yes, but technically, the wider business community doesn't need too. They already make their squillions with the current taxation framework.
I know this is wildly off-topic now, but I think this is a massive point of differentiation between Australian Tech companies and our Us cousins - the US tech centers have reinvested directly into their industry, sometimes without even expecting a ROI. With a large number of IT giants all in relative close geographical proximity, pumping millions of dollars back into the industry has created a positive investment cycle. Since the resources are available - many startup are considered a success which in turn fuels the same investment cycle; and the loop continues. But its important to be realistic about these things. Business people in Australia are clearly happy with the current two government choices, otherwise they'd be pushing reform much harder than they are now. I can only conclude that they don't push harder, because while they current taxation system may be far from perfect, they seem to be making enough money off it quite easily enough. They dont want, nor desire the risks typically associated with the creation of new and innovative technologies. (Now to bring this back to the original thread) This is my single fundamental reason why the NBN is (in my opinion) such a powerful, important and vital peice of national infrastructure. It's an amazing industry upset that radically changes the "balance of power" in the telecommunications industry in our great nation. Ask vitually any Aussie startup where they're servers are hosted, and I'll bet the vast majority are hosted overseas. This is a prime and perfect example of Australian telecommunication companies and the existing infrastructure acting as a "blocking" agent becasue increasing capacity or investing in radically new infrastructure isn't considered to be economically beneficial. Oh how easy it would be, and what a difference it would make if the government would simply subsidize bandwidth for Australian IT companies (at least for Australian traffic). How many startups would find financing their ideas and innovations if a fibre-optic link + hosting + bandwidth costs were eliminated? This is of course, just one small way the NBN will radically help our little infant industry (as it will for the wider business and general communities), but I think the NBN is the best thing that we could have hoped for - in terms of real-world tangible benefits that *might* actually have a hope in hell of being delivered. Ash On 28 December 2010 18:05, Phil Sim <philip...@gmail.com> wrote: > Also, agree 100 per cent. It's frustrating because it's so bloody obvious. > We only need government schemes because we don't get the investment from > non-government sources and I'm sure 95 per cent of that comes down to there > not being favourable taxation conditions. > > It would do well for the broader emerging business community in Australia > to rally around this single point of policy IMO. > > > On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 9:54 PM, Paul Wallbank <paulwallb...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Geoff, I'd suggest the 'media play' aspects of the NBN are something >> that all parties what to keep out of the debate. >> >> When it dawns on the free to air TV sector what pervasive, fast >> broadband means to their markets they will do everything they can to >> stop it, just as they have done with multicasting and new TV licences. >> >> I suspect that right now they are in denial about how the net is >> changing things, particularly given they've had a good year in >> advertising sales, but when reality bites they will work hard to >> undermine the NBN and all Internet technologies. >> >> On topic, I think what we need in Australia is to treat startup >> businesses – be they tech startups, new dog washing franchises or >> manufacturers – to be treated the same way as passive investments in >> shares and stocks are. >> >> At the moment, the taxation system favours geared speculation, not >> investment, in shares and property. >> >> If people were allowed to write off operating losses in new >> businesses, developing new products and inventing innovative >> technologies just as they are allowed to claim negative gearing >> deductions, then we'd have a far more entrepreneurial society. >> >> More importantly, the Australian economy wouldn't be the one and a >> half trick pony it currently is. >> >> I don't think government schemes really help anyone, they just become >> self perpetuating for the bureaucrats and a small group of connected >> individuals who know how to game the system. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Paul >> >> On Dec 27, 7:34 am, Geoff McQueen - Hiive Systems >> <geoff.mcqu...@hiivesystems.com> wrote: >> > On that political note, I've been fascinated to see how the 'media play' >> aspects of the NBN have been kept out of the limelight. Our Free to Air >> broadcasters are heavily protected, highly profitable and politically >> powerful creatures. >> > >> > In the transition to digital TV a decade ago we were sold an absolute >> pup which enabled the commercial players to retain their oligopoly, and keep >> News Limited out from starting another Free to Air network (we could have >> had another 40 or so channels I recall, all digital, but they elected to go >> with a spectrum hogging HD format to crowd out alternatives, and enshrined a >> ban on "datacasting" to ensure they didn't have to innovate at all; so glad >> I can see Eddy McGuire in HD, aren't you?). >> > >> > The NBN is going to leapfrog all of this. I'm now starting to watch more >> stuff on ABC's iView, SBS catch up and 7Mate's website from here in >> Australia than through the broadcast stream (and I record the broadcast >> stream and already skip ads). >> > >> > Anyway, just interesting that this hasn't gotten much airplay. >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com [mailto: >> silicon-beach-austra...