21,000 faulty NBN connections claimed

[nero_bolt]

Another LABOR failure and botched policy....... 

One of an Abbott Government’s toughest jobs will be to clean up the NBN mess and stop the bleeding of our billions:

THE company building Labor’s $37.4 billion National Broadband Network could be forced to repair tens... after cutting corners in the construction processes to boost the number of homes passed by the massive infrastructure project.

The Australian can reveal that as of last week, connections to as many as 21,000 - one in eight - of the 163,500 existing homes and businesses passed by the fibre network were considered to contain defects in the network construction…

The defects mean that network connections to thousands of homes and businesses, which have been classified as “ready for service”, may require repairs before users can access the internet on the new network.

NBN Co last night disputed the figures, admitting there were significant defects but insisting the total number was lower than the [NBN internal] figures obtained by The Australian.

[lakeland27]

---

@poddster wrote:

The NBN was/is a con job.

Being forced into a FTTP system is what my objection.

i have no problem in admitting the FTTP is the ultimate internet system....................IF YOU NEED IT............. but the average household/user does not need it and wont need it but it is being forced on them with the attempted exclusion of any other system.

People are being told that you "NEED" and you "MUST HAVE" the NBN Co. broadband system and legislation has been passed to exclude any other system. Now that may be reversed and choice given back to the taxpayer.

---

 so , you understand what we need. in your case, if you didn't have the need you wouldn't have to pay a cent. you'd simply have a good (better) service . those with business needs would have the system they need too. the anti-business (other than huge/large) bias is an odd thing from a conservative viewpoint.. john howards father was a small businessman he always reminded us.

[freakiness]

---

@poddster wrote:

Refresh my memory on any questions you have have asked Freaki.

---

You can read can't you?

Here's another: Who is the they you refer to "My objection to the NBN Co. system is that they conned a government"

[para-sights]

As far as I underestand it the NBN as it stood before gave you the option to pay to boost your speed up to 100 but Turnbull has told us we only need 25, that;s hardly a choice. And I don't care about the politics, (but unfortunately I have to compare.) I don't care who brings it in. But some areas will never get the choice to go to 100 only 25.

[poddster]

The NBN Co. and it's representatives.

Gillard was ripe for the plucking she needed votes in 2010, NBN was one of the things that appealed to young voters and it was sold to them that they would have a 100Mbps connection.

Now my question

How will the average household economically benefit from having an ultra high speed Internet instead of the alternative that is proposed?

[lakeland27]

---

@poddster wrote:

The NBN Co. and it's representatives.

Gillard was ripe for the plucking she needed votes in 2010, NBN was one of the things that appealed to young voters and it was sold to them that they would have a 100Mbps connection.

Now my question

How will the average household economically benefit from having an ultra high speed Internet instead of the alternative that is proposed?

---

restricting the question to the non-existent average household is disingenous. leaving small/large business out. leaving medical application out leaving educational benefit out.. etc.

[freakiness]

---

@para-sights wrote:

As far as I underestand it the NBN as it stood before gave you the option to pay to boost your speed up to 100 but Turnbull has told us we only need 25, that;s hardly a choice. And I don't care about the politics, (but unfortunately I have to compare.) I don't care who brings it in. But some areas will never get the choice to go to 100 only 25.

---

The current NBN takes fibre to the premises (FTTP). Not top shelf Rolls Royce style PtP fibre, but consumer GPON network fibre that is cheaper than copper these days. The Turnbull option is to take fibre to Nodes (FTTN), which will be large cabinets that need power, then copper to the house from there. NZ started their roll out in FTTN manner and found it was not cost effective so changed to FTTP. 

Rural areas will get fixed dedicated wireless services with the 25/5 choice at this stage.

[para-sights]

Probably no different than a telephone that can dial locally, interstate and internationally or going digital on tv. If you don't wish to get the internet you don't have to.

[freakiness]

---

@poddster wrote:

The NBN Co. and it's representatives.

Gillard was ripe for the plucking she needed votes in 2010, NBN was one of the things that appealed to young voters and it was sold to them that they would have a 100Mbps connection.

Now my question

How will the average household economically benefit from having an ultra high speed Internet instead of the alternative that is proposed?

---

How could the NBN Co con the govt before they even existed?

NBN Co was created to implement the 100Mbps plan. It predates the 2010 election. It also wasn't the young voters fighting for it. There are more older people than younger people putting up the fight.  You're wrong on every level, as evidenced by the reference to email.  You're the first person I've ever seen use email in their argument against.  

No, you can answer the original questions first.

Or not. I don't really care to waste my time arguing with a trolling dinosaur.  I started discussing NBN here for the benefit of people that might be interested.

[poddster]

LL if there is more than one household then there is an average.

More than one of anything can be averaged so how is it the the average household is no exiatant?

LL perhaps you can give me an example where there is an economic benefit from having 100Mbps as oposed to 25Mbps.

[freakiness]

---

@poddster wrote:

LL if there is more than one household then there is an average.

More than one of anything can be averaged so how is it the the average household is no exiatant?

LL perhaps you can give me an example where there is an economic benefit from having 100Mbps as oposed to 25Mbps.

---

How about you actually start answering the questions for a change instead of your childish attempts at mocking others.

In all the attacks you've made about the NBN you've not answered any question asked of you.