NBN Boss: Pay Up Or Accept Slow Internet

Image: ThamKC / iStockphoto

NBN Co CEO Bill Morrow has some frank advice for people complaining about fibre-to-the-node (FTTN) technologies: if you want faster broadband speeds, you need to be willing to pay for it.

Answering questions in Senate Estimates last night, Mr Morrow told Senator Deborah O’Neill there needs to be a demand for superior technologies before NBN will consider them.

"When we see that people are willing to pay more than what they are paying today for 25 Mbps, then we will build a business case," Morrow said. "You have to be willing to pay above what you are willing to pay today." Well, that's us told.

The above statements were picked up by broadband advocacy group Internet Australia (IA) who understandably take a dim view of Morrow's views.

"Bill Morrow has effectively told four million of his current and future customers they will have to pay extra if they want to be upgraded from the copper-wire based FTTN service they will be provided under the current NBN rollout strategy," the organisation said in a statement.

Morrow said NBN Co is "constantly looking at reducing" the number of households on FTTN. However, late last year the company shifted one million premises from hybrid fibre coaxial (HFC) to FTTN in its construction planning.

Internet Australia is calling on the Government to abandon FTTN and support a bipartisan NBN policy based on fibre to the distribution point (FTTdp) technologies.

“They’ve already announced they’ll use FTTdp in lieu of the Optus HFC (Pay TV) cables that have been found to be unusable. So why continue to roll out inferior technology that they know will need to be replaced?" IA's CEO Laurie Patton said.

"If FTTN isn’t considered good enough for Optus customers how can they expect anyone else to settle for an inferior product?."

In Morrow's defense, it's worth noting that the majority of Australians continue to opt for cheaper and slower plans in areas where higher speeds are being offered. At last month's half-year financial results presentation, NBN Co revealed that the vast majority of its customers were on low-tier 25/5mbps plans.

"There's a limited current need for higher products and lower awareness of their availability," NBN Co CEO Bill Morrow said during the presentation.

Indeed, 100/40mbps adoption rates have actually dropped since 2015, while customers on the aforementioned 25/5mbps speed tier have increased by six per cent over the same period:

Fixed Line speed tier mix (upload/download by Mbps) As at 31 Dec 2015 As at 30 Jun 2016 As at 31 Dec 2016
12/1 33% 32% 31%
25/5 45% 49% 51%
25/10 1% 1% 1%
50/20 4% 4% 4%
100/40 18% 14% 13%

You can find out when your suburb is getting the NBN - and what technology you are likely to receive - on NBN Co's address checker tool.

Planhacker: How Much More Do You Pay For NBN100?

Like it or loathe it, the NBN rollout is going full-steam-ahead. The government has reportedly connected over 3 million premises meaning that more and more people each month are asking the same question. which NBN plan should I get?

Read more

When Are You Getting The NBN?

NBN Co's address checker tool can now tell you when NBN services will be available for your home or business, instead of just letting you know when the network will be rolled out in your area. It's gives a more accurate view of when the NBN is coming to your neck of the woods and you can try it out now.

Read more

[Via Internet Australia]


Comments

    thats all well and good but my who is the local butcher wanted to get fiber to premise installed NBN basically told to get fucked, despite the fact that he is next door to our local NAB and they were willing pay to get FTTP installed as well

      Hmmm, I doubt NAB would be supporting their branches on NBN. I'd suggest they are running business grade fibre (apples vs oranges).

        i doubt they would have it, Im in regional NSW with population of only 2k people. its a 40min drive from my town to nowra where the major NAB branch is

          Given I'm involved in this sorta stuff, chances are you're still not correct. It's unlikely NAB would use the NBN - the SLA's just aren't there (uptime, speed, etc). I'd suggest the branch manager doesn't have a clue about the details and I wouldn't be surprised if the techo's at NAB just explained it as NBN because it's something that is understood.

          Last edited 01/03/17 12:31 pm

            You do know that NBN offer managed IP services similar to Telstra managed Ethernet services right?

              You do know NBN is shitsville right? It's fine for the likes of you streaming Days of Our Lives re-runs... not so good for running a bank...

