Jason Ashton and the no-NBN rebel cause
- 10 September, 2010 12:42
- Comments 15
BigAir's Jason Ashton
The National Broadband Network (NBN) has been the darling of the broadband industry since it was given a $43 billion dollar budget and the goal of being a wholesale-only network.
Many major ISPs have supported the fibre-based network for its scope and capacity to end Telstra’s stranglehold over wholesale broadband services. The Labor Party also pushed it as one of its key policies in the lead-up to the election.
On the other hand, the Coalition’s $6 billion wireless-centric plan met strong criticism from much of the industry.
When the Alliance for Affordable Broadband came onto the scene, it shattered the happy family image of a unified ISP industry which favoured Labor’s $43 billion baby.
The group includes AAPT CEO, Paul Broad, Pipe Network founder, Bevan Slattery, and BigAir CEO, Jason Ashton. The rebel ISPs wrote an open letter deriding the current NBN plans and proposed an NBN 3.0 which heavily features wireless technology.
In this ONLINE ONLY interview, ARN spoke to Ashton about the Alliance, why the group has defied its ISP brethrens and the finer details of its NBN 3.0 proposal.
How did the Alliance for Affordable Broadband come about?
Jason Ashton (JA): I know a lot of the other participants in the Alliance through the industry. We all maintained some dialogue at industry events. It’s interesting because the NBN had very little commentary during the lead-up to the election. Then it became a hot topic after the election cycle. The Coalition released their policy.
There is a lot of criticism of the Coalition’s policy and I guess some members of the Alliance, including myself, believed some of the criticism wasn’t justified; wasn’t fact based. Not that we believed the Coalition’s plan is perfect either.
It got us thinking - given it was such a hot topic - there hadn’t been much debate and industry discussion around the NBN concept. It made sense for us to get together, discuss and propose an alternative that might have more traction with the community than the current two proposals, neither of which appeared to be getting complete acceptance from the community based on the election results.
We tried to come up with something that would be a solution that might be more attractive to the industry and also more targeted.
Did you have reservations over the NBN project since the beginning?
JA: Look, I think it has gone through some major revisions since the last election. The original proposal was $4.7 billion. It was an upgrade to Telstra’s copper network and it was a fibre-to-the-node (FTTN) network. That was the election commitment in 2007.
Then that got cancelled. It was announced that a deal couldn’t be done, that the NBN 1.0 proposals were unacceptable. NBN 2.0 was put forward as fibre-to-the-home (FTTH) network. There was no industry consultation, to my knowledge, with the large parts of the industry.
There may have been some consultation but only with some and there was certainly no consultation with us and a number of other carriers.
NBN 2.0 was presented as a perfect solution to telecommunications future here in Australia.
Initially, there was a lot of people supportive of it because it seemed to address the structural issues with Telstra in that you are taking Telstra out of the network ownership position that it’s in today. But the downside was the incredible cost at $43 billion and the fact there was no cost-benefit analysis that was presented that would give us all an understanding as to how the money was justified in terms of the economic investment and socio-economic benefits expected from that.
I don’t think NBN 2.0 had complete industry support and I just think it took a while for people to digest it and everybody had hope to see further discussion, further analysis, business case, everybody had been hoping to see that come forth, but it hasn’t.
I think now we’re at a point when it’s become such a critical issue at least in the political debate, especially given we have a hung parliament (at the time of interview). It’s interesting now there is a little bit more of a microscope being applied to the policy and people are starting to look at it and go “Well, it’s a lot of money. Is it in our best interest long term to invest all this money into one technology?”
The Alliance’s proposal seems to be more aligned with the Coalition’s plans.
JA: It certainly wasn’t our intention to align with the Coalition’s plan. Our intention was to present an alternative view. We believe that the current project which is fibre-centric, perhaps, be tuned to focus more on delivering fibre where fibre is needed. It should be using policy settings and using the national asset, which is the spectrum, that can be used for mobile broadband to derive long term efficiency and communications in this country and to deliver what we believe to be a world leading national 4G wireless network that would be more affordable and more accessible on a national basis. One of the problems with FTTH network is you can only use it in your home. You can only use it in your desktop or laptop in your home.
