If anyone is still following this, here are Graeme Samuel's (chairman of the ACCC) thoughts on Fibre To The Node (FTTN) versus Fibre To The Premises (FTTP, what we will get with the NBN):

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/16/samuel_on_fttn/

Conroy thoughts on the matter:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/04/11/overbuild_threat_drove_nbn/

Both say roughly the same thing. FTTN would have worked technically. But financially it would have meant the government paying the incumbent monopoly Telstra $15B..$25B to build it, and getting nothing back in return.

It's just repeating what was said earlier I guess, but it is nice the guess at what they were thinking confirmed.

Interestingly, if Telstra hadn't been privatised by the Lib's the FTTN node would have been the cheaper option for the tax payer, and presumably Shadow would be happier. It's odd how things turn out.

Dear Rstuart,

So if the problem is only financial and not technical, then can't money solve it all?

Those promoting FTTN always stated that if a household wished to have a fiber-optic connection, they could still pay for having a fiber-optic cable connected from the node to their premises.

Then what about the reverse - can't the same be done with the NBN? what possibly prevents households that wish to retain their copper from paying NBNCO for a new copper connection (assuming that for political reasons NBNCO doesn't want to use Telstra's existing cables)? Wouldn't it even be technically trivial for NBNCO to provide ADSL on that same copper line (for a fee of course)?

In the case of the lady whom Csteele described, who lives 3km away with no electricity, I believe that her best solution would be to have her NTU "hosted" in the exchange/node (and her existing 3km wire connected to the NTU inside the exchange).

I would be more than happy to pay for such a service.

@Yuyutsu: Then what about the reverse - can't the same be done with the NBN?

Technically, yes.

But technically it would be possible for you to drive a horse and cart down the freeway, and have the rest of us could just queue up behind you.

Realistically, I don't like your chances, regardless of how much you are prepared to pay for the privilege.

Dear Rstuart,

"But technically it would be possible for you to drive a horse and cart down the freeway, and have the rest of us could just queue up behind you."

Can you please explain why this is similar? How could this paid service, a copper connection from my nearest node, possibly slow down anyone else?

As far as other clients are concerned, I would still be using a standard NBN connection, it's only that my NTU will be located at the exchange instead of on my roof. Whatever other equipment is connected to my NTU's sockets should not affect anybody else.

BTW, as for that lady who lives 3km away, I suppose that if the government refuses, then one of her nearest neighbours could also provide her with a similar service using their spare phone socket and their own power-supply to charge the battery.

@@Yuyutsu: Can you please explain why this is similar?

Quite apart from anything else, I don't see the point of having an exchange any more - or at least not so many of them. What do you expect them to do - keep an expensive building around just for you?

@Yuyutsu: How could this paid service, a copper connection from my nearest node, possibly slow down anyone else?

Hey look - it ain't me you have to convince. It is Telstra or the NBN or whoever. Ask them the question. I am just making guesses and god knows I have been wrong many times before.

@Yuyutsu: BTW, as for that lady who lives 3km away, I suppose that if the government refuses, then one of her nearest neighbours could also provide her with a similar service using their spare phone socket and their own power-supply to charge the battery.

Indeed. Or she could get a mobile phone and charge it using a solar charger. As could you for that matter. As others have pointed out the traditional fixed line phone appears to be going the way of the dodo.

I can't resist adding new bits of information as I find them. Yesterday Malcolm Turnbull was doing his appointed job, producing negative articles about the NBN:

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/NBN-broadband-Conroy-South-Korea-fibre-bandwidth-i-pd20110616-HUS7C

The gist of the article was that 100Mbit/sec subscriptions dropped by 10% last year in Korea. The relevance is Malcolm's currently touted alternative is Fibre To The Node can only do up to 50Mbit/sec or so.

It appears Malcolm made a mistake. Who knows, it might even be an honest one rather than an Abbott'esk attempt to spin pure crap. I sure hope so, as I have some time for Malcolm. Yes, Korea's largest carrier is shedding 100Mbit/sec connections, however unusually Korea's largest carrier isn't the largest fibre carrier. In fact there are two carriers that sell more of it, and they are growing. In a country with a lot of wireless the number of 100Mbit/sec Fibre connections grow by 14% last year. That's one hell of a growth rate.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/16/turnbull_nbn_calculations/

@Yuyutsu: Can you please explain why this is similar?
@rstuart: I don't see the point of having an exchange any more - or at least not so many of them.

Perhaps I should be clearer. Australia has around 1200 telephone exchanges currently. Telephone exchanges are were all the wires from the local houses come together so calls can be routed between them, or over trunk lines.

The NBN equivalent to an exchange is called a Point Of Interconnect, or POI. Thus the NBN's POI's are where the fibre from surrounding premises end up so the service providers (Telstra, Optus, iiNet, Foxtel ...) can connect to them.

The point is there are only going to be 120 POI's, and once they are up and running I don't think the current exchanges will be needed.

In other words Yuyutsu, there is at best a 9 in 10 chance the Telephone Exchange your copper wire runs to will vanish. At worst the NBN won't use the Telephone Exchanges at all. And unless you are a very rich man indeed, you are unlikely to be able to afford whatever it costs to prevent that from happening.