                And this churlish remark proves how clueless you truly are and suggests even more strongly that the closest you have to do with "this sorta stuff" is using the nearest ATM to get cash out.

                You don't even understand what NBN is. A bank doesn't care what connects them to the point, as long as they get sufficient bandwidth from the poi to the rest of the world. NBN has absolutely no part in the connection from the poi to the rest of the world. NBN is a last mile carrier. They connect you to the exchange that's all. For banks, this last mile is fibre optic cable capable of gigabit speeds. The bottleneck, and where it has always been is at the connection to the rest of the world. This is where congestion has always been the biggest issue.

                And given that I do work with this "sorta stuff" I know for a fact that plenty of bank branches DO use NBN managed IP services.

                You really live up to you name, don't you BONEHEAD.

                  HAHAHAHAHA - I love it when trolls revert to name calling!!!!

                  I'm proud to be a BONEHEAD and I'd much rather be a BONEHEAD than a troll any day!!! Go crawl under a rock and try and find someone else to impress with your lack of knowledge because it doesn't impress me...

                  Last edited 02/03/17 10:18 am

                  No way any bank would be using NBN services. Security and PCI requirements would require dedicated, and perhaps even dark fibre, to branches. You can get it most places even in the back of beyond it's just the monthly rental costs which are the problem. They go into the $15000 to $25000 a month pretty quickly depending on bandwidth and discount levels.

                I mean, i'd be pretty upset if there was downtime and I couldn't watch days of our lives. Is that show even still on?

            You'd be surprised at how many government agencies in regional areas use the NBN. Especially those that had expensive 2mbps business grade connections or even 4G with a VPN before the NBN came to town.

            If the town is big enough to support a bank however, it wouldn't surprise me if the bank rolled out it's own private fibre to the town. A bank needs extremely low latency for a start. They also need extremely high levels of security and very low risk tolerance for anything going wrong.

            Last edited 02/03/17 10:02 am

              Not many. Gov security standards require us to use a little more security than is available on NBN. Generally it is a secure Telstra service called GWIP (Government Wide IP) and in QLD we have a private secure network used for all DJAG, Emergency Services and Police. This is often leveraged by other departments and segmented for their use.

              I cant generally speak for the Feds but if they use NBN they have frikken rocks in their heads and their heads up their frikken arse. Their IT managers would need to be lined up before a commission and grilled over why they didn't take more care with public information. Yes it is only layer 2 but...

      Its one of the biggest weaknesses of FttN. When you do want to upgrade, its on a premise by premise basis, so every property gets stung with the full cost of running fibre from the node to the property. Two properties side by side, neither of which can piggypack off the others build.

      It gets glossed over by NBN and the Liberals, but its going to be the biggest cost drama moving forward from their MTM mix - upgrading to full fibre.

      And here we have the boss in charge of that holding everyone hostage. Nice one.

        ... so every property gets stung with the full cost of running fibre from the node to the property.

        It's worse than that, the nodes have no capacity to act as a fibre distribution hub - the fibre needs to be run from the EXCHANGE to the premises for each upgrade - much more expensive. nbn rolled out fibre to the nodes on the cheap - there are only four fibres (one each inbound and outbound, and two spares).

        This means that when the nodes are eventually replaced, more fibre needs to be pulled to them. Considering the labour costs of pulling fibre compared to the cost of the extra fibre, Australia has been well and truly shafted by the bean-counters at the nbn.

        Even better, when the nodes are replaced, they are effectively junked - nothing can be reused. We are paying almost the cost for FTTP and getting a totally inferior product with no upgrade capacity. Thanks Malcolm!

      bill morrow is applying black mail we need to ask many question and understand more.
      copper = 1 lane\
      fibre + multi lane
      fibre meets copper equates to congestion...
      https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/5-days-lead-time-Direct-burial_60277643639.html?spm=a2700.7724857.main07.50.1cbbba06d66NoC&s=p

      we need our communication ministers our treasury and our leaders to insist on a audit to Mr Morrows company.
      in all the companies that morrow managed when he was ceo he created a loss in profit and also a loos in customers....