Whereas the future, and everybody knows this, is shifting to a mobile broadband. Everybody take things with them. People work from home, work on the road and work anywhere really.
And having that high-speed mobile broadband will deliver so much more than just having a fixed broadband.
Have you received any feedback from ISPs that are not in the Alliance?
JA: We’ve heard bits and pieces, whispers here and there that people were supportive if they weren't worried about government backlash. So we’ve heard whispers of support from lots of different quarters.
Of course, there is a lot of criticism. You get criticism from some quarters that have a vested interest but the truth is we are not positioning ourselves to build this network.
We’re saying, “This needs to be Government lead but there should be input from private industry”. There should be proper analysis, proper business cases and a proper cost-benefit analysis.
There should be proper study done as to what is the best choice is for the country to make so we are open to criticism. We are open to dialogue and we expect to get criticism. We are not trying to be too prescriptive either. I think it’s important that everybody is open-minded as to what the network architecture should look like.
There are a lot of people that think we are wireless fanatics and that’s not true. Four of members of the alliance – 50 per cent of the Alliance – have never deployed wireless services.
We are not wireless evangelists. If anything, we are technology agnostic. We just believe you’ve got to make the right investments.
Nominations for the 2012 ARN IT Industry Awards open on Tuesday, June 12.
- Bookmark this page
- Share this article
- Got more on this story? Email ARN
- Follow ARN on twitter
-
Facebook could buy Nokia to build 'FacePhone', expert claims
-
It's not all Doom at new media conference
-
Tech Watch: Who watches the datacentre?
-
Facebook scammers host Trojan horse extensions on the Chrome Web Store
-
Webroot: Growth in security
Get exclusive access to ARN's news, research and invitation only events. 
Comments
Noel Peters
Internet guru Tony Windsor who doesn't own a computer says no.
Tom Brown
What a lot of fluff.
Mr Ashton does not answer any question.
"How did the Alliance for Affordable Broadband come about?" He just said he knew a bunch of like minded people.
"The Alliance’s proposal seems to be more aligned with the Coalition’s plans."
There is no real proposal by the alliance and the pretence of a plan appeared in line with and after the coalitions, not that I have been able to see their letter only comments in news articles, must be a closely guarded secret.
"Have you received any feedback from ISPs that are not in the Alliance?"
The response was "We’ve heard bits and pieces, whispers here and there that people were supportive if they weren't worried about government backlash. So we’ve heard whispers of support from lots of different quarters." What does that mean whispers, bits and pieces what rubbish. especially re his answer to the last question.
and that was page 1 the rest is as much mush.
For example pretending he has a finger to wag at the ACCC.
Appearing to claim the advances in wireless will cope with the service level needs of industry, commerce, science, education or medical , Mr Ashtons response waffled around not making any statement.
And Spandas Lui, you reported this rubbish!
Where are the teeth, blood and?
ihope
The context is actually simple, Australia needs a Fibre fixed network that is optical fibre based backhaul just like the inter-country undersea interconnects that the internet uses to make itself global, by adding fibre to the premises it means that the original copper [analog] network is updated to the full potential that digital optical (using lasers to modulate the carrier) provides that will scale for the future.
The fixed network is just that - fixed for use in buildings without contention and loading issues because every connection is a high speed link direct to the multiplexed routers at the backhaul hosts. Don't fool yourself, this speed will be needed soon and into the future in ways that even telco gurus don't understand today and serious money will be made globally from the commerce opportunities that this enables.
Wireless is the other side of the coin, not a substitute for fixed services, we need both because people are both static and dynamic in how they work and live. We stay at the office and home then we become mobile and when mobile we need the second level of technology (which will still leverage the NBN fibre network for overall function and pervasive access) the argument is not an either/or fixed or wireless one, it is that we need both. And the wireless side of our market must function in contexts where we travel at high speeds.
