Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Australia Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: WTF - $43 billion bucks spent to improve porn download rates?!?!
Aussiegunneragain    4/7/2009 3:26:13 AM
So now that we are heading towards a recession with the prospect of a $100 billion dollar deficit over the next 4 years, our Dear Leader has decided to quadtriple the size of the National Broadband Network project to $43 billion bucks. Originally the project was "only" going to cost $9b, with $4.5b coming from the Government, but now the $4.5b will just be an initial payment. How much is the taxpayer going to end up paying for this monsterous white elephant of a project, $20b plus? WTF are people going to use all that bandwidth for anyway ... surely if the demand was really there then business would build it of its own accord? I don't know about you lot but don't want my taxes being flushed down the toilet by a Government making the old mistake of trying to pick winners. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Broadband price rise tipped under $43b plan Posted 2 hours 50 minutes ago Updated 2 hours 17 minutes ago Massive project: analysts are astonished at the upfront cost. (Reuters: Hannibal Hanschke, file photo) Video: PM announces broadband scheme (ABC News) Audio: Market rocked by Government announcement (The World Today) Audio: Press conference: Kevin Rudd unveils broadband plan (ABC News) Audio: Opposition slams Government plan (The World Today) Audio: Federal Government ditches broadband policy (The World Today) Audio: Tanner takes critics to task (The World Today) Audio: Dr Bill Glasson on the Government's national broadband network plan (ABC News) Related Story: Broadband plan 'a massive broken promise' Related Story: Rudd redraws broadband landscape Related Story: Tas gets first 'byte' at new broadband Related Story: Broadband network 'must accommodate rural needs' Related Story: Telstra defies downward market trend Related Story: Phone lines restored in NT Related Story: Disappointment over national broadband plan Related Link: Factbox: Key points about national broadband network Market analysts say broadband prices are likely to rise, after the Government unveiled an amibitious new $43 billion plan to build a national fibre-to-the-home broadband network. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has scrapped the broadband tender process in favour of forming a public/private company to build and operate a network which will cost over four times the amount of the original $9.4b proposal. Mr Rudd says the network will take eight years to build and give 90 per cent of Australian households download speeds 100 times faster than they currently experience. The 10 per cent of homes not covered by fibre-to-the-home will get upgraded wireless access. But analysts are astonished at the upfront cost and say they have concerns about the network's commercial viability. "I've got no idea what's driving the Government to do this," Ivor Ries, an analyst with EL and C Baillieu Stockbroking, says. "They're saying a network that will deliver 100 megabits per second, that would exceed current household consumption by a factor of 100 times. "[That] allows you to download several channels of television at the same time. "[So] what it will do is create a market for people selling downloads to homes - people selling movies for downloads to homes will obviously be big winners from this. "But is it going to provide some sort of magic shot in the arm to productivity? Probably not." Mr Ries says the new network is only financially viable if 80 per cent of Australians choose the access provided by the new cables rather than wireless internet access. "If they get only 60 per cent of the population using it, and people preferring wireless over this new cable, then the monthly access fee they're going to have to charge people will be prohibitive," he warned. "At the moment the average Australian household is spending about $40 a month on accessing the internet. "Whereas this proposal will require the average household to be paying somewhere round about $75-85 a month. "So you're talking there about a $35 to $45 a month increase in the cost of basic access for the average household." BBY Stockbroking senior analyst Mark McDonnell says it is hard to see how the private sector could make a return on such an expensive project, unless broadband prices rise significantly. "It's both audacious and paradoxical," he said. "The paradox being that if you can't find private sector support for a proposition around building a fibre-to-the-node network which might have cost $10 to $15 billion, let's up the ante and make it $43 billion and still ask for private sector support. "How's that going to happen?" But telecommunications analyst Paul Budde says Australians are getting top-level technology without waiting for a commercial company to provide it, even if home use will only be part of the new network. "You have to look at it in a totally different situation," he said. "You talk about the use of the infrastructure; not just for internet. You talk ab
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8   NEXT
SCisback       4/7/2009 3:30:37 AM
Really pains me to see the country being led down the toilet.
 
But not half as bad as seeing the PM literally buy votes from every idiot with a vote.
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       4/7/2009 4:55:50 AM
 
I see it as a good thing, no a great thing. It wont be the fastest system in the world but it will be up there and above all it will be scaleable, i.e. its speed can be increased as required through upgrading the exchanges.
 
It will make copper lines obsolete and will not suffer the band width limitations a wireless network would.
 
This is probably the best thing the government has done since coming to power.
 
 
Quote    Reply

FJV       4/7/2009 2:35:43 PM
 
Quote    Reply

DropBear       4/7/2009 10:29:20 PM
I actually fully support the idea of internet on par with first world nations as opposed to our current snail pace.
 
1mb/sec is an international joke for a nation that keeps banging on about being lucky/clever/smart.
 
Not sure about the commercial arrangements though. Will wait and see.
 