      Morrow is blackmailing the nation for more funds and if Shorten and Turnbull allows then they are condoning black mail to the australian people more money or you will have lower speeds

    Given that this is a government initiative, shouldn't it be the government telling the NBN leeches... err I mean heads what they want??? In the meantime, Australia gets an expensive dud that won't give me much more than ADSL...

    NBN = Nonsensical Broadband Network

    Last edited 01/03/17 11:39 am

      I think whether it will drastically outperform your adsl depends on a lot of things, like how much copper you have to use before hitting the node, how degraded it is, how many others in your area are using it etc. I've heard a surprising mix of stories from people on FTTN.
      Some are barely able to get above adsl, while others are getting 80-90Mbit down and 20-35 up on a 100/40 plan.
      It's a sad state of affairs really.
      "You have to be willing to pay above what you are willing to pay today."
      This is simply the dumbest shit I've ever heard. Most people ARE willing to pay more than what they are currently paying, but the problem is, their FTTN connections are either flaky, or they've heard horror stories with regards to speeds from others around them, so can't see the point in paying more for something they're not going to be able to achieve.
      There's no point forking out $99/mth for a 100/40 connection if your FTTN only allows you to get 20-30Mbit. If they actually listened to the people, they'd realize it's not that they don't want to spend the money, rather that there's simply no point.

        So if you want something better than FTTN to your house before anyone else in your street does, you have to invest the money into your house. In the same way that your house didn't come with a big screen TV or a pool out the back. If you want to have those extra things the house didn't have before you need to pay for them.

          Well I guess it could be looked at from that perspective. The way I read it though, is he was talking about the fact that most people are signing up to 12/1 and 25/5 connections, which they were also talking about last week. There's many factors involved in why those numbers are so large, from mum and dad signups who just don't know/care, right through to people who can't see the point in paying for speeds they can't/won't achieve.

            Exactly!
            When your '25MBit' conenction only gets you 6.5Mbit, then why would you pay for a 100Mbit connection, to still get 6.5Mbit?

      Nope. NBN operates as a separate, independent entity, just like Australia Post.

    Hang on... so you're saying that the guy that runs the company that we've already given 40 billion to deliver high speed internet, and will probably give another 40 to before they're done...

    You're saying that he wants us to give him more money before he'll provide us transmission speeds that exceed 4% of the speeds we were initially promised...

    What the hell? Can we have the other 96% of 40 billion back then?

      Before the last election, 25mbps is all that was "promised" to you. If you want to have more you need to pay more (a lot more in this case)

        Was that a "non core" promise? Paying for a 25/5 plan but got 4/5. Informed ISP who informed nbnco...WOW...now get 12/5! How much extra do I need to pay to get 25/5? And to think NBNco had started the FTTP roll out in my area before the election that saw it canned. Now it's going to cost more for a still inferior network? Oh please...

    What a clown. I'm paying for 100/40 fttn but the speeds delivered are only 35/17, making it very attractive for me to drop to the much cheaper 25/5 service. Your never going to see demand evidenced by subscriptions to higher speed plans from fttn customers for this reason. Also worth pointing out the lack of 50mbit plans from ISPs, wasn't this an option earlier in the roll out?

      If you want higher speeds on the FTTN you can have it by paying for the fibre to rolled out to your doorstep, but you really have to value your internet.

        Yeah, all the way from the *exchange* to your doorstep, not from the node. That is insane.

    How's about this: Roll your broadband out to my area and give me the ability to pay for gigabit internet and I'll gladly pay the fucking price.

      $500 a month? That's what it will cost, and that's probably on the cheaper end.

        Keep going. Someone mentioned a week or so ago that it costs the ISP around $13 per Mbps, so to provide 1 Gbps, plus the 400 Mbps upload, AND avoid contention issues is going to be costing the ISP $20k or more. That needs to be spread between the users, I'm just not sure if that cost is per POI or per 32 property cluster.

        But its that CVC cost per Mb that stops the ISP's offering it as an option, and would stop the user from connecting. Technically (if you squint real tight) NBN is right when they put the blame onto the ISP, but the reality is that the ISP simply cant afford to offer it. Which is NBN's fault for those CVC prices.

