New G9 boss insulted by Telstra network details

Former Soul CEO Michael Simmons will be taking up duties overseeing G9's bid for the national broadband network, and has today called for the ACCC to intervene in the tender process.

After announcing his resignation from Soul late last week, Simmons was today appointed managing director and will oversee the G9's bid for Australia's fibre-to-the-node (FTTN) network.

"As CEO of Soul I was on the board with all the other CEOs, so I've been living and breathing this for more than a year now.

"At the moment we're working on a tender response for a network that will service a generation and we're being asked to do that in a three-month period, I really don't see how that's long enough," said Simmons.

"We need more time and more information from Telstra," he said, going on to describe the existing network details handed over by Telstra last week as "basically an insult for [G9]".

Simmons' comments come after Optus CEO Paul O'Sullivan threatened to withdraw from the bid following Communications Minister Senator Stephen Conroy's refusal to extend the 25 July deadline for responses.

Simmons then urged the ACCC to intervene in the tender process for the network, telling ZDNet.com.au today, "It's crazy that [the ACCC] have had no involvement already".

"It's really the government's obligation to appoint someone as the referee in all of this, there's so many different stakeholders to be considered even at this stage; providers, media organisations, the incumbent and basically anyone with an interest in broadband access," he said.

Simmons emphasised the importance of a structural separation for Telstra as part of his organisation's bid. "I personally don't understand why you wouldn't have a separation for this," he said.

Asked how he would respond to Telstra's aggressive statement to competitors after lodging its bond for the network bid last week, Simmons said "[G9] don't really see much benefit in attacking Telstra; we just want to see the right access regime put in place to ensure open and fair access to the network".

Advertisement

Print feature brought to you by Hewlett Packard

Talkback 101 comments

  1. "The G Whine" ron -- 13/05/08

    The "G Whine" has started up!!! The delay tactics continue at the behest of progress.

    This is becoming a "joke" and would be funny if it wasn't so serious. The future prosperity of this country is being held back for the sake of Boptus. These guys dont get it that the "Gravy Train" ride is over and that they are overplaying their "Poor Little Optus" card which has worked for the last decade!!! The public are aware of their little game and they have had just as much time as Telstra. If not why did the G9 totally scrap their entire original 'wonder plan' and start over? And now have the hide to whinge that it's all being rushed through - lol!

    Paul Sullivan and Michael Simmons would be better of going to "whingepool with the other "whingers.

    1. "The G Whine" Peter McC -- 13/05/08

      If the "future prosperity of this country" is going to rely on Telstra providing a service at a reasonable price then we're all totally and utterly stuffed!

    2. The G Whine Anonymous -- 13/05/08

      Based on what Peter?

    3. Based on their previous history James Bell -- 13/05/08

      An hostile wholesale attitude, inflated prices where there's no competition.. there's no need to go on any further

    4. Based on past experience Charles Gregory -- 13/05/08

      For an example, lets take a look a the Bass Strait transit costs. Telstra is the only provider.
      It is cheaper to send data from Sydney, via the US, via Europe, via Singapore, to Perth - than it is to send from Melbourne to Hobart.
      The Bass Strait route is an example of what happens when Telstra are the only provider. Do you want this sort of treatment for the national network?

    5. Based on Anonymous II -- 14/05/08

      No, based on the totally unbiased (cough, splutter) opinion of Simon Hackett of Internode.

  2. Telstra up to their old tricks james squires -- 13/05/08

    Whilst I do think it is a little "whiney" (for lack of a better phrase), there is some logic to it. First Telstra said they couldn't release the network information until the proper legislation was in place. While this legislation was being worked on, they worked on their own network proposal. Then, just before the legislation is to be approved, Telstra release the information, seemingly forgetting their previous demands.

    If you want to know why Telstra being given a monopoly (again) is a bad thing, look at the pricing of back haul where they have a monopoly (i.e. Tasmania). That is how they will behave.

    1. Previous Demands Anonymous -- 13/05/08

      Telstra put a mutual confidentiality agreement with the network information. I'm sure that would have met their requirements, demands or not.

    2. Previous Demands james squires -- 13/05/08

      "Telstra put a mutual confidentiality agreement with the network information."

      No doubt they would have (and rightfully so), but why demand and delay earlier for legislation then? Did they not think of doing this earlier?

    3. because telstra is more flexible than the government Anonymous -- 13/05/08

      it's a very reasonable request to have some assurances that go with confidential information. The government were not prepared to make any such assurances, which would have been a preferred option i'm sure.
      So, for the purpose of getting things moving, telstra slapped a ca on top of the info so we can get on with our lives. doesn't sound that unreasonable.

