That linked preso was terribly salesy. He did a poor job of actually backing up some of his graphs with data.
He has a point when he talks about NBNCo's CPE device offering. But that's not really a big deal. Most of his griping seems like nitpicking. Te point of the NBN is getting fiber in the ground that no one company owns. Once that is done all of his other complaints can be dealt with. We can argue incessently over what kind of CPE device to deploy, and change it, without altering the fact that NBNCo now has the fiber in the ground.
He also has a point about the number of POIs that NBN will require the wholesalers to interface with. But again, this is missing the forest for the trees.
>Frankly, the less of Labor's NBN that gets built the better.
Simon doesn't make that argument. His argument is to do it differently, which is completely different than not do it. In the Q&A he makes suggestions to do some parts of the NBN differently, but it's clear he is generally in favor of it.
The NBN is about getting non-monopolized fiber in the ground. Once that's done everything else about it can be changed to suit his or your desires.
Yeah, I get where you're coming from. I think by the time Simon gave that particular presentation he'd been saying the same stuff on a regular basis for a good two years, so it started to sound really rehearsed. Have a look at some of his older videos eg. [1] Although, that is, to a major degree, just how Simon sounds when he talks.
I don't think you fully understand the implications of what NBN Co is building.
> Te point of the NBN is getting fiber in the ground that no one company owns.
This is exactly what is not happening. Labor's NBN Co is (was?) building another Telstra-like monopoly. The one company that owns the fibre is NBN Co. which will, like almost every other government asset, be sold at a loss to a private company. And, like Telstra, it will become notorious for dragging its feet when it comes to appropriately pricing the wholesale service.
> He also has a point about the number of POIs that NBN will require the wholesalers to interface with. But again, this is missing the forest for the trees.
While you (I don't mean you personally, I mean 'you' in the general sense of the Australian voter) are focus on 'fibre regardless of costs' then yes, sure, you're correct.
> Simon doesn't make that argument.
You're right, he doesn't. That is my argument. And, like I always said from the very first first announcement of the NBN "well that will take Labor winning the next 6 elections".
> The NBN is about getting non-monopolized fiber in the ground. Once that's done everything else about it can be changed to suit his or your desires.
Change. Yes, just like Telstra. In fact, the scenario with Telstra is better than NBN Co. At least Telstra has been forced to resell ULL (Unbundled Local Loop, ie. vacant copper) to ISPs. NBN Co. is being built from the ground up to not be like that.
WHY!
I'll take Dark fibre to the premises, or no fibre thanks.
The creation of NBN Co. even resulted in the enactment of new legislation that prohibits competing fibre network builds. Hell, NBN Co. is taking TPG to court over TPGs pre-existing fibre network! [2] This is decided not the role NBN Co. could be playing.
I've been trying to follow NBN Co since I first heard about it 2-3 years ago, but it's tough not being in AU. Thanks for giving me more to think about, and some more links to read.
It sounds like the NBN that was planned is not the NBN that you guys are getting, and that sucks.
He has a point when he talks about NBNCo's CPE device offering. But that's not really a big deal. Most of his griping seems like nitpicking. Te point of the NBN is getting fiber in the ground that no one company owns. Once that is done all of his other complaints can be dealt with. We can argue incessently over what kind of CPE device to deploy, and change it, without altering the fact that NBNCo now has the fiber in the ground.
He also has a point about the number of POIs that NBN will require the wholesalers to interface with. But again, this is missing the forest for the trees.
>Frankly, the less of Labor's NBN that gets built the better.
Simon doesn't make that argument. His argument is to do it differently, which is completely different than not do it. In the Q&A he makes suggestions to do some parts of the NBN differently, but it's clear he is generally in favor of it.
The NBN is about getting non-monopolized fiber in the ground. Once that's done everything else about it can be changed to suit his or your desires.