    Errr, as taxpayers, haven't we already paid for it? Also, they will want more money to finish it so we pay more taxes for it, then this spanker says pay up or miss out. Isn't that the very definition of highway robbery?

      No, the taxpayer only paid to get the fibre into your street. If you want the fibre to your doorstep, you will have to kick in more.

      That was pretty clearly communicated prior to the last election, and the liberals won, so it's arguing the toss really.

        You keep making these comments, and I assume that you're trolling, but I'll bite.

        The problem is that the taxpayer already payed for a substantial number of homes to get FTTP. It's not unreasonable for people to expect that the service they get be equal to the one that they paid for other people to receive. It's not as if we were consulted about the change - Malcolm's rhetoric was always that we would get "as good" service under his MTM. That was a lie, and Malcolm is a smart enough guy to know he was lying. It's naive (and frankly idiotic) to think that the NBN was the only thing people were voting about in the last election.

    Hmmm. He seems to have forgotten a) who he works for and b) what his job is for.

    Tl;Dr, so feel free to point something out.

    The government is a group of people selected to represent the people, and are paid via taxes and the like, no?

    Our taxes are already paying for just about everything else, so why don't we vote to redirect funds or pay politicians less?

    Yep ... doing it one by one will definitely have great economies of scale. Lets build maybe a new dial up service which then can be upgraded on an individual basis when the customer pays more money. A great way to future proof our country. Internet is only for the hip people anyhow. Didn't the taxpayer fund the NBN ... or are they privately funded? No need to make money ... they got the money already.

    So glad that my NBN is now due for 2020 ... lots of time for policies and technology to change.

      The NBN pays the taxpayer back when it makes a profit.

      Contrary to popular belief in these tech forums, it will make a profit because the general public will be happy with 25-50mbps for years into the future. Also the idea that 5G will come along and offer 500GB downloads for $50 is grately exaggerated. It will be just as expensive as 4G is today until the infrastructure investment is paid back, then data quotas will increase (just not by that much)

      Last edited 02/03/17 9:49 am

        People are not happy you wack stone. Why is New Zealand currently getting fiber to the premise and at 1Gb/s and the world is moving to 10Gb/s. You make out you work in the industry, well you might but if it is an Australian industry your learning 3rd world standards.

    NBN Boss: Pay Up Or Accept Slow Internet

    Australians: Actually, we already have paid up so where's your half of the bargain?

      No, the taxpayer only paid to get the fibre into your street. The rest is up to you.

        Weird, i don't have an invoice for the fiber, NTD or labor to install it.... i must be special and got it all for FREE!

          That is indeed very special because it was prior to the change in government and change in direction.

          I don't like Turnbull either, and there is no doubt he has stuffed this up massively (clearly he didn't have too much to do with OzEmail's early success), however what he tried to do was to minimise the cost to the taxpayer, expecting the same for profit return at the end.

          The NBN isn't an investment in the country's future, that's a myth. It's an investment in future budget surpluses from returned profits, and then furthermore a investment in a massive capital gains return when it's sold which the liberals can then take massive political credit for... he hopes.

          Mobile carriers had other ideas but then the NBN acquired the most useful spectrum to lock them out of fixed broadband (except Optus, they are still very much in the game). I'm sure in time other technologies will come along that will threaten the viability of this business model.

          Also don't forget video compression is getting vastly superior. If you download everything in HEVC, a 100GB quota in 5 years might feel like a 300GB quota does today. Other compression tech will come along too to make file sizes of an hour of HD video even smaller.

    If they offered a speed guarantee of above 25Mbps, I would gladly fork out for the upgraded speed, even putting aside that the entire company is taxpayer-funded in the first @#$%ing place. But when the tech they are rolling out to my area physically cannot provide sync speeds above 40Mbps to my house, and my ISP regularly fails to provide that at peak times because of congestion anyway, what is the @#$%ing point in paying extra for the higher tier internet when I'd be paying it for speed I'm not getting?!

    Last edited 01/03/17 2:00 pm

      The NBN can't make any guarantees, and really even your service provider can't do that since the speed you get downloading something would depend on a range of factors.

