Optus to halt sales of Telstra-based ADSL

Wes:

I cannot see the consumer benefiting in all this. What it looks like to me is that for those consumers who were going to get Optus ADSL but through a Telstra network, they will simply not get it until Optus have their DSLAM available in the area.

tin:

Some on Whirlpool predicted Telstra would use this as an argument that Optus simply doesn't want to serve rural areas... Again, Telstra's publicity machine has switched to a spin cycle and left the facts flapping in the breeze.

Optus has many exchanges covered outside the capital cities already. Coffs Harbour, Orange and Albury are 3 I can see straight away on one list. Not exactly little towns, but they are all well outside the Greater Sydney area. Rumors suggest Optus will be DSLAMing Tamworth and Armidale in their current round of installs. Again, not small towns, but far from being the metro areas Telstra suggest Optus are sticking to.

Daniel1v4:

Optus is also "outside the capital cities" with too few exceptions. These are in "Not exactly little towns." What about the real, dinkum bush, in the scrub? We want services too, and satellite has its limitations. These days the internet is quite a lot like roads. So much of what happens is not “real,” but it happens with information passing between people. Just think about credit cards! Because of the vast landmass, and therefore separation of Australia’s residents, we need a higher level of physical roads, and we also need more internet/communication services than other countries. If you live in the larger cities and suburbs, you might even have ADSL2. Half of us out here don't even have anything more than 28-56K Dialup. This is the "City vs. Bush" problem, and one of the main problems is the fact that it does cost more to put these services out to remote places. Areas where there is not such high population density cannot expect the same prices, but at the moment we are not being given much choice, because of the current combination of bits of "regulation" mixed with bits of "competition" based planning, pricing and even marketing!
I read somewhere recently that the best way might be for individual councils to tender. (I.e. put the task of supplying services up like an auction to the cheapest bidder) The costs would then be relevant to the area. Those using would pay, and the council would also have to subsidise it. (This solution reminds me of Telstra - before it was sold!) The difference this time is two-fold. The "city" no longer has to "subsidise" the "bush." But one concern is that there would be no easy solution for people on the move, (remember Telstra's "I've been everywhere" campaign?) and there are inconveniences relocating, without changing carriers, technologies, etc. It is already quite a process just to change from Telstra to Optus or vice versa. It might take two to four weeks if all goes well. (And with technology things haven’t always gone well!) I can't see many better options though. (I can’t see the government being able to buy Telstra back or make a new company.) All the to and fro just delays the process. The populated areas, and those close to them, will eventually end up with nice fast cheap choices for broadband services. The less populated and further away you are from them, the slower, more expensive, and fewer choices you will have for internet of any sort. I know this was supposed to have been dealt with when Telstra was first sold, but…
We are already seeing local councils organising services for their area. I think we’ve gone past the point of no return long ago, but we still have some things left to be decided. Will we see continue to see many companies fighting over customers, or will we see larger companie(s) emerge as the leader(s)? I think in twenty years time we’ll all look back and ask, “Why were we so far behind the times back then?” We will have new challenges then though, because the only thing that stays the same with technology is, “There is always something changing!” Just like the old "Town Mouse, Country Mouse story," the city vs. country issue is one that is unlikely to change in a hurry.

raindog:

"Optus is also "outside the capital cities" with too few exceptions. These are in "Not exactly little towns." What about the real, dinkum bush, in the scrub? We want services too" Im sure there are chaps in the outback that want noodle bars or Krispy Creme's as well!

The question is, is it economic and necessary to provide or subsidise them. You cannot expect private companies or city folk to foot the bill for Want!

There has been and continues to be a lot of federal money spent on creating equity of Internet services across our wide brown land.
A quick Google search will show several rural councils have become involved in providing Internet services for their districts. (Ironically a quick Google search is not really possible on dial-up.) A local body is the most likely ones to act on your behalf but Councils dont generally have a the track record for delivery of services at bottom dollar. And expect those service to be concentrated around the rural towns just like all the other utilities. There aren't to many of those dinkum bush homesteads with curbing and guttering are there?

The real problem is Telstras fixation on running a monopoly, irrespective of their level of privatisation Telstra has concentrated most of their efforts on frustrating competition and restricting their own services for political advantage and they are more interested in becoming a content provider than in expanding their networks. The ideal of balding men accessing the Internet from Kombi Vans anywhere is an advertising fantasy and where service is possible it is simply uneconomic, Telstra NextG is not Broadband Internet by any stretch of the imagination.

It is not all bad there are wireless broadband providers springing up in many rural areas, just dont expect city broadband. These service generally exceeds dial-up speeds and are still reliant on subsidisation to be economic.

Rural Australia should be subsidised to the level of Need not the level of Want. There is a much greater number of wanting voters/consumers ahead in the queue in the suburbs and regional centres.

raindog:

Good on you Mr Bruem crank up the Telstra miss-information generator and fire it for all its worth!!
The claim Telstra "relished competition" had me almost barf my Wheaties, it sure doesn't align with the slant Telstra are peddling in their so called BAC campaign.

Optus will be ramping up it's ADSL2 roll-out and becoming more active as a broadband wholesaler. A continued roll-out of non Telstra DLSAMs is what will make broadband accessible and affordable to the vast majority of the Australian population. Bring true broadband to the waiting millions in outer suburbs and the large regional centres first. All strength to Optus and the other providers playing some part in that.

