News & Discussion: National Broadband Network

[Wayno]

thanks Vee. In general here's what you'll get:

What network technology will be delivered to your premise?

nbn will deploy a range of technologies and utilise existing fit-for-purpose network infrastructure to deliver the minimum data rates required by the Federal Government’s broadband policy.

The multi-technology principles mean that most households and businesses:
* Already served by the Optus or Telstra Hybrid Fibre Coaxial (HFC) cable networks, will receive fast broadband over an upgraded HFC network
* Where the nbn fibre-to-the-premises (FTTP) network has been deployed or is in advanced stages of being built, will remain part of the FTTP rollout; and
* Where the nbn fixed wireless or satellite networks are earmarked for deployment, will remain part of the Fixed Wireless or Satellite rollout
* All other communities are likely to receive fast broadband over fibre-to-the-node (FTTN) and, in the case of multi-dwelling units such as apartment blocks, fibre-to-the-basement (FTTB).

[monotonehell]

Ridiculous waste of money for a substandard almost-network that is outdated before it's even deployed.

We will have to spend pretty much the same amount again in less than 10 years just to catch up.

Turnbull et al need to be up on fraud charges.

[Waewick]

Ridiculous waste of money for a substandard almost-network that is outdated before it's even deployed.

We will have to spend pretty much the same amount again in less than 10 years just to catch up.

Turnbull et al need to be up on fraud charges.

have you been 10 years into the future to see this?

[monotonehell]

Ridiculous waste of money for a substandard almost-network that is outdated before it's even deployed.

We will have to spend pretty much the same amount again in less than 10 years just to catch up.

Turnbull et al need to be up on fraud charges.

have you been 10 years into the future to see this?

If it is already outdated and insufficient, then you don't need a crystal ball to see that this is true.

[Waewick]

Ridiculous waste of money for a substandard almost-network that is outdated before it's even deployed.

We will have to spend pretty much the same amount again in less than 10 years just to catch up.

Turnbull et al need to be up on fraud charges.

have you been 10 years into the future to see this?

If it is already outdated and insufficient, then you don't need a crystal ball to see that this is true.

its better than what i have. so its not outdated for me.

[rubberman]

its better than what i have. so its not outdated for me.

Well, maybe it will be better than what you have. Maybe.

On the other hand, if the copper between the node and your place is in poor condition, maybe you won't get any improvement.

But have no fear, people who do get fibre optic to their home will get much better than you.

Now, at this point, it gets interesting. If you are right, no big deal. If you are wrong, then houses connected with fibre to the premises will start to attract a premium price compared with others. If that happens, then those people whose homes are worth less will no doubt agitate to have the connection upgraded.

Too late then of course.

If I shift, it won't be somewhere that only connects to a node.

[monotonehell]

its better than what i have. so its not outdated for me.

1. Sample size of one - not statistically significant.
2. A network is only as good as its parts. If you're on a "good enough" connection, but the people with which you are trying to do business are not, then the the whole system fails.

[Waewick]

there is an interesting article in one of the newspapers about the impact, or lacktherof of the NBN today.

now don't get me wrong, I am not anti-technology nor am I anti NBN, like with most things that are done with huge fanfare and little detail, I get skeptical very quickly of the benefits espouted by the pro-team (and equally skeptic of the nay-sayers)

the difficulty here is for me being in the unkown, I don't know enough about the technology to have an opinion that is relevant to the roll out, I can only go on what is written and spoken about in the media as well as people that I have spoken to in the IT industry.

it will be interesting what happens at the end of the roll out, I'm not convinced there will be a material impact to property prices, but you would think there would be something positive for those areas who whole hog rather than the leg ham we'll be getting.

[Wayno]

hey Waewick, i'm also not expecting a material impact to property prices. However politics has really screwed us here.

The full FTTH solution (doing away with copper wires) is an appropriate nation-building solution. The FTTN (existing copper wire for the last km to your home) is a disaster waiting to unfold. sigh. It's a false economy to claim saving costs with the FTTN solution.

We're already waaaay down the world ranking list, and expected to drop further AFTER the NBN rollout is complete (simply because other countries are installing better solutions than us). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... ion_speeds

If you surveyed people BEFORE cars were invented about their transportation needs, they'd have said they need a faster horse.

The pro-team are on the money. A super fast and robust NBN will become a basic need in the not too distant future. We're being financially and economically screwed with the FTTN approach.

[rubberman]

The economic case for increased property prices in ares with FTTP vs FTTN is this:

Just wander round electronics shops for a while. You will see that there is a significant number of people willing to shell out big dollars to get the latest "toys". Many would pay thousands per year in various items from computing to home entertainment.

So, if one of these people is looking to buy a house, they simply won't look at suburbs with FTTN. Why would they spend thousands per year on new gizmos and then be limited in their use at home? If you have bought a Ferrari, you aren't going to buy a house on a dirt road are you?

Now, there may be an argument about how many people like this there are. But, again, check out the shops. There's plenty of this high end merchandise on display, so, unless you believe that merchants are buying in all this stock for no reason, there's got to be a significant number of buyers.

So, let's say the number of buyers is as low as 5%, that's low. Imagine two similar suburbs side by side, one with FTTP, and the other with FTTN. The one with FTTN will have 5% less interest, and the one with FTTP will have 5% more interest. That's a 10% difference in numbers of people due to the type of telecoms.

Let's go further. If a business needs higher speeds upload and download. Where is it going to set up if possible? In a suburb with FTTN? Not likely. Again, even if it were only 5% of businesses, that would work out in the market as higher prices for premises in FTTP areas.