Bring it on. http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emthup.gif" align="absMiddle" border="0" alt="" />
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       4/7/2009 11:24:43 PM

The South Koreans tried to show us how it could be done 4 years ago - we still haven't looked at their model and learnt anything.

If we want to look at how a country can get wired up - then they are the model 
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       4/8/2009 5:48:58 AM
I had cable in the late 90's early 2000's and lost it when I moved dropping back to ADSL. Another move saw me lose even that as the Pair Gain line my newly purchased 4 year old house was on didn't support it. After 18 months of complaining and eventually threatening action through the Ombudsman I managed to get changed to RIM system which supports ADSL but not ADSL 2+, which is ironic as Telstra told me that I would be able to get 2+ before I moved in.
 
Basically the internet I have now is still inferior to the cable broad band we had in the mid to late 90's. It really is too bad that the original cable rollout stopped in 97.
 
And no AG the internet at my house is not for watching porn but for the other halfs home office,my studies and (unfortunately) our teenage daughters social / Emo life http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emcrook.gif" align="absMiddle" border="0" alt="" />
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain       4/9/2009 9:41:57 AM
I suspected that this response might get a bunch of people here saying "wow, 100mbps - way cool, of course the Government should do this thing". The real point is however how much are you all willing to pay for that 100mbps? The estimates in the papers range between $75 and $200 per month, with the most sensible sounding independent estimate that I've heard being $100. Would you be willing to pay $100 per month so that you can see your Auntie in Gympie's face while you are making your Xmas phone call? I wouldn't and I'd bet that a hell of a lot of others wouldn't either.
 
What that means is that there is a big risk that this network won't get a decent return on the taxpayer's and the private investors investment. In the worst case scenario the network might not be commercially viable to run and would require ongoing subsidisation by the taxpayer. That might be ok if you are one of those who is willing to fork out out $100 per month because the subsidies would would be preventing you from paying more, but it won't be to all the rest of us. Basically it would be the case of a few having their hands in the rest of our pockets to support their usage and AFAIC that sucks, as well as being a waste of resources. If enough people want a service to make it commercially viable it will get built and if it isn't then that is just the way it is.
 
The other aspect of the plan that bothers me but isn't getting any attention is that this plan is likely to stuff up technological uptake and competition in Australia in the long run. Once Governments establish a presence in what should be a commercial market they will be tempted to change the rules to suit their own enterprises, to protect their monopoly and ability to tax by stealth through public ownership. That means that over the life of this network if some whiz-bang wireless technology or whatever arises that supersedes its performance it is likely that the Government will take steps to stop it competing. That means that by 2030 we might well be behind the technology curve again and at great expense.
 
That is why I think that this is one of the worst public policy decisions I've ever seen. I don't know why this bunch of idiots that we've got in charge now have to continue to ignore good sense ... it is just pig headed ideology AFAIC.
 
Quote    Reply

buzzard       4/9/2009 11:35:58 AM
Damn, you know in the U.S. stupid government broadband ideas are generally restricted to localities. Some city generally gets the bright idea that they are falling behind in connectivity and that the government has to do something about it. Much money gets spent after plenty of cost overruns, and then once it fails miserably since the ability of government planners to anticipate markets and technology is once again proved abysmal, so they bail on the project, dumping the infrastructure on someone else for a loss. Then, even the recipient often fails because the government acting at it's normal snails pace bought a load of gold plated buggy whips from some politically connected sorts so the tech is second rate.
 
However doing it on a national scale- Wow, that's really a grand scale for stupid. 
 
Quote    Reply

DropBear       4/9/2009 11:45:44 AM
The real point is however how much are you all willing to pay for that 100mbps? The estimates in the papers range between $75 and $200 per month, with the most sensible sounding independent estimate that I've heard being $100.
 
Absolutely. I'm paying Telstra $70/month now for their lousy slow 1mb/sec crap.
 
Bring it on.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain    Buzzard   4/9/2009 12:01:35 PM

Damn, you know in the U.S. stupid government broadband ideas are generally restricted to localities. Some city generally gets the bright idea that they are falling behind in connectivity and that the government has to do something about it. Much money gets spent after plenty of cost overruns, and then once it fails miserably since the ability of government planners to anticipate markets and technology is once again proved abysmal, so they bail on the project, dumping the infrastructure on someone else for a loss. Then, even the recipient often fails because the government acting at it's normal snails pace bought a load of gold plated buggy whips from some politically connected sorts so the tech is second rate.

 However doing it on a national scale- Wow, that's really a grand scale for stupid. 

 

Told ya that our stupid can be bigger than your stupid. You know the "best" thing? They are going to make sure that every hick town gets a broadband connection at everybody elses expense, either by this monstrosity of a network or by their own wireless service. This is in a country with a greater land area than the lower 48 and about 90% of the population in the major cities. You do the math ... or even don't and just guess how many connections per thousand of kilometres of cable and trench that those services are going to have. The answer is somewhat shy of not so many.

 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics