NBN3 Wireless plan needs 4G spectrum fast-track

NBN3 Wireless plan needs 4G spectrum fast-track Sep 1, 2010 12:58 PM

A wireless National Broadband Network proposal aired late yesterday [pdf] called for the expedited release of 4G spectrum by regulators as well as access to Telstra backhaul and mobile towers to cut out further costs.

formatting link

A coalition of dark fibre owners and ISP chiefs from Pipe Networks, BigAir, Vocus, AAPT and others issued the manifesto under the guise of the Alliance for Affordable Broadband.

The Alliance sought to take advantage of the uncertain future of the NBN in its current form and proposed changes it claimed could cut the network cost to as low as $3 billion.

==============

Quoting from the PDF proposal:

formatting link

In short, we believe that a mix of technologies and a market based approach will deliver the best outcome. We believe that an alternative national broadband network, let?s call it NBNv3, could look something like this:

1) 4G national wholesale network coverage, to 98% of Australians, at up to 100mbps; 2) Fibre or equivalent high speed broadband for backhaul, school, hospitals, and most businesses, at speeds up to 1Gbps;

Cheers Don...

==============

--
Don McKenzie

Site Map:            http://www.dontronics.com/sitemap
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Don McKenzie
Loading thread data ...

called for the expedited release of 4G

owers to cut out further costs.

Access to Telstra Infrastructure? One reason it's good is and not underinvessted in is that its not overloaded by cheap plans

Reply to
eunometic

Exactly, why should taxpayers subsidise movie downloads?

downloads

living to another

and work etc.

So don't share it, dongles are cheap now, and most mobile phones are 3G capable these days.

And the taxpayers should subsidise all that, WHY exactly?

MrT.

Reply to
Mr.T

And spending another $43Billion will reduce the cost, HOW exactly?

MrT.

Reply to
Mr.T

Work out who it is that will be using these services. And the answer is

- (Tada) Taxpayers!

Reply to
keithr

If you use Wireless in rural areas as suggested....

They you are going to have a school either having one wireless connection shared across all PC's or all PC's with their own wireless. The cost of all the Wireless stations would be more than a Fibre link or the speed of each PC will be that of a Dial-up Modem. Both of these is Looney tunes. Unless each of these schools only have ONE PC, and that is also Nuts.

Reply to
son of a bitch

strawman

The cost of all the Wireless stations would be more

it;s your suggestion thats nuts school normally are close to facilites hence will have coper and or fibre presented

--
X-No-Archive: Yes
Reply to
atec77

Well, it would certainly be cheaper than they are forced to pay now for decent broadband, however, I am assured that there are cheaper ways than that. Bottom line is that the backhaul should be in public ownership as an equity service and to provide a "level playing field" for competitive delivery of services.

Reply to
terryc

So you are suggesting that NBN fees would be a standard monthly connection fee, aka sewerage/electricty/water service access fee, plus another fee charged by the NBN to the ISP for data carried, which the ISP allows for in their data plans?

>
Reply to
terryc

keithr wrote

really suck.

capable these days.

(Tada) Taxpayers!

Doesnt mean that the taxpayers should be spending anything like $50B extra.

Reply to
Rod Speed

No one is suggesting that for schools.

link or the speed of each PC will be that

So is spending $50B for schools.

Makes a hell of a lot more sense to run a fibre connection to the school from the nearest exchange that already has fibre.

Even tiny little one teacher schools, and there are f*ck all of those now, it makes absolutely no sense be spending anything like $50B on schools.

The tiny little schools should have a decent satellite feed.

Reply to
Rod Speed

Nope, he is saying you lied.

Reply to
Rod Speed

(Tada) Taxpayers!

We seem to have some price creep here up from $43B to $50B, anyway isn't the theory that the taxpayer will only pick up half the bill?

Reply to
keithr

keithr wrote

(Tada) Taxpayers!

Its always been a suspiciously precise number, particularly when its some of the most important figures were never know when it was specified, like how much Telstra would be paid, whether the entire copper pair system would be scrapped so consumers wont have any choice on whether they use the NBN if they want a fixed line service, what price end users will be charged etc. And EVERY SINGLE ONE of those govt of clowns major projects has cost a lot more than was originally claimed, most obviously with the home insulation scheme, the schools building program, the green loans and green power schemes.

Where the hell is the other half coming from ?

Reply to
Rod Speed

is - (Tada) Taxpayers!

xtra.

ll?

In the end, it ALL comes from the taxpayer, or from higher broadband prices which end up in a small way contributing to higher wages and prices which we all get stiffed with one way or another.

Short of them doing something like physically seizing and nationalising Telstra or anyone else with a network with no compensation to the shareholders and using their network it isnt going to come from anywhere else.

Reply to
kreed

kreed wrote

Nope, quite a bit of it comes from those who pay no federal income tax.

You aint established that there will necessarily be higher broadband prices, particularly if the NBN has to compete with other forms of broadband.

Thats just plain wrong, its a tiny part of the cost of what business does, so wont produce higher wages and prices.

Those whose entire income is welfare dont pay for it.

They dont have to do that if they can get Telstra to agree to flog them the copper pair network.

Not even possible legally.

What I said in a lot more words.

Reply to
Rod Speed

When I lived in Newcastle NBN3 was a tv station, am I missing something here?????

Reply to
SG1

NO, the answer is only SOME taxpayers. In any case if exactly the same people were paying, AND they actually wanted to pay, then private industry would get on with the job WITHOUT any need for government to be involved. Telecommunications were privatised a while ago you do realise???? The whole NBN is about providing the same cross subsidies that were considered wrong when Telstra was 100% government owned. They seem FAR more wrong when left to private enterprise IMO.

MrT.

Reply to
Mr.T

ONLY IF you ignore the taxes needed to pay the $43Billion. That's the trouble with governments, it's all about shifting costs around to make it impossible to work out how much anything REALLY costs us.

MrT.

Reply to
Mr.T

Not quite the full story. The private sector would simply cherry pick the profitable and screw the rest.

which cross subsidies? And why are they wrong in tele comms, but not in other areas (mining royalties being redistributed, taxes from all tax payers being redistributed to subsidise all private motor vehicles).

They seem FAR

Reply to
terryc

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.