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Matthew Griffiths >> > Sent: Sunday, 26 December 2010 10:11 PM >> > To: Silicon Beach Australia >> > Subject: [SiliconBeach] Re: National Broadband Network Comments.. >> > >> > I'm a huge supporter of disruptive technologies, and conceptually >> > (like James) I see huge advantages from a fibre backbone... >> > >> > However, would I rather see a Maglev line down the East Coast for the >> > same money ? (good question - no real answer) >> > >> > As for the NBN - the only thing fundamentally enabled by super fast >> > broadband to the HOME is fully interactive HD TV - ie. a new Australia >> > wide digital broadcasting network. >> > >> > Could true tele-medicine, tele-communiting, etc. evolve from this - >> > who knows...although I'd probably argue that the bandwidth already >> > currently exists, and that prices don't look like they will massively >> > decrease under the NBN for the enabling technology. >> > >> > Are there opportunities for SB's - of course...just correcting our >> > tardy take up of on-line services that are utility like in the US >> > would be a start... >> > >> > M >> > >> > On Dec 26, 9:33 pm, Phil Sim <philip...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > James, liked your 2 cents :-) >> > >> > > To me, after having had countless debates on this issue with all >> manner of >> > > people, I think the fundamental mistake is to try and turn this into a >> > > business or even technological debate. For how many decades have the >> tech >> > > community screamed out for better broadband? When we finally get a >> > > government, who does something about it because they think its a vote >> > > winner, we complain about what is essentially details. (yes, i realise >> its a >> > > lot of money but in the scheme of things...) >> > >> > > In my view, this debate is best viewed as a political discussion. I am >> sure, >> > > we could get a cheaper version of the NBN that may suffice for a >> period of >> > > time into the future. What then? We have to wait till the issue >> becomes a >> > > vote winner again, which generally means a lag of a decade or so. I >> think >> > > when your dealing with government funding you don't look a gift horse >> in the >> > > mouth. Governments never spend money purely based on what's best for >> the >> > > country - it's always traded off against what will or won't win votes. >> And >> > > if we get 'good enough' broadband, it will cease to be a political >> issue for >> > > how long? And in 5 or 6 years we'll go back to complaining about how >> we lag >> > > against forward thinking nations... >> > >> > > The response to criticism of the afforementioned paper by the Kenny >> mob in >> > > CommsDay is enlightening: "But [the critics of our paper] do argue we >> are >> > > missing the benefits that could flow from what they see as a new model >> that >> > > hasn't been tried before. Perhaps so, and in which case Australia is >> doing >> > > the world a favor. It can test out the theory that >> government-supported >> > > ubiquitous fibre combined with government directions to use the >> network will >> > > create significant economic returns - returns that can't be evaluated >> or >> > > predicted on the basis of what we know about the marginal returns to >> > > increased bandwidth in the past or what people currently suggest a >> > > fiber network will be used for." >> > >> > > And to me, Silicon Beachers, that's where our community come into it. >> And >> > > once the NBN has been built I think there is far greater scope for the >> > > Australian technology building community, to say to the government, >> that all >> > > those programs you cut really need to be brought back and boosted if >> you >> > > want to realise those promised economic gains... >> > >> > > On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 8:58 PM, James Purser <jamesrpur...@gmail.com >> >wrote: >> > >> > > > To be honest I think that paper starts on a flawed premise: >> > >> > > > "A decade ago telcos wasted billions >> > > > of shareholders' money on telecoms infrastructure that was well >> ahead of >> > > > its >> > > > time - governments are now in danger of doing the same with >> taxpayers' >> > > > money." >> > >> > > > We've had this argument thrown up by Malcolm Turbull as well, that >> the >> > > > expenditure of the late 90's in building capacity was a waste of >> money >> > > > because it lacked short term gain potential. Only a decade later we >> are >> > > > hitting the limits of that capacity build (having had very little >> build in >> > > > the intervening years until recently). >> > >> > > > The Just In Time model for physical capacity building doesn't work, >> I don't >> > > > know if everyone here on the list has seen what happens to a data >> rack when >> > > > it grows "organically" but I sure as hell don't want to have our >> telecomms >> > > > networks resemble one. Govts have advantages over business when it >> comes to >> > > > infrastructure building, the ability to look beyond the next >> quarterly >> > > > report. >> > >> > > > With regards to the 12Mb/s minimum, right now the minimum account >> you can >> > > > get is still 256/64. This means that even the slowest account will >> be able >> > > > to access a huge range of new services. 