People eat at home AND they go out to eat, the NBN or Wireless argument is like saying the whole country has to cook at home OR it has to leave home to eat. There is room for, and market for both contexts. Get with the program and stop trying to compete with natural progress NBN rebels, analog becomes digital just as copper becomes fibre, only luddites would baulk at that! Besides you can still own the mobile wireless data commercial space and the NBN backhaul links will enable it for you. Or do you really think the overpriced traditional Telstra wholesale backhaul and access model gave you a better business costing and service with the speed and coverage you need. SHEESH!
Ash
Very interesting food for thought. Hope some politicians take note.
ShowMeTheBroadband
Is FTTH a great system? Yes.
Can FTTH be rolled out quickly? Maybe.
Is FTTH being rolled out quickly? Hell no! After more than a year there are only handful of customers despite hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars being spent.
I can see the money going out the door.
SHOW ME THE BROADBAND.
SHOW ME THE BROADBAND.
Lord Rocker
"In 2009, there was no growth in fixed broadband where as mobile broadband, call it complementary or call it substitution, either way, it doubled. There was 100 per cent growth last year."
1. Wireless double mainly because of the amount of wireless devices now on the market compared to last year.
2. Many people have gone wireless at home not because they want it, it's because they do not have a choice! No sane person would want 3g/4g as the main connection for home use, only for moving around the town use.
3. One of the main reasons why fixed broadband in Australia hasn't grown is because of the available ports at the exchange. Check out Warner/Cashmere area of in Brisbane. Hundreds want a fixed broadband line but had to go wireless. Once the NBN is in wireless connections for home use will be dropped.
ihope
Lord Rocker makes a very good point, the 'Wireless' that is being utilised currently, when fixed wired ports are so often unavailable, is mostly slow overpriced 3G, perhaps it should be called 'Lesswire' and if any political party members think it is ok that this fraudband is acceptable then the NBN can't come soon enough for city or rural folk.
singo79
Yawn! A group of people with a vested interest to see wireless succeed over the NBN. What a surprise!
Yes wireless is a versatile medium to access the Internet on the go, but as has been stated and proven quite often, it is no replacement for wired connections.
Ultimately we are expected to somehow overlook the fact that this alliance is tainted by the fact that they all want/need wireless to succeed for financial gain.
I tend to trust the ability and qualification of NBNCo CEO Mike Quigley to deliver the right medium and to deliver it on time and on budget.
zag
To be honest wireless will end up being the #1 connection of choice and use in Australia.
There's already more mobiles than people in Australia, (over 24 million)
NBN will have a use but will become limited though the government will force people onto it as they want everyone's phone line to use the NBN etc this will conflict with the current phone laws.
Also while NBN will be great or ok, what happens when ALL your services that run via NBN fall down in a blackout?
Are people willing to shell out $6,000+ on a pre-existing NBN home install?
If your building it's a bit cheaper $3,000+ but still a bit costly.
I think people are thinking the NBN will come along 1 day and just wire in a new fibre connection but as we all know via copper lines you have to pay Telstra $500 just to get them to connect it up.
So while that fibre run might be at the foot path that doesn't mean your connected to it.
That will be the turn off to the NBN, and many people for the NBN seem to forget that it's going to cost at least 6 times the amount that you can get a copper phone line connected.
Once 4G network come online and they will come online very quickly as labor is in and the only way a real telco can make money now is via mobile services.
I see Telstra has already jumped on this band wagon by expanding it mobile network and talking about chaning mobile plans etc.
Optus have their 21 hsdpa network up.
It's only a matter of time before you get mobile networks that offer faster speeds than current DSL2+ services
Daniel
This so called "Affordable Broadband" alliance doesn't know what it is doing let alone can claim Affordable Broadband.
Perhaps the ACCC should come into this?
Question, how can this group make Affordable Broadband? I want detailed information. Second Question, How can their Wireless they been sprucing up be cheaper than it already is, when existing networks refuse to increase quota's and decrease pricing? As fast as Existing Fixed Line Network?