If Telstra sees itself as savior of the bush I'd love to know where they get their mushrooms. And if Mr Bruem believes the Optus decision is adversely detrimental to the bush than its an admission that the NextG nonsense is not all it has been portrayed to be.
Next time Telstra fires off with one of their 98% of the population claims have a look at how small an area of our vast continent that entails.

Sorry Telstra an overpriced, under done wireless system that may achieve 256K on a good day is not Broadband by any rational stretch of definition. 98% coverage and 10% user satisfaction there are some statistics to be truly proud of.

The nice thing when migrating from a Telstra DLAM to a better cheaper and faster competitor is knowing your doing your part in enabling that competitive open playing field Telstra speaks of in their brochure, a reality.

QLD:

Well guys! Against the common opinion (or so it seems) I am batting for Telstra on this one.
Telstra has done some really good things over the last couple of months (Next G is changing the outback and is now giving this region “a fair go” in terms of Internet access) and somehow people must have missed T3 which now means that these guys (Telstra that is) needs to run a profitable business (like Optus).
It is truly disappointing to hear that Optus is using the excuse of "Local Access Resale (LAR) and Resale DSL (RDSL) are low margin businesses with almost all of the revenue being paid to Telstra" to “get out” I think that this is the crappisest excuse ever.
In my mind if it is making Optus a margin – well just go for it!
If you look at the second part of the statement above “almost all of the revenue being paid to Telstra” – well revenue is not profit so clearly these guys have no idea if this business is making a margin/profit or not (for Telstra that is).
So let me ask you one question.
How much does it cost to keep the Cloncurry switch going?
I am pretty confident that Optus would not know because they are not servicing that area and I just wonder if anyone of you reading this can even pin pin point Cloncurry on a map. Still there are actually real people (about 4,000+ of them) living there, in desperate need of broadband access.
So in conclusion the real winner here is really Optus but oh no, regional areas are not PROFITABLE ENOUGH.
So why are we asking Telstra and not Optus to cover the Cloncurry’s of the world then?
Having spent 15 years in telecom, working across the globe I do understand the reasons why Optus and the likes are “bailing out” and hanging on to ACCC and the government to push their agenda. Rolling out AND maintaining ANY type of communications network IS EXPENSIVE and if you can tag on to someonelses (at below cost because ACCC sets the wholesale rates NOT Telstra) WHY NOT?
I would love to see your comments when Telstra decides to “bail out” of Cloncurry…..
BTW I live in Townsville and we are getting a throughput of 2.2 – 2.5Mb on our Next G network up here. Finally we feel part of the world!!! Australia is not all about Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth and Brisbane (and its suburbs)!!!
…and if you want to know more about Cloncurry, MacAir flies there regularly from Townsville or you can educate yourself about the place on: http://bigscreen.afc.gov.au/tour_blog/blog44.aspx or http://www.cloncurry.qld.gov.au/news/index.shtml

raindog:

Quote:Next G is changing the outback and is now giving this region “a fair go” in terms of Internet access
A fair go? OK do the sums and tell me how much per month 40Gb of NextG would cost and how that compares to an actual broadband connection. And what would be the likelihood of those 4000 odd Cloncurry locals all living the Telstra dream concurrently. Its just spin to the extreme NextG is not and never will be a broadband solution.

From an economic perspective some of these rural hamlets probably dont even justify having the power on let alone broadband Internet. Broad areas of the major capital cities have less than adequate broadband coverage due to Telstra's maneuvering and insane political argument. Why should Soil Creek have broadband internet at any cost and why should the large population centres have to fund it. I dont see rural Austraia offering to subsidise my weekly $100's of dollars of road tolls, why should I subsidise their internet?

from your line of thinking Optus should channel its finite funds and resources into the near zero return venture of Telstra resale just so a few can have their chosen badge? The only ones to benefit are Telstra. Alternatively to channel those same resources roll-out of independent infrastructure, both the consumers and Optus benefit.

Quote:Rolling out AND maintaining ANY type of communications network IS EXPENSIVE and if you can tag on to someonelses (at below cost because ACCC sets the wholesale rates NOT Telstra) Funny that without exception 3rd party ADSL2 from non Telstra DSLAMs is able to be retailed at a lower price then the Telstra resale offering. So if all of that is below cost for Telsra they should really have a good look at their internal efficiency and their ability to run a competitive network.

Tried to migrate a connection to a non Telstra DSLAM lately? Appears Telstra can only do this at a time of their choosing.

Telstra deliberately stifled 8M ADSL connections to gild the Lilly of their monopoly FTTN fancy.

Does Telstra have any concept of why they are so much on the nose, or why people are telling them to stick their exclusive content Bigpond offers where the sun dont shine?

Telstra rants on about wanting a level playing but in reality they are terrified of real competition. Everyday Telstras ability to stifle the competition wanes, and that level playing field cannot arrive soon enough!

raindog:

Anyone considering NextG as a their sole viable broadband connection should read here first.

Daniel1v4:

No you're not the only one who appreciates Telstra. NextG is the first of its kind in that it gives or improves services in the "bush" and at the same time is viable economically. (Only just it seems. They have just increased their prices a little bit!) If Telstra is bringing in good profit from these "bush" areas, why doesn't anyone else start filling in all of the gaps that Telstra have left for them? I think the answer is obvious. There is less money in these areas, and there comes a cut off point where they won’t economically offer services there at all. Telstra might seem to be the dearest in the “city,” but it is the cheapest in the bush. (Where it is the only provider, the alternatives have implied that they would not be viable there, at least not yet.) We need to award credit where it's due. Telstra may not have done everything right, but this one's not bad.