[LINK] Google US fibre deployment would cost $140bn

[tomk]

On 9/12/2012 8:07 a.m., Rachel Polanskis wrote:
> http://news.slashdot.org/story/12/12/08/1810244/nationwide-google-fiber-deployment-would-cost-140-billion
>
> That sort of works out the same cost for Australia , too.  I would say our NBN is going to be great value for money...
>
>
> rachel

That is a little bit like saying, the cost of firewood in California is 
the standard for the pricing of Apache smoke signaling technology which 
compares favourably with the cost of the NBN in Australia. (Mainly 
because so few people can speak Apache that only a very few will be able 
to interpret the puffs of hot air - err, sorry smoke....)

I have to ask Rachel, did you actually read all of the article ?

To me it was an article about a private company offering Broadband on a 
roll-out basis that it could afford, to those that wanted it...
Our NBN is about a Government building national (much needed) 
infrastructure.... and the two shouldn't and can not be fiscally 
compared. Because:

US = 100  million homes
AU = 8 million homes

US Population Density per Km2 = official = 33.82 unofficial = 36.87
AU Population Density per Km2 = official = 2.7 unofficial = 3.1

But you are almost right, the cost difference is negligible...

AU transiting Cost per Mb $ 0.000000000000007591*   **
US transiting Cost per Mb $ 0.000000000000000002 ***

*AU cost based on 100 Mb per second on a fibre cost of 4250 per home, 
assumes 71% penetration of every home with NBN Fibre with an 81% 
population take-up . (Exceptions: Wireless ignored as it isnt 100 Mbps)  
- Australian costs based on removing competitive technologies leaving 
customers no choice.
** Excludes cost of Trans Tasman, Trans Timor, Trans Indian and Trans 
Pacific links to ensure transit price parity.
***US Costs based on 1 Gb per second on a fibre cost of 1400 per home; 
assumes 100% penetration of every home with Google Fibre with a 81% 
population take-up. (Exceptions: Approximately 7 million homes ignored 
as wireless only) - Us costs based on leaving competitive technologies 
in the Ground offering consumers customer choice.

The above not-withstanding, We should all be proud of our Government for 
instituting the NBN. An excellent idea. Now if they could just leave the 
HFC, Telstra Broadband cable and the ISP's alone, as well returning all 
that spectrum that they purchased for the bush so that ISP's [in 
communities] are able to use it to be able to compete with the 
carriers... then I would say that for the first time in Australia's 
recent communication history we had smart leadership.

The article about Google was about providing a commercially viable, 
better and cheaper alternative.
Nowhere does it say that Google will get the US Federal Government to 
remove all the copper to ensure that their investment will pay off.
Nowhere does it say that Google will ask the Federal Government in the 
US for permission to install a technology that will fail to deliver 
999/111 emergency calls in the event of a long term grid power failure 
(e.g. three day bush fire).
However, it [the article] also fails to report that the United States 
F.C.C. is releasing chunks of bandwidth into the ISM domain to encourage 
competition and innovation in the United States communication arena. 
Unfortunately in Australia, our politicians see spectrum as a financial 
dividend and not a digital dividend, which is a shame as we all seem to 
be moving away from tethered connections and towards wireless.
Or is that why the NBN is buying up all the usable spectrum from the 
various carriers ?
It would appear that unfortunately nearly 30% of the  NBN money is being 
spent on preventing future competition and not providing a better, 
cheaper user alternative.
At the moment, with capex - [less] amortization but including 
penetration and take-up the cost per home is an [TK estimated] aggregate 
$305,090.
Depending on how long the NBN is allowed to continue it's build out for, 
will give us the final value per household. (As this includes large 
segments of backbone and exchange fabric it is an unrealistic and unfair 
comparison of the cost per unit at this time.) Therefore Rachel, in 
conclusion, I am left with no viable alternative, but to agree with you.
For some employed Australians whom don't like using their mobile phones 
and whom are on million dollar per year salary packages, it is great 
value for money.  Possibly the NBN could be enhanced by allowing WISP's 
to build the edge infrastructure that the Government appear unwilling or 
unable to do so, based on community interests ands subsequently 
introducing a level of competitive offering [designed to invigorate the 
economy,] that appears to be missing from the current business plan of 
the Government. Mayhap, the NBN could become a nationally owned 
back-haul infrastructure and pay for itself by connecting all the 
communities.
I believe that is in essence the nub of the Google business plan that 
you were favourably inclined towards above.. Community by Community....
The original 2009 communications environment has altered and expanded. 
For the NBN to survive and become relevant, it needs to upgrade the 
napkin corner to maybe totally rewrite it's stated ambitions.
Companies like AAPT and Optus are struggling to survive in this 
environment. Our Government is ignoring their plight and instead 
tightening the screws on spectrum. That way lies rocks, big bloody sharp 
ones, just beneath the waves and it allows foreign Governments to build 
competing wireless infrastructure in our country that will in effect put 
the tax-payer funded option out of business.
We should be able to out build those commercial efforts and not leave it 
to foreign Governments to deliver superior technical solutions. Didn't 
we invent Wifi ? Arnt we an educated innovative bunch ?
Then why are we still believing in a business model that has a 2009 date 
stamp on it ?
A brief glance at the leaders of ITC commerce, Apple and Microsoft show 
us that the hardware and software models are updated yearly with the 
business and marketing plans following suit.
NBN success include the KA band Satellites; The backbone deals with 
Nextgen and hiring some of the best minds in Australia.
NBN failures include : Too many POI's; spectrum grab; shutting down 
competition; lack of free service oiptions for the 27% of Australians 
that will not be able to afford the NBN; Brain drain at the competition.

When the NBN started it was to be a welcome boon to our economy and our 
future.
I wonder if anyone can say that about the NBN today ?
I do know that there is no way that anyone can compare the NBN roll-out 
to the Google rollout, sorry Rachel.


TomK