        You are ignoring the fact that if the fibre was to the home, the top speeds gotten from major websites would be up to 40 times faster than the 25Mbit being offered, and that it is the shitty NBN that is restricting people on the 25Mbit plan to get speeds less than 8Mbit.

        The last election, the promise was 'as good or better' than the fibre to the home, that has not occurred, not even close, so saying the taxpayer only paid for ;fibre to the street' is disingenuous. We paid for a service that was supposed to be on par with the one already being rolled out. It simply is not.

        Actually, NBNco has a contractual sync speed guarantee of 25Mbps. Note, that's the sync speed, not the delivery speed. That means, the connection you are on must be physically capable of delivering 25Mbps or greater. The speed you actually get from day to day use is entirely dependent on the ISP beyond that, and NBNco have no obligations to that end.

        Last edited 02/03/17 8:40 pm

    More evidence that Bill Morrow is a joke.

    Why should people pay for speeds that can't even get in the (vain) hope that someone as completely inept as Bill Morrow will upgrade their infrastructure in the future? Like it's some reward for allowing yourself to get price gouged.

    Let me spell it out simply so that people can repeat it ad nauseam until he gets it. People on FTTN only pay for 25 Mbps because that's all they can get.

    Last edited 01/03/17 2:09 pm

      ...if they are with the wrong provider. If you go with a provider that is willing to pay to give it's customers decent speeds, yes this means you pay more as a consumer but the faster it goes, the more it costs isn't a difficult concept.

        Well that's just demonstrably incorrect. Even when the provider has enough bandwidth to service your 100/40 connection, physical limitations apart from the fiber can prevent those speeds. Plenty of people are seeing exactly that - so why would I pay Telstra for a 100/40 connection if the service I'll receive is identical to a 25/5?

          If you have paid the extra cost to lay fibre to the home then what physical limits are you talking about?

          Thousands of whirlpool posts prove you wrong by the way

        @jjcoolaus that is patently untrue. My folks get 6.5Mbit on a 25Mbit plan, that won't change no matter what ISP they go with or if they option up to the 200Mbit plan.

          How many ISPs have you tried to prove it won't make a difference?

          The bandwidth going to the POI isn't determined by NBNCo it's determined by your RSP

        Uh, no. It's not a bandwidth issue. It's a copper issue. You have to be goddamn close to your node to get more than average speed.

        If I could physically get 100/40, I'd be paying for 100/40.

        @jjcoolaus The problem that is being mentioned isn't the fact that it is not just an ISP limitation. It is more down to the fact that some can't realistically achieve 25mbps due to the connection. With FTTN you have to rely on the quality of the copper and distance between your house and the node to get an idea on how fast it is going to be. For some it will be good, for others it will not.

        If I signed up for 100/40 and found out that realistically I can only get 24Mbps, do you think I am still going to pay for a 100/40 connection, or downgrade it to a 25/5?

        What is quite telling with the breakdown of users on speeds is that while the bulk is on the lower 2 plans, the next largest seems to be 100/40. This tells me that those people who have the necessary connections are paying for the full speed and forgetting about the in between, especially as the price difference between the two top tiers is a very small amount.

        If this really was a case of users not needing the full speeds, you would see more on 50/20 than 100/40. If they displayed total users instead of %, it would be obvious as while the % mix has changed it doesn't mean that people aren't buying 100/40 plans.

          A large portion of that is because the initial drop-off for VDSL2 vs. copper length is like falling off a cliff. Over the space of 200m, it drops from 100Mbps+ to about 30Mbps. The drop-off for ADSL2+ was far less abrupt.

        Learn a bit more about VDSL2 technology then come back here. The disparity is because of the copper lines over the "last mile" between the node and the house. VDSL2 technology has a ludicrous drop-off over that short distance, and it is physically impossible to achieve 25Mbps at anything over about 350m. This is why FTTdp provides far superior sync speeds to FTTN, because the copper line only covers the distance from the street to the house, reducing the copper length to a few metres instead of a couple of hundred. On FTTN, anyone over 100m from the node should forget about the 100Mbps tier, and anyone over 250m should forget about the 50Mbps tier as well. They will receive no benefit from it because the connection NBNco has provided to their house will physically not be capable of exceeding those speeds.

