[clug] Trump Telstra once and for all

Mon Oct 9 00:19:29 GMT 2006

On 10/8/06, Andrew Smith <andrew at coolchilli.com> wrote:
> Ben wrote:
> > is to go wireless, or get Optus HFC, or TransACT. TransACT are worse
> > than Telstra when it comes to wholesale access to their network;
> Not true, in fact they're cheaper in most respects, and somewhat easier,
> given that you can telehouse a floor away from the Broadband routers.

No new providers - other than Grapevine and one sub-ISP of an existing
retailer, in 2-3 years. Seems a bit odd to me, for an open network...

> Not true, I've spoken to both sides in my travels.  They simply
> want/offer different things.  Transact's wholesale broadband network
> delivers clients on Layer3, Internode want to see clients on Layer2 and
> neither side will budge.  End of story, no conspiracy theory.

That's not what I heard, but maybe I misinterpreted things.

> > TransACT are worse than Telstra when it comes
> > to artificially constraining the speed of the service. The highest
> > residential plan is a 2Mbps plan, and the network is capable of 56Mbps
> > (including video and voice). The business plans start $549/month for
> > 10M/1M connection, with a $2,000 installation cost and you still need
> > to get an ISP on top of that!
> Actually there's also 3M/1M for $189/month and $450 installation, or
> 5M/1M for $319 and $750 installation...
> They don't constrain the speed, you do by spending less :)

Well why are whinging at all when we should all just be buying our own fibre?

The speeds you're talking about are comparable to SHDSL via Telstra
and the pricing is too.

Max 10Mbps down and 1Mbps up are constraints on the TransACT network,
and they're artificial. 22.5/2.5 or 24/1.1 are regulatory constraints
and they're what Internode will be offering soon or is offering now,
starting at $69.95/month or $59.95/month. + minimum $19.95 phone line
and a $129 install cost for Internode. TransACT aren't even in the
same universe.

> As it
> happens, you can get some pretty good cross-town bandwidth for
> reasonable money with their Metro Ethernet service, it craps all over
> Telstra price-wise.

Or grab an ADSL provider with unmetered intrastate transfer (one thing
Internode don't do).

> I'm much more scared of Telstra's 3G network.  Has anyone had faults in
> during the last month while Telstra techs have been tied up rolling it
> out?  We've had delays of up to 10 days to get attendance on basic DSL
> line faults and 5 days for all the phones at a school.  Somehow I don't
> think that level of service is getting better.
>
> So Telstra couldn't get their domestic $3B FTTC network, they roll out
> 3G with speeds (next year) of <14Mbps and NO requirement for
> competitor/wholesale access.  Where do you think their resources will
> go?  Fair enough, sell them off, but leave the wholesale infrastructure
> with the government.

Telstra are between a rock and a hard place. They're selling a service
for several times what it's worth and the only way their profits have
to go are down. I'd rather see them launch a budget sub-brand than
mess about with 3G, but at least they're sticking to a frequency that
they can't disturb anyone else on.

WiMax will make that 3G network laughable for use in metro areas. It
will be great for people in the country or people who travel in rural
or regional areas and that's about it.

I think it is a concern that Telstra are delaying service call
responses, but it will come back down to normal again soon. I'd prefer
to run wirelessly, but the latency and reliability aren't anywhere
near good enough.

> Andrew
>
> --No new providers - other than Grapevine and one sub-ISP of an existing retailer, in 2-3 years. Seems a bit odd to me, for an open network...

> Not true, I've spoken to both sides in my travels.  They simply
> want/offer different things.  Transact's wholesale broadband network
> delivers clients on Layer3, Internode want to see clients on Layer2 and
> neither side will budge.  End of story, no conspiracy theory.