12Mb/s is enough for an SD >> stream, >> > > > voice channel and browsing. Thats media, phone and internet to >> everyone in >> > > > the country. >> > >> > > > In terms of new services, this is a list for tech entrepenuers yes? >> Whether >> > > > we agree with it or not, the NBN is going to be rolling out (and >> there is >> > > > going to be a tipping point where it becomes more expensive for the >> Govt to >> > > > close it down than keep rolling it out). The people who get in on >> the ground >> > > > floor and offer new and innovative services and content are going to >> be the >> > > > ones who win in the end. >> > >> > > > Speaking of content, I'm struggling to understand why the concept of >> the >> > > > NBN being a media distribution network is actually a bad thing. >> People are >> > > > shifting away from the broadcast model to "when I want to consume" >> instead. >> > > > Content producers who can take advantage of that to cut out the >> middle men >> > > > in the broadcast networks are going to gain a huge amount of control >> over >> > > > their product. If the old players don't move fast enough they're >> going to >> > > > find themselves left far behind. >> > >> > > > Anyway that's my 2 cents worth, I'm sure there are people that >> disagree >> > > > with me. But for me, I'm going to run with the idea that the NBN is >> going to >> > > > be built and that it's going to offer a whole new vista of market >> > > > opportunities. >> > >> > > > James >> > >> > > > On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 10:28 AM, Matthew Griffiths < >> > > > matthew.griffi...@mail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > >> Guys, >> > >> > > >> I'm sure we all love the principle of super fast broadband... >> > >> > > >> However, this is the most complete analysis I've seen on the >> economic >> > > >> benefits (or lack thereof) >> > >> > > >> >> http://charleskenny.blogs.com/weblog/2010/11/superfast-is-it-really-w... >> > >> > > >> M >> > >> > > >> On Dec 25, 5:11 am, Andrew Dever <andrew.de...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > >> > I'm glad this discussion has been brought up in this community. >> > >> > > >> > At the time NBN was first mentioned the cost was quoted at ~$39B, >> and >> > > >> > google had ~$30B in cash. >> > >> > > >> > The IIF & IIFF, that help VC's invest in the AU space is ~$192M >> over 4 >> > > >> > years. And they have to match it dollar for dollar and work hard >> to >> > > >> > get it. >> > >> > > >> > Please pull me up if my figures are wrong. >> > >> > > >> > Further, as far as I know there's not been any explicit >> discussion >> > > >> > about investment in education around how to turn 'fast' internet >> into >> > > >> > economic/cultural benefit for AU. >> > >> > > >> > Nor any explicit discussion or investment in making sure we have >> > > >> > infrastructure bringing bandwidth into the country (as far as I >> > > >> knowhttp://www.vocus.com.aulaidthe3rd cable in). >> > >> > > >> > My point is, fast internet anywhere only matters if we a) have >> > > >> > capacity and willingness to invest and b) have the ability to >> teach >> > > >> > old and new how to turn that connection into cultural/economic >> > > >> > benefit, and that is what the debate should be about. >> > >> > > >> > This year Obama met with Eric Schmidt, Steve Jobs and ~20 other >> US >> > > >> > tech CEO's. Julia/the AU govt. should be engaging with Atlassian >> etc. >> > > >> > especially before they spend that much on infrastructure they >> don't >> > > >> > completely understand. >> > >> > > >> -- >> > > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Silicon >> Beach >> > > >> Australia mailing list. >> > >> > > >> Guidelines on discussion: >> > > >> >> http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia/msg/351e183e13... >> > >> > > >> No lurkers! It is expected that you introduce yourself. >> > >> > > >> To post to this group, send email to >> > > >> silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com >> > > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> > > >> silicon-beach-australia+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<silicon-beach-australia%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com><silicon-beach-australi >> a%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com <a%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>> >> > > >> For more options, visit this group at >> > > >>http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia?hl=en?hl=en >> > >> > > > -- >> > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Silicon >> Beach >> > > > Australia mailing list. >> > >> > > > Guidelines on discussion: >> > > > >> http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia/msg/351e183e13... >> > >> > > > No lurkers! It is expected that you introduce yourself. >> > >> > > > To post to this group, send >> > >> > ... >> > >> > read more » >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Silicon Beach >> Australia mailing list. >> >> Guidelines on discussion: >> http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia/msg/351e183e1303508d?hl=en%3Fhl%3Den >> >> No lurkers! It is expected that you introduce yourself. >> >> To post to this group, send email to >> silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> silicon-beach-australia+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<silicon-beach-australia%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia?hl=en?hl=en >> > > > > -- > Phil Sim > Chief Executive Officer, > MediaConnect Australia Pty Ltd > www.mediaconnect.com.au > phi...@mediaconnect.com.au > > Ph: +61 2 9894 6277 > Fax: +61 2 8246 6383 > Mobile: 0413889940 > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Silicon Beach > Australia mailing list. > > Guidelines on discussion: > http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia/msg/351e183e1303508d?hl=en%3Fhl%3Den > > No lurkers! It is expected that you introduce yourself. > > To post to this group, send email to > silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > silicon-beach-australia+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<silicon-beach-australia%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia?hl=en?hl=en > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Silicon Beach Australia mailing list. Guidelines on discussion: http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia/msg/351e183e1303508d?hl=en%3Fhl%3Den No lurkers! It is expected that you introduce yourself. To post to this group, send email to silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to silicon-beach-australia+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia?hl=en?hl=en