        Last edited 02/03/17 8:51 pm

    Had 25mbps fttn as a trial, got close to advertised speeds. Upgraded to 100mbps, paid the extra, got no difference in speed, therefore downgraded back to 25mbps. Give me the speed, I'll pay the $$.

      Your retail service provider hasn't paid enough for bandwidth. Change providers.

        Untrue. We get the same limitation on Telstra, and on iinet. Who do you suggest that can magically make the copper in our street suddenly get better bandwidth?

          @poita Looking at comments in here he has made this claim a few times. Seems to live in a bubble where copper is equal to fibre and our problems are that we are not paying enough.

          I expect misguided comments like these on news.com.au, not a tech site....

          Liberal party shill that is towing the government line.

          That's an issue you need to take up with Telstra then, the copper needs to be replaced if it's not meeting your needs OR you can pay to get a quote to then invest in your home to lay the last mile with fibre.

        You seem to not be aware of the fact that entire backhauls (owned and managed by NBNco) are over-capacity, at this early project stage. The whole 'NBN' is fundamentally broken.

    So - I'm currently scheduled to have the NBN Active in my area between January and June 2018 as FTTN.

    I have absolutely zero interest in having FTTN as my current ADSL2+ service syncs at ~5Mbps with fairly frequent drop outs.

    I've tried investigating how I go about using the Technology Choice Programme to get a quote to upgrade my premises to FTTH, but it turns out they have pretty much ZERO interest in helping this happen, even when I'm willing to pay for a quote, and then presuming a reasonable price, pay for the upgrade.

    You cannot apply for the upgrade until you already have an active NBN connection and you have to pay $660 (Up from the original $300) just to get a quote.

    From the NBN Website (http://www.nbnco.com.au/connect-home-or-business/technology-choice-program/individual-premises-switch.html)
    Why do I need to be connected to the nbn™ network before I can apply for an Individual Premises Switch?
    nbn wants to ensure you have an opportunity to experience your planned or current nbn™ network technology before you decide to switch.

    I think this is completely anti consumer, and a waste of everyone's time and money. It would be VASTLY cheaper and more efficient to allow people to opt into this programme before the rollout begins, but they actively want to force you to wait for inferior technology before even allowing you the opportunity to ask to be upgraded to a more sensible technology at your own expense!?

    Madness.

      So if you went from 5mbps DSL to 50 or 70mbps FTTN you wouldn't be happy? As part of installing the NBN, the lines around your premises are checked so if the reason for your dropouts is in the pit at the front of your house, it will be replaced.

      Also if you are getting frequent dropouts with enough patience you can force your retail service provider to get telstra in to replace the copper <-- I did!

    I'm more than willing to pay more. But all I can get is 30 mbit so why would I pay more

    Its a bit rich saying demand isn't there for faster speeds when CVC charges mean most people don't get those speeds, and those who can often are looking at $100+ a month to access them.

      Why is it so hard for people to understand that the faster it goes, the more it costs?

      Nobody is going to sell you a ferrari at holden prices. Sorry, the world doesn't work that way.

      Last edited 02/03/17 9:39 am

        Except CVC pricing is entirely artificial. Nothing stopping those networks from running faster. Its time that we started pricing thru network tiering, where you pay for data priority rather than speed.

    Like most have said, people are opting for the 25mbit plans because even if they pay for the 100mbit they don't get the fucking speed they pay for! so why would you pay??? it's pretty simple really. People aren't dumb and they do follow this stuff. So they no if their connection is FTTN then they know that paying for extra speed is silly.

      You can easily get 100mbps on the NBN if you have the right retail service provider that doesn't cheap out on bandwidth.

      Everytime anyone complains of the speed of streaming of Stan/Netflix/Amazon, which all work over DSL just fine, the answer always ends up being their retail service provider is at fault. Always.

        So both Telstra and iinet are cheaping out then? Because we tried both, and don't get 25Mbit speeds.

          That's an issue to take up with Telstra or your MP or the TIO then, because we were promised 25mbps speeds. If you can never achieve that, there is obviously a problem with the copper.

