TPG Has broadband for $9.99 per month over the phone charges for 20GB. The NBN cannot compete with this.

That the NBN is "only recovering its costs" does not mean that it is not gouging the retailers. If it had to compete, it would be forced to make a loss, if it has the license to recover its costs, and not competition, it has no incentive to reduce its costs, and happily passes them on to the customer.

"More bs. You don't know that either. If the pricing ends up being the same as Telstra is charging Internode for ADSL then in fact you are wrong. Right now, what Internode is paying the NBN for fibre access is _cheaper_ that what Telstra is charging Internode for copper access" Wrong.

Yes I do know it. Why else demolish the existing network, pay telstra and optus not to compete via wireless, and put in legislation to prevent others from building competing networks.

The reason government monopolies are broken up is precisely because there no competition and no incentive to reduce costs or innovate. The NBN is already corporate dinosaur, and cannot compete without protection from the real world.

The real test would be if the ALP removed the competition and the NBN could compete. Otherwise the claim that the NBN is value for money is Bullsh1t.

SM "The real test would be if the ALP removed the competition and the NBN could compete. Otherwise the claim that the NBN is value for money is Bullsh1t."

ALP Remove competition?

I think you need to check your statement

I want the "competition" to be free to compete on a level playing field.... no NBN monopoly -

and then we will see what a fraud this ALP shrine to the great God "Nation Building" is

I still think there would be competetive value in a wireless/cable hybrid

of course, that some farmer in the back of Bourke cannot count his cattle via internet video might be a problem but if he really wants to do that, he is free to pay the economic price for it....

I dont see why ordinary city based citizens should subsidize his technological fiobles

@Shadow Minister: TPG Has broadband for $9.99 per month over the phone charges for 20GB. The NBN cannot compete with this.

We are clutching at straws aren't we? It isn't $9.99. It's $29.99 with land line rental. Oddly enough, I can't see too many people being worried by loosing it. They can get cheaper plans with mobile wireless. The 20Gb isn't real, as I am sure you have figured out.

@Shadow Minister: The reason government monopolies are broken up is precisely because there no competition and no incentive to reduce costs or innovate.

Absolutely. Which is why it is a pity when the Liberals sold Telstra they didn't take the opportunity to break it up. Because then they would have achieved something. But no, they got greedy over the sale price, and turned a public monopoly into something far worse - a privately owned one.

To be fair breaking up a land line telecommunications monopoly is damned near impossible because that particular market tends to naturally form monopolies. Nonetheless your summation of the private monopoly that was created is spot on - it didn't reduce costs or innovate.

And so now that mistake is being rectified. The private monopoly is now being turned back into a public one. Oddly enough to do they very thing you say a government owed monopoly won't do - innovate. It's amazing how you manage to get it arse about.

@Shadow Minister: The real test would be if the ALP removed the competition and the NBN could compete.

Pity the Liberals failed at that same test when they had their stab at reorganising the industry.

@Shadow Minister: pay telstra and optus not to compete via wireless

Maybe they asked for that, but both you and I know it's an impossible ask. There are loopholes big enough to drive a truckload of tethered smartphones through. The payment was for fixed internet. There will be competition from wireless - as you have pointed out over, and over, and over again.

Telstra was a state funded monopoly, and should have been broken up.

The NBN is simply repeating the mistake of decades ago by building Telstra 2

A government owned monopoly is no way better than a privately owned one. With the break up of Telstra, and the different technologies available, there is a chance for the first time of delivering communications by different competitors on different platforms. Juliar simply wants one platform and to ban all competitors.

@Shadow Minister: Telstra was a state funded monopoly, and should have been broken up.

Breaking up a natural monopoly doesn't work Shadow. The US tried it when they broke up the AT&T. When they ended up with is a whole pile of smaller regional monopolies. The net effect was to introduce a little at the edges of the networks where the baby bells touch.

Sp what they ended up with was the phone company, and the cable company. These private companies don't allow others to access their network. Several companies are tried to rollout fixed wireless, but the capital costs are just too great. This comment is typical: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4574/clearwire-makes-lte-advanced-plans-official#cid196786 The end result is in the US typically you have two land line ISP's you can choose from. Compare that to our situation. We accept there will be a natural land line monopoly, but we regulate it heavily forcing it to offer the same price to all retailers.

As you know Shadow you have a huge choice of ISP's all fighting tooth and nail to get your business. Which do you think serves us best?

I know what I prefer, and the bottom line that is what both sides are delivering. Neither are proposing to break the monopoly on the land lines. The Liberals put the monopoly in private hands, then heavily regulated it - to the point of setting prices a private company could change for the goods they were selling. You talk about private companies innovating, but what incentive is there to invest money under those conditions?

It is reasonable to question whether the upgrading the telecom land line infrastructure to fibre is necessary. But if you are going to do it, I don't see any other way of doing it than the NBN. Expecting or asking Telstra to upgrade the copper network under the current circumstances is just kidding yourself, or asking to be ripped off. Being charged a rip off price is what happened when they did ask.

rstuart, that link doesn't say anything about "fixed wireless" being too expensive. It does, however, make mention of the use of TDD, which you may recall I mentioned way back at the start of this thread.

The only mention of finances is in the comments and seems to be from a disgruntled customer. I'm sure Telstra and/or Optus could tell him all about those...

You might also like this piece from the Fairafx press

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/treasury-had-early-concerns-about-nbn-papers-show-20110812-1iqwf.html

"Previously secret documents, made public yesterday, also reveal Treasury told the government it would have to consider shielding the $36 billion network from private-sector rivals to help make it viable."

Who'd have thunk it? Well, actually, everybody apart from you and Conroy, apparently. Oh yeah, Quigley quite likes his gig too...