a national project, not middle class welfare.

> But then there cost for plans are a lot cheaper $60 wholesale for 1Gbps ( wow fttp can deliver 1Gbps even though you have claimed other wise). They also don't have a Cvc cost and have unlimited plans available with out the congestion. Wow again right must be magic pudding or something.

Clearly based on this the NBN woes are Labor's fault then because they put in place design and financial model for the NBN. Why did Labor set the wholesale 1Gbps price at more than double the NZ price? The Coalition have made CVC pricing significantly cheaper.

What you haven't provided is the ingredients for the magic pudding that enabled NZ to deliver the same service significantly cheaper. Could it be the $11 billion that Labor agreed to pay Telstra to move customerse off the copper network onto FTTP, whereas in NZ the incumbrant telco was structurally separated?

0
2
mathew42
Bronze badge
Facepalm

FTTN average speed is 70/30Mbps / 76% don't care

A couple of quotes from NBNCo in Consumers expect too much from the internet, says ombudsman:

On Friday NBN Co blamed consumers, saying 76 per cent of Australians "don't know what internet speed they are receiving" and 35 per cent were unaware they have a choice of speed when switching to the NBN."

A spokeswoman confirmed the average speed on fibre-to-the-node lines is currently about 70 Mbps download and 30 Mbps upload. It estimates about 65 per cent of FTTN lines can get between 50 and 100 Mbps during the switch over phase, then increasing by 5 and 10 Mbps.

Remove speed tiers from NBN because of the variability in speeds and the average would be 70Mbps, not that many people would care :-).

0
2
mathew42
Bronze badge
FAIL

Re: NZ Model

> But then there cost for plans are a lot cheaper $60 wholesale for 1Gbps ( wow fttp can deliver 1Gbps even though you have claimed other wise).

I have never claimed that FTTP won't support 1Gbps. What I have pointed out is that Labor planned for less than 1% to have 1Gbps in 2026!

> Lol considering reports that by 2020 1Gbps would be the norm around the world. But it's ok we only need 25Mbps.

Shame that Labor didn't read or understand the charts they included in their NBNCo Corporate Plan. We might have had a different outcome.

> Lol again you have no idea what your talking about. Why does aDSL sync speeds to different place from less than 1Mbps to up to 24Mbps.

Please learn to comprehend the statements you are quoting. I didn't ask for evidence that VDSL speeds vary over the distance of the connection. I asked for evidence that VDSL speeds for [on the same piece of copper] show a wide variation over the course of the day.

> ATM RSP Cvc average is just 1Mbps there is your congestion ATM it's in that same accc report.

Thank you for explaining exactly where the performance issue exists. Inadequate CVC purchase by RSPs to match the plans being sold.

> So a customer PAYing for 100Mbps and Telstra has to move them down to either 50Mbps or worst 25Mbps because the fttn can't deliver over 50Mbps or worst over 25Mbps.

So this would be one of the small shrinking 14% who are willing to pay for 100Mbps? They have the option of requesting a technology change from NBNCo.

0
2

Page:

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017