"Recounting the process by which Telstra's non-compliant FttN proposal
was rejected in December 2008, Samuel said that careful consideration of
the three compliant bids had confirmed that FttN — when paired with the
estimated AU$20 billion cost of accessing copper from an unseparated
Telstra — simply wasn't economically viable"
http://www.zdnet.com/fttn-hfc-are-dead-end-nbn-alternatives-samuel-7000005901/
Comment:
So, separate Telstra.
"Mooted wholesale pricing for the FttN network was far higher than that
currently being proposed by NBN Co over its fibre-to-the-premises (FttP)
network".
Comment:
Pricing? The issue is costs not pricing. Samuel is ignoring the capital
cost of the FTTP rollout.
"Samuel did allow that the complexity of running fibre into multiple
dwelling units (MDUs) might require the use of local fixed-wireless
services as an alternative to fibre in some cases"
Comment:
Completely silly using fixed wireless in the highest density housing.
Leave it to private enterprise to sort out.
"Samuel is equally sceptical about the long-term relevance of Telstra
and Optus' hybrid fibre-coaxial (HFC) networks, upon which Turnbull's
policy will depend.
'I think it is highly unlikely to be a longer-term competitive
infrastructure to the NBN', he explained. 'What has happened with HFC is
that more and more data is being pushed down, and at this point in time,
it's suffering contention issues'".
Comment:
Complete & utter rubbish. He is ignoring the fact that it can be
upgraded to 50Mbps+. Where is the data upon which this 'skepticism' is
based?
NBNCo has connected a paltry 6,400 premises. Why worry about HFC when it
will be the last to be replaced?
This report adds no information - it simply restates Conroy's ideology.
The original aim was to provide reasonable bandwidth to rural users. The
government should leave the cities o private enterprise and *return* to
the original goal.