It's still a lie. The whole premise is bogus. The lie is in claiming that this was ever reasonable.
I have Bigpond cable. It is supposed to give me 100Mbps down and 2Mbps up. Does it always give me that? Of course not. It would never make business sense. I share my capacity with others on the cable. Am I affected by the fact that I don't always get the top speed? Not really - in the entire time I've had it I have been unaffected by this. I still get a decent download speed the whole time, and it's never dropped noticeably for me. When I work from home, others are at work. Why would the ISP need to purchase a continuous stream of data to support my use when there are others that aren't using theirs? So when Malcolm Turnbull says it's going to cost $20,000 to connect up every household, I call BS, because, quite simply, it was never suggested before he said it, it was never practical, it was a statement designed to deceive the public and it is complete and utter BS. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Paul Evrat Sent: Wednesday, 13 November 2013 10:55 AM To: 'ozDotNet' Subject: RE: NBN Petition Turnbull's point was - 'don't anyone think that the Labor NBN was going to give everyone 100% always available unfettered 1 Gbps' .. There's no lie in that .. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com <mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com> [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Tony Wright Sent: Wednesday, 13 November 2013 8:23 AM To: David Connors Cc: ozDotNet Subject: RE: NBN Petition Actually it was you trying to propagate Malcolm Turnbulls lie that a 1Gbps was going to cost every household $20,000. But keep going trying to reflect from this lie, by all means. Sent from my Windows Phone _____ From: David Connors Sent: 13/11/2013 9:04 AM To: Tony Wright Cc: ozDotNet Subject: Re: NBN Petition No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> Version: 2014.0.4158 / Virus Database: 3614/6773 - Release Date: 10/22/13 On 12 November 2013 20:36, Tony Wright <tonyw...@gmail.com <mailto:tonyw...@gmail.com> > wrote: Its quite simple really. The whole premise of CVC being delivered to 93% of the population is bogus and deceptive. This is the statement that was suggested. The statement was factually correct but based on a complete lie. Now you're not even making any sense at all. CVC is measured and charged at the POI, not the customer connection. It applies to all traffic as it egresses the NBN and enters the RSP. It is utterly bizarre to advocate for it. Anyway, as I said, both board members of NBN Co and Turnbull are on the record as arguing either against CVC or for a massive reduction. We can only hope they follow through. Go google nbn cvc ===== "Hackett has argued that the CVC costs are far too high, creating an artifical scarcity in bandwidth that doesn't exist." ===== "Hackett has consistently criticised NBN Co's CVC pricing over the past six months, arguing that it was "insane" and warning that no small ISPs would survive their walk through the "valley of death" transition from the current copper network to the fibre future envisioned by the Federal Government, if they wanted to maintain their spots as national providers." ===== "iiNet has ongoing concerns over the economics of NBN Co's current CVC [Connectivity Virtual Circuit] charges. At the moment, the NBN's fee structure treats the abundant capacity on the NBN as if a scarcity existed. When access to abundance is irrationally constrained by NBN Co, bogus scarcity is created - like an artificially enforced famine." ===== "NBN pricing in terms of access may be manageable if the CVC charge is brought into the world of the rational. iiNet continues to be very concerned about input costs from NBN Co which are disconnected from real-world costs." ===== "Mr Malone said it was "incomprehensible" that international capacity costs were much cheaper than domestic transmission, which he described as a "chokepoint". "The cost of domestic transit is completely drowning out the cost of international capacity," he said." ===== "After four years, it is fairly obvious that the previous NBN policy is an absolute failure: both in terms of failure to execute timely construction of the network and the inability to create a pricing framework, as evidenced by excessive megabit transmission (CVC) charges, which would actually encourage optimal use of the network and spur all those economic benefits currently touted for FTTH. - See more at: http://www.commsday.com/commsday-australasia/lynch-comment-regulators-yet-to -get-message-about-red-tape#sthash.peJmBqQb.dpuf" ===== "Telstra says the current price of the CVC of $20 per megabit per second assumes an average monthly usage of 30 gigabytes for each user, but this is "already insufficient to cater for the requirements of end-users on high-speed broadband networks and, in the near term, this will create excessive CVC costs per end-user". - See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/in-depth/nbn-charges-could-quadrupl e-telco/story-e6frgaif-1226689784957#sthash.7jFSW3oj.dpuf" Telstra estimates CVC costs could quadruple by 2016. ===== "There is a material risk in the near term that RSPs will be forced to either significantly increase end-user service prices or reduce the quality in response to demand growth," its submission says. "When coupled with the lack of ongoing regulatory recourse, there is significant risk and uncertainty to RSPs that is likely to impact their investment decisions for NBN-based services." Other telcos have backed the warning. - See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/in-depth/nbn-charges-could-quadrupl e-telco/story-e6frgaif-1226689784957#sthash.7jFSW3oj.dpuf ===== "Speaking at the Communications and Policy Research Forum 2011, Market Clarity's Shara Evans suggested the fixed $20 per megabit per second CVC fee should be reviewed - particularly as it had an impact on whether it was economical for RPS to service regional Australia." David.