Of course, what I have outlined above is for hard case people who want the new electronic toys, and businesses trying to get an edge. However, it ignores the fact that other people and businesses while not being too fussed about performance, would still go for FTTP vs FTTN if everything else is equal. Who wouldn't? If you can buy house A in an FTTP area for the same price as house B in an FTTN area, why not take the house with the better internet? So, which suburbs are going to have more interest on open days, and in sale numbers and prices?

It's early days yet, but just wait until people get used to the new speeds, and get a chance to visit each other's houses and compare. And kids from one house compare what they can do with what their friends can do.

And let's say I'm wrong. If I buy in an area with FTTP, then I get better performance, but am no worse off real estate wise. So, why not buy in an area with FTTP, on the off chance it takes off.

[Waewick]

hey Waewick, i'm also not expecting a material impact to property prices. However politics has really screwed us here.

The full FTTH solution (doing away with copper wires) is an appropriate nation-building solution. The FTTN (existing copper wire for the last km to your home) is a disaster waiting to unfold. sigh. It's a false economy to claim saving costs with the FTTN solution.

We're already waaaay down the world ranking list, and expected to drop further AFTER the NBN rollout is complete (simply because other countries are installing better solutions than us). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... ion_speeds

If you surveyed people BEFORE cars were invented about their transportation needs, they'd have said they need a faster horse.

The pro-team are on the money. A super fast and robust NBN will become a basic need in the not too distant future. We're being financially and economically screwed with the FTTN approach.

Look no doubt, when I can watch HD TV via internet I will watch HD TV via internet.

It is the same for cars, of course when I can drive a car rather than taking a bus, i'll drive (and then I'll just drive because)

The question is, will the same fate await superfast internet as it does cars - for instance, merely having the connection but not being able to afford the internet plan that takes advantage of it anyway - like being next to a road but can't afford the car (which is real for some people)

Are all future connections FTTN rather than FTTP? given the prestigous suburbs in Adelaide are yet to be hooked up, I'm not sure the speed of the internet of say Gilberton is going to bring it back down to Prospect prices just becuase prospect has FTTP (wasn't that part of the initial roll out?)

[Waewick]

The economic case for increased property prices in ares with FTTP vs FTTN is this:

Just wander round electronics shops for a while. You will see that there is a significant number of people willing to shell out big dollars to get the latest "toys". Many would pay thousands per year in various items from computing to home entertainment.

So, if one of these people is looking to buy a house, they simply won't look at suburbs with FTTN. Why would they spend thousands per year on new gizmos and then be limited in their use at home? If you have bought a Ferrari, you aren't going to buy a house on a dirt road are you?

Now, there may be an argument about how many people like this there are. But, again, check out the shops. There's plenty of this high end merchandise on display, so, unless you believe that merchants are buying in all this stock for no reason, there's got to be a significant number of buyers.

So, let's say the number of buyers is as low as 5%, that's low. Imagine two similar suburbs side by side, one with FTTP, and the other with FTTN. The one with FTTN will have 5% less interest, and the one with FTTP will have 5% more interest. That's a 10% difference in numbers of people due to the type of telecoms.

Let's go further. If a business needs higher speeds upload and download. Where is it going to set up if possible? In a suburb with FTTN? Not likely. Again, even if it were only 5% of businesses, that would work out in the market as higher prices for premises in FTTP areas.

Of course, what I have outlined above is for hard case people who want the new electronic toys, and businesses trying to get an edge. However, it ignores the fact that other people and businesses while not being too fussed about performance, would still go for FTTP vs FTTN if everything else is equal. Who wouldn't? If you can buy house A in an FTTP area for the same price as house B in an FTTN area, why not take the house with the better internet? So, which suburbs are going to have more interest on open days, and in sale numbers and prices?

It's early days yet, but just wait until people get used to the new speeds, and get a chance to visit each other's houses and compare. And kids from one house compare what they can do with what their friends can do.

And let's say I'm wrong. If I buy in an area with FTTP, then I get better performance, but am no worse off real estate wise. So, why not buy in an area with FTTP, on the off chance it takes off.

you seem to know a hell of a lot more about it than I do - so I'm happy to take your word for it

I'm curious though, do we have list of who will be FTTN and who won't.

[PD2/20]

...

I'm curious though, do we have list of who will be FTTN and who won't.

Now it is not just FTTP v FTTN. HFC has been thrown into the mix. Significant parts of Metro Adelaide are now slated to have HFC. See http://www.nbnco.com.au/learn-about-the ... -plan.html. This listing does not include premises already connected and so FTTP does not appear here.

[realstretts]

Ugh, live in Woodforde, in a black spot, nothing till 2018 -_-

[Wayno]

guys, forget the property 'marketability' thing - at least for a few years. I'm loathe to say 'property prices' because there will always be a cross-section of the population who don't really care about the NBN or don't get it.

There definitely won't be a short-term property impact. The impact will come in 10+ years when the next generation of internet novelty ideas firmly become everyday needs. This will happen, just as mobile phones and general internet connectivity are ingrained in everyday life. They are almost human rights!

Think top quality in-home video conferencing (ala Skype) including virtual doctor visits, etc. For example a remote aged care home with a local resident nurse but no resident doctor. A patient & nurse sit in a room in the remote town of "boondidywang" with a HUGE TV screen. The doctor is reclining in his city office 500+km away. The doctor and nurse work to review many patients together, and they all get to sleep in their own beds that night. THIS is the kind of benefit a truly robust NBN will deliver. Not one made of twine, bubblegum and sticky-tape.