Thirdly,
Why not use existing infrastructure and upgrade it? There will be lots of useless equipment by having a new network. There is no business case, there is no set ROI, no Lodgement of SAU to ACCC, no modifications to existing competition laws. Existing networks need to be fixed first before a new wireless competitor comes in.
How is Backhaul going to be archived, will it be shared towards existing providers? etc etc etc
Lets Be Frank
Fact is Big Air's Jason Ashton has a lot to loose if the NBN is completed. Big Air will simply not be a viable business with the NBN operational. Let me explain. My company has a head office 30km NW of Sydney in the major business district of Castle Hill. For years we have been unable to obtain any adequate ADSL braodband because the office is too far from the exchange with 512/512 the best speed we could obtain which was flaky at best. We needed a decent upload speed for video conferencing, etc with head office in the UK. Our ONLY option was to get wireless so we turned to Big Air on a 4Mb/4Mb symertical fixed wirless connection which works well. This plan IS expensive with a small data quota. This is what Big Airs business is based on, providing wirless broadband solutions where fixed line broadband is NOT available due to the poor infrastrucutre which is currently in place. Due to cost & reliability there is no way any one would go with Big Air if they had decent speed available via ADSL or in other words if the NBN was available. So I cannot see how he would not have a vested interest is seing the NBN potted.
Kevmeister
@zag: You should go and take a look at the NBN ONT and what it is capable of, before you go sprouting off with costs for "installation" that you have clearly just grabbed from some headline-seeking news articles.
The NBN ONT is capable of interfacing direct to a copper line on the premises side to the extent of even being able to "look like" a DSL connection for those who don't want to change their internal equipment (eg. if they already have a DSL router). The only difference being that, as the copper portion is now perhaps 20 metres long, it will run full speed. That gets most people to a guaranteed 25Mbits/second.
Those wanting the full speed offering will need a Cat-5e or Cat-6 connection from the Ethernet port of the ONT into their premises.
Your $ figures are FUD. I have installed about 12 Cat-6 ports in my home, post-construction, double-storey, for a cost of around $1500. Note: I do not have the NBN, I did this so my house was networked. My brother-in-law has added about 18 Cat-6 ports to his house under construction at a cost of about $2700 - a higher cost primarily because they charge "per port" rather than on a time-and-materials which was my case.
To get an NBN broadband connection requires only 1 Cat 6 connection into the house, if the existing copper line is not going to be utilised. Anything beyond that is "network distribution" within the house, and nothing to do with "installing the NBN" itself.
The point here is that the cost can be as little as $0 if you want to use a DSL connection over your last 20 metres of copper via the ONT. If you want the higher speeds afforded by the NBN, you'll need to interface to the ONT's Ethernet port using Cat-5e/Cat-6 copper, a cost of perhaps $250.
Your FUD not only doesn't help the situation, it makes you look like an idiot.
Daniel
Lets Be Frank,
Rubbish,
BigAir is one of the bigger Wireless companies apart from Telstra and Optus,
They can also expand into Mobiles (iPhone, etc).
NPSF3000
You still haven't explained the costs.
Compared to current NBN offerings, Bigpond wireless is 100 times more expensive!
While Bigpond isn't the cheapest provider known to man - these large costs are inherent in the technology platform.
And you haven't provided a means for people to access high speed's - speeds that are needed by technologies like OTOY and HD streaming.
All this 'plan' does is give people access to a expensive slow wireless network instead of an mediocre copper one!
If you even decide to actual explain some details of your plan instead of making lots of general, unsubstantiated comments i'm all ears.
Lets Be Frank
Daniel,
Taken direct from Big Air's web site:
BigAir owns and operates Australia's largest metropolitan fixed WiMAX* broadband network.
&
Most of BigAir's competitors rely on access to Telstra's copper network which can takes weeks to install a service and often does not deliver fast symmetric speeds. Mobile wireless networks such as the 3G mobile phone networks are also not nearly fast enough to meet the demands of business Internet users in an office environment.
So the NBN will have no effect on their busness whatsoever. Don't be so naive.
Post new comment