          There are other NBN alternatives, such as fixed wireless providers providing faster than 30mbps speeds. Not everyone can get those alternatives though, you have to research which ones might service your area and then ring up a few.

    This is seriously a bad really fukn bad situation that is deliberately being played out by both Malcolm turnbull & nbn. I'm being honest here right now so please hear me out wat I've got say
    If we all the law abiding tax paying citizens of Australia DO NOT MAKE A FUKN STINK BOUT THIS UNBELIEVABLE USELESS LAME WASTE OF OUR TAX PAYING BILLS BULLSHIT OF A IDEA TO PROVIDE US ONE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT INVALUABLE INFRASTRUCTURE TO LEAD US IN THE FUTURE FOR ALL GENERATIONS TO UTILISE EXPERIENCE ENJOY & MOST OF ALL BENEFIT FROM THE WAY LIFE IS HEADING BECAUSE LIFE AINT GUNNA GO BACKWARDS WITH TECHNOLOGY IS IT? MOST CERTAINLY NOT. We have experienced or see technology stop or gone backwards since its become part of our everyday lives. This is my point we seriously need to take this point in reason this evidence up to parliament house in Canberra & argue drive it all the fukn way into their pigheaded heads until they understand the truth of it all. Don't fukn worry wat fukn speed we are being offered they jam that up where the sun don't fukn shine for them. The reality is this fact that needs to be resolved NOW if it's left to much longer it will only be much much harder for it to be reversed than what it is already. It really would.
    What I can't understand is this morrow bloke it's even is name morrow who took out the to from his surname morrow put it together he'l have
    to-morrow.. Anyway wat I can't believe n understand is the bloke would know wats the right way the best way a solution to future proof the people, I'm 100000000% sure he would ok.
    But the fukn arsholes gets paid 4million a year right watever it is for doing wat? Wat the hell has he seriously done to fukn justify he's pay? Wat will come of his history when it will be written that he was responsible for Australias failed nbn delivery as it has to be redone again to the FTTN infrastructure, etc.
    Can I we get paid that amount for the work that we have to do? I mean we do our jobs right the 1St time most of the time don't we.?
    It's that fukn ezy to be a motherfukingcunt to take all that money n think n believe it's alrite do that when he fukn knows it's not the best way to achieve the best results for us the paying customer. Yet he gets away with it, if we let him.
    That's my point b msg to all of us
    Let's not let him getaway with it
    Someone somewhere we need to start this protest.

    NBN Co CEO Bill Morrow has some frank advice for people complaining about fibre-to-the-node (FTTN) technologies: if you want faster broadband speeds, you need to be willing to pay for it.

    ...and he is bang on. Well done Bill. The government can't be expected to pay for everything, it costs enough money just to bring fibre into your street. If you want that "last mile", pay for it. It's not a hard concept.

      And it's this backward-facing logic that has landed us in this situation. Internet as a service is a outdated concept, the internet is infrastructure now - it has been for a number of years. Looking at the current uses for domestic internet connections and using that information to assess future need is like trying to steer a car by only looking out the back window.
      Just one potential benefit, and there's many more I can think of and even more that I can't: telecommuting. How many people currently join the carpark from Western Sydney into the CBD every day that don't actually need to be in the office 5 days a week? Well over 100000, I'd imagine. If half of those people can avoid commuting to the office 3 days out of five then:
      Those people gain 6-9 hours of their lives back per week. There is a well understood, negative correlation between total commute time, work/life balance and health outcomes.
      If, of those commuters, half are drivers; 15000 off the roads every morning and every afternoon. With traffic congestion what it is, there is a continuing cost to the taxpayer in upgrading and maintaining the infrastructure to get all those people to and from work everyday. The other half rely on public transport, which is another piece of infrastructure that the taxpayer has to pay for.
      The integration of telecommuting technology allows businesses to better interact with not only their own employees, but with clients and other offices anywhere in the world.

      Except you can't pay for the last mile, the node doesn't support it, currently they charge you for fibre to the house *from the exchange*.
      Plus you have to:
      *First connect to the NBN and get on a plan
      *Second, get a quote, which costs $600+ just for the quote (you cannot do this before being on the NBN)
      *Third, If the quote ever gets done, you pay from the exchange to your house.

