Fibre - where it's at in Oz

Subscribe To RSSRSS

Posted Sun 26 July 2009 @ 9:11 a.m. by Ernie Newman

Here's an interesting article from The Australian yesterday. It sums up the high level issues around that country's National Broadband Network. I don't agree with all the assumptions, but as a summary in simple terms it hits the mark.

The comments about Telstra's capitulation to the government's leadership remind me of my 2007 presentation to the ATUG conference in Sydney when I set out a list of lessons from New Zealand - the first being "If an incumbent telco takes on a government head  on, the government, eventually, will win."

QED.

I'm tired of the doomsayers' calls for rigorous cost benefit analysis. Where's the vision? I'm also tired of the claim that much of the increase in demand will be satisfied by mobile - experience shows that the opportunity is far bigger than anything mobile can facilitate; both mobile and fixed are needed. 

Dampening expectations is not going to work. The public, parents especially, know about the expolsion in video usage driven by Youtube. They appreciate the potential this kind of technology has in education, health, security and community services. 

So the debate rages on. But the lucky news for the Lucky Country is that its incumbent telco now seems reconciled to working inside the government tent. That's a really useful start.

Categories: Fixed line carriers | Innovation | TUANZ policy | Vendors | Wireless carriers

ADD YOUR COMMENTS

     

1 comment

  • Neil says:

    Interesting reading that article.

    The article says it will cost Aus$43 Billion to do the build out of FTTH in Aus.

    Translate that to kiwi (= $52.4 Billion) and then scale it back to the NZ population. (4.1M / 21M or approx 19.87% of the $52.4 Billion)

    I get a figure of approximately NZ$10.4 Billion for New Zealand to build FTTH.

    And that does not give the 100 Mbps each way that has been touted by the industry and the government. Closer to 1.6 Mbps.

    It also says that the monthly charges will need to be Aus$100 per month for this lesser service to have a reasonable return. Aus$200 per month for 100 Mbps.

    The NZ government says it will get away with putting in $1.5 Billion with a total cost of about $6.0 Billion for NZ.

    My questions:
    1) How is this government going to do FTTH for $4.4 Billion less that an Ausie equivalent? (ie 42% cheaper)

    2) What does John Key/Steven Joyce know that will allow them to significantly reduce the cost over what the Ausies have estimated?

    3) Knowing their secrets, are John Key and Steven Joyce setting themselves up with jobs with the Aussie Government based on their ability to save the Aussies over 40% of their Aus$43 Billion FTTH development costs? ie Aus$17 Billion. :-)

    4) Will either of them resign over their previous very confident statements if the FTTH cost estimates are significantly (ie 15%) over the $6 Billion they have stated? (Yeah Right. . . . )

    Added: 29 July 2009, 4:46 p.m. Flag as Spam  |  Flag as Offensive
  • Comments are now closed