Opinion: No more Telstra copper complicates ‘fibre-ready' plan

 

Don't make wireless broadband the new RIM.

Telstra's decision to stop deploying copper has substantially weakened a concession made by the Federal Government to the housing developers just a fortnight ago.

iTnews reported then that the Government had introduced a ‘fibre-ready' status option for greenfields estates that effectively handed Communications Minister Stephen Conroy discretion to exempt estates of his choosing from the expense of deploying fibre networks.

"A strong message from our consultations has been that if fibre cannot be immediately installed, there is benefit in having fibre-ready infrastructure installed so that fibre can be more readily and cost-effectively rolled out in the future," Senator Conroy told a gathering at Whittlesea Council in Victoria.

It meant estate developers would need only to deploy "ducting, pits and plinths for splitters" rather than pay an installer to lay the fibre.

But estates granted that exemption can no longer fall back on Telstra to get phone and internet services over copper in the interim in the wake of Telstra's decision to stop deploying it.

Residents will instead have to turn to wireless services - and potentially invest in femto or pico-cell technology that works over small areas to strengthen the signal - until NBN fibre is deployed in the empty pits and pipes in the estate.

"[Wireless] is effectively treated as a variant of the scenario of providing a copper solution and fibre-ready infrastructure with this to be later retrofitted with fibre," the Government said in explanatory notes attached to its greenfields legislation.

Interim wireless

In the absence of copper, it's unclear how favourable fibre-ready estates with interim wireless will now appear to the Government.

There is no doubt that phone services could be provided wirelessly.

Telstra already meets its universal service obligation in estates where a rival had already deployed fibre by offering a 'fixed' phone service that runs on its Next G network. (The obligation does not specify technology.)

But the same could not be said for broadband, which suffers speed degradation in congested wireless cells.

And the Government was wary of this potential outcome in its legislative explanatory notes.

"It is estimated that the per premises cost of [interim wireless] would be less than that of an interim copper solution but it would not be able to support high demand for high-speed broadband services over an extended period," the Government said.

Minimum option

Another reason for concern is that the figures aren't good when it comes to developers doing more than the minimum asked of them from a telecommunications perspective in greenfields estates.

For developers, deploying fibre-to-the-home is about $2500 a lot. Prior to Telstra's announcement, copper was free.

In its explanatory notes, the Government wrote that about 11,000 dwellings had fibre-to-the-home connections as of last December but they were in the minority compared to the 150,000 houses and 60,000 other buildings built each year.

Without free copper, the new minimum for developers is to apply for an exemption from the greenfields fibre mandate rules due to come into effect on July 1, have Telstra dig fibre-ready pits and pipes and leave residents to use wireless until NBN Co comes into the estate.

The question is, how many developers who previously chose copper over fibre and who face the reality it is no longer free will go with the new minimum option?

Answer: as many as are granted an exemption by the Communications Minister.

Granting too many exemptions could condemn another swathe of broadband users to the same fate as those stuck on remote integrated multiplexers or RIM systems. That is, waiting for the NBN before they get broadband.

Telstra's decision to end copper before the NBN is available is, at the least, reason for the Government to clarify the fibre-ready proposal and the extent to which it operates when the only access technology is wireless.

What do you think? Would you buy a new home if the only telecommunication option was a wireless network?


Opinion: No more Telstra copper complicates ‘fibre-ready' plan
"I know, I know...you prefer Westpac, right?"
By Ace
 
 
 
Comments: 9
anonymous
Mar 23, 2010 5:35 PM

This is amusing, considering that up to two years ago Telstra was pushing hard for a FTTN national network so that they could use their last-mile CAN monopoly to choke out any potential competitors.
srhardy
Mar 23, 2010 9:09 PM
User pays, the price of a block of land is so high now (land, god isn't making any more of it!) so whats an extra $2,500? Guess the GOV forgot that they don't actualy DO anything in Cambera, people at T$ do the work. Its one way of giving the GOV a little tickle... lol... If the gov want the NBN built for any amount, shouldn't they be paying for it, not the developer?
ITrant
Mar 24, 2010 9:30 AM
The new telecommunications poor! This is the cost of privatisation. Telstra should be bought back by the government, at a price of their naming, since the company has CEASED to function. Sorry shareholders, Telstra management stuffed up and left you with worthless shares, sue them!

