[LINK] Why NBN Co Is Wrong About Gigabit Broadband [Was:] Demand 'still not there' for 1Gbps: NBN Co
linkdb at boxall.name
Tue Feb 21 08:20:27 AEDT 2017
On 21/02/2017 12:05 AM, Stephen Loosley wrote:
> "nbn™ to cut the charges ISPs pay for traffic"
What if they didn't charge at all?
In response to:
> Baxter is certainly the archetypal market fundamentalist, but there are some interesting points in the interview. He has great difficulty accepting that telecommunications infrastructure is a natural monopoly. He speaks of "re-monopolising" and asserts that the results of competition are "much better than what we used to have".
> Baxter seems outraged that the commercial sector isn't allowed to cherry-pick the most lucrative markets. He calls it "efficiently competing". I call it siphoning-off revenue, leaving the taxpayer to ensure equitable service to less-profitable markets. I do agree with him though, that selling-off the monopoly to a private operator would be monumentally idiotic.
> One interesting factoid: a "unit" (1 megabit per second for a month) from LA to Sydney costs about 20¢-$1, depending on source. The same within Australia from nbn™: $17.50.
> Baxter characterises the monopoly NBN as a public good, like the road system. With that, I agree. Despite history, he denies that competition in telecommunications infrastructure has failed. With that, I don't agree.
> At the end, Baxter came up with a proposition that I'm going to take where he probably doesn't intend. He said "imagine if every household in Australia could connect to every other household in Australia at this blistering speed. People will find a use for that. It will be used for things that you and I can't fathom. It's mind-expanding."
> I've pointed out before that implementing fibre to every premises on the mainland (plus Tasmania and quite a few other islands) would probably cost less than $1 per week for each premises over the service life of the infrastructure. We could therefore afford to write off the entire cost. I've always assumed that we'd charge for usage, so the investment would pay for itself, but suppose we didn't charge. What if we just kept paying our <$1 per week and allowed everyone to use the infrastructure cost-free? What would that do for Australia?
> Another connection that occurred to me overnight (amazing what the dozing mind comes up with).
> Baxter notes that no commercial lender would provide nbn™ funding to cover a cost blowout. <http://www.afr.com/technology/web/nbn/pbo-raises-concerns-over-governments-risky-nbn-loan-and-88bn-budget-impact-20161214-gtar71> Prospects for the mutilated network are simply too poor. That gels with a comment in an article which was, I think, linked on BIRRR. The upshot of that was that rebuilding the NBN could be an issue for the 2025 election.
> If so, then an investment that should last a century or so would need to be rebuilt after less than a decade. The "superior managers" in our Coalition government seem to be on track to waste the better part of $50 billion.
David Boxall | Dogs look up to us
| And cats look down on us
http://david.boxall.id.au | But pigs treat us as equals
More information about the Link