      It is BS, @jjcoolaus do you work for the NBN or the liberal party or something? Your constant statements that the speed is only ISP dependent (which is bullshit, the crappy copper plays a big part) and statements here read like a corporate shill.

        I don't work for the NBN and I'm not connected with any political party.

        I'm just trying to help you to find the root cause of your slow speeds. If you believe the copper is in poor condition near your house and you never reach the 25mbps speeds, then you need to ask your provider to get Telstra out to replace the copper.

        The copper in your house may also be at fault and my understanding (i might be wrong here) is that if it's in your house you need to pay for an austel approved tech to come out and have it replaced.

        NBN Co are starting to replace FTTN with FTTC (to the curb) around the country to improve speeds further (google that, a particular news outfit created it's own replacement 3 year construction plan PDF based on NBN data) so if that's coming to you, it's even more reason to look closer to home (ie on your property) for the cause of speed issues.

        Just giving up, and saying "oh well a 100mbps plan only gives me 26mbps so therefore the nbn is ^$%*& and i'll go on a 25mbps plan" may be expedient and cathartic but won't make your internet go any faster, particularly if you look at heat maps or whirlpool and see that people with similar line distance to you are getting 50-75mbps or faster. Have you done any such research?

      "Ayo we know you want sewer and water access, it's over on the next street over, soz bro you need to pay to connect to it"

    The original NBN was to take a large amount of tax payer money and build a state of the art and future proof fibre Internet network that would deliver internet speeds that are currently more than what is needed but will meet future needs. In the future it can be upgraded through the exchanges and the bulk laid infrastructure will not need to be replaced.

    The Turnbull NBN is to use a similar, maybe slightly less amount of tax payer money to build an already obsolete network that is expensive and difficult to upgrade. Where the speeds offered in many cases already are insufficient to current needs and in some cases worse than what people previously had access to.
    Access to decent speeds will either not be possible or cost a premium. The idea being that money generated from getting as much out of the customers as possible will then be used to replace most of the entire network and built what the NBN was originally intended to be. It is not easily upgradable long term as skinny fibre, copper and coaxial is never going to be as good as fibre.

    We are being screwed so royally by this.

    Spending a relatively similar amount of a substandard version with the plan be we pay out of pockets with after tax money to eventually then build what could have been built.

      Actually the original NBN was projected by the Liberal would-be government to cost $73B, and would take until 2020 to roll out. They claimed their one would cost $41B, and be rolled out to 93% of homes by 2016, providing 25Mbps minimum to those homes, to be upgraded to 50Mbps minimum by 2019.

      Their rollout is behind schedule, and projected to take past 2020 to complete. It has already cost in excess of $30B and will likely take an additional $30B before it is completed. The 50Mpbs target is a dream with the current technology, and will require considerable retrofitting of existing NBN infrastructure to accomplish, adding further to the cost. And it will still need upgrading in 7-10 years from now when the technology becomes completely obsolete because it cannot handle even the low-end household use, which will likely cost another $30B on top of the current project expenses to bring the last mile to fibre, which was the original FTTP NBN plan to begin with.

      tl;dr - We got even more screwed than most people realise.

      Last edited 02/03/17 9:13 pm

    Lets see used to pay 69.95 a month for 25mbps with TPG but would only get around 14mbps. Now i pay 69.95 for 100mbps with Myrepublic and get around 90 mbps on average. Im not paying a cent more ???

      I hate you so much right now... *Goes back to his 1.5Mbps connection and pulls out the hammer*

    I have NBN FTTN 100/40 and IT IS BRILLIANT..!! Here's what I suspect most people aren't realising. When we first got connected our speed was worse than ADSL (not even ADSL2). Just about ready to cancel with IINET when all of a sudden IINET upgraded their hardware and bam!! every speed test since pegs the dials at just under the 100/40 we're paying for. Maybe dont blame the NBN....more likely blame the ISP's for the bottlenecks/congestion. We should be paying for the amount of data we move, not connection speed. Connection speed should ALWAYS be max. This way ISP's have incentive to provide good service. If they dont shift data they dont make money.!!

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now