The profits from a competently run telco can then be used to fund the bank-bailout deficit and the NBN, which is a vital service to all Australians, not a public trough for private exploitation.

Telstra was always going to have to build the NBN, anyway. They're the only company big enough and with the skills to do the job. Privatise it now while the shareholders can get some of their money back.
singo79
Mar 24, 2010 12:33 PM
@ITrant +1

I completely agree.

Rather then everyone carrying on about Telstra and their shonky ways, we should all look back and see where the problem started. The Howard Government is totally 100% at fault, had they not sold the controlling share of Telstra we would not be in this situation.

There are those people out there who say that the Government should not be in the business of owning and somewhat running utilities etc, but those people would also like to see us move towards an American style system.

We all know that America is not a model we want to base ourselves on. Healthcare that is unaffordable, corruption, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

Telstra have already proven that, without Government and legislated involvement, we would all being paying a lot more for all services in Australia. There is not enough competition in Australia to justify having a free and open market.

The NBNCo. might as well be registered as Telstra2, as that is exactly what they will be. Installing and selling telecom related services to retailers, who in turn resell it to the consumer. The only difference here is that Telstra sold their service direct, whereas the NBNCo. are planning to operate at arms length, only selling to retailers.

It is my opinion that the NBNCo. will be a huge step forward for all Australians in the long run. After all, since the Rudd Government announced their NBN plan the American Government has come out and announced a very similar plan at an estimated cost of US$343 Billion.

The Rudd Government must be somewhat on the right track, especially if the Americans are following our lead.
Mordd
Mar 24, 2010 7:48 PM
I have to agree, the biggest mistake here was the Howard Government not retaining ownership of all the existing pipes, ducts, etc... that make suburbs ready to be cabled (with copper or fibre), but then Conroy has stuffed up here by allowing himself to end up in a situation of Telstra refusuing to deploy more copper free and now we will end up with wireless being the 'RIM' of the 21st century.
mick09
Mar 25, 2010 12:37 AM
@ITrant "Telstra should be bought back by the government, at a price of their naming," - I take it you mean "a price of the government's naming" - it would be a piece of drollery, were the decision not up to Chairman Rudd (advised by messers Tanner, Swan & Conroy). "O, what tangled webs we weave when first we practise to deceive". NBN mk 1 - $4B. NBN mk 2 - $43B. NBN mk 3 - $343B. And all in an election year!

@singo79 - such a subtle analysis - all bad comes from Howard, all good comes from Rudd, as long as the Americans follow us they are good too!

How can the leader who pleads so eloquently for bi-partisan co-operation be saddled with such blinkered supporters?

Perhaps the solution is to invite Alcatel to take over both Telstra and NBNCo - as long as Conroy's mates get to keep their jobs at the new AlcaNBNtelstaCo, of course.
Ace
Mar 25, 2010 1:02 AM
You want the French running our telephones? Sacrebleu! I searched for 'World's best telco', and found Macquarie Telecom, who have 'The World's Best Customer Care' according to their web site. I like to idea of a Telco that sounds like a bank being in charge of of phones. I mean, if you can't trust a bank, who can you trust?
anonymous
Mar 25, 2010 12:08 PM

@Ace, you don't really want us to answer that, do you?
.
Ace
Mar 25, 2010 1:49 PM
I know, I know...you prefer Westpac, right?
Comments have been disabled for this article.
 
 
 
Top Stories
Telstra shifts BigPond email to Windows Live
All data to be migrated to Microsoft cloud.
 
Windows 8: Under the hood
Part One of iTnews' enterprise guide to Windows 8.
 
iTnews on tour: The Executive Summit Series
Join us in Sydney and Melbourne to meet Australia's tech leaders.
 
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...

Latest VideosSee all videos »

Latest Comments
Polls
Would you be concerned about your business' email data being hosted offshore?

   |   View results
Yes
  89%
 
No
  11%
TOTAL VOTES: 89

Vote