    4. Except..... james squires -- 13/05/08

      Yes, it would be perfectly reasonable, however the government issued those assurances in February (in a letter), so the facts show that to be utter nonsense.
      http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0,24897,23295660-5013041,00.html

    5. like Internode Anonymous -- 13/05/08

      Finally the penny has dropped!! You mean the game internode is playing at!!

      People love to blame Telstra, when others do not wish to invest in the country themsleves they play political games to try and get the ACCC to enforce cheaper rates."

    6. Opel Saga con't !!! Anonymous -- 13/05/08

      "The question should be "what is in the Country's Best interests". This is what should drive Government decisions when it comes to the NBN process and Telstra has a plan in place for several years.

      Unfortunately the G9 are squabbling and do not have a plan. The OPEL saga highlights to the public how these companies look for a free ride!"

    7. What rubbish James Bell -- 13/05/08

      Anonymous if you actually knew anything about the "Opel saga" you'd have known that they submitted their final business plan very shortly after the new government took office. It was the government that took their sweet time doing anything about it, and instead decided to can the agreement as it didn't fit in with their NBN plans.

      G9 have a plan, but as with any bidder (including Telstra) they require the necessary network information in order to cost it properly. Please for the love of god will you Telstra shareholders look at what's going to benefit this country for a change? Even if Telstra win, by at least providing the necessary information that ALL other prospective bidders (including parties outside of the G9) are requesting for it will make the entire process far less controversial.

      Anonymous do you want to pay over $100 per month for a 4gig internet connection? I don't ok!

    8. What rubbish James Anonymous -- 13/05/08

      How can they even comment on what information Telstra has provided to the government, without paying the $5M bond they would not have seen the information. This is simply grandstanding and an amateurish attempt to undermine the Telstra submission / deposit announcement.

      You constantly talk about $100 broadband and now you are throwing 4GB allowance on top of it. You either have information that is not available to any other person in the country or once again you are spewing lots of s&^t out of you mouth (or fingers). Having been caught out repeatedly for your inaccurate statements in recent times I thought you would have learnt, I am sure most of the readers have woken up to you.

    9. Caught out? James Bell -- 14/05/08

      I'll believe it when you show me.

      $100 is a generally accepted retail price amongst many analysts in the industry based on Telstra's demand for an 18%+ return and the minimum costs associated with rolling out the network. 4gig is a quite a fair assumption when we consider Telstra's history of highly restrictive download allowances with other products.

    10. Singtel / Optus profit announcement today Brian -- 14/05/08

      Let's see ... today Singtel (Optus) announced their profits.

      Singtel $S14.84 billion in sales, $S3.96 billion in profit = 26.68% profit

      Optus division $7.8 billion in sales, EBITDA $2.02 billion = 25.9%.

      This makes Telstra's desire for 18% seem pretty low to me and makes me assume $100 charge from Telstra would be around $108 with Singtel / Optus / G9.

    11. The Optus contradiction! SJT -- 14/05/08

      Thanks Brian, you took the words, so to speak...

      Now to also demonstarte the each way bet that Optus/SingTel are attempting to hoodwink us with.

      On the one hand we have Paul O'Sullivan CEO of Optus crying about the Telstra monopoly and poor little Optus just wanting to be given a chance. Comments which of course are mindlessly repeated by the ground soldiers here and other blogs. However, SingTel Group CEO, Chua Sock Koong, mentioned in an interview on CNBC today that "they have a major foothold in Australia"! Hmmm, so which is it?

      I guess that's the advantage of having the company here and the parent company abroad, you can contradict each other and one of you will be right! - lol!

    12. Re: Singtel / Optusprofit announcement today James Bell -- 14/05/08

      Wow Brian you should be consider becoming a Commercial Analyst

    13. Re: Re: Singtel / Optusprofit announcement today You can ring my bell, ring my bell -- 15/05/08

      James Bell, you should not give up your day job. You are not funny and you obviously try pretty hard to make your employer sound good.

    14. First time for everything Anonymous II -- 14/05/08

      Ill believe it when you show it to me.

      Well thatd be a first!

      Cmon, go and have a look in the mirror and admit to the bloke staring back that, even if sent certified documentation, it would just be ignored and you'd be back here in a flash spreading the same lies you just had disproven.

      You wont accept anything, true or not, unless its against Telstra.

    15. more hOPELess! SJT -- 14/05/08

      Still clinging to hOPELess! Bit tlike the fisherman and the one that got away isn't it. It can be as big and wonderful as you dream!

      The G9 do not have a plan, they scrapped their initial one and now want another 5 months on top of the 3 years they've already had to come up with another - pitiful!

  3. Three card trick is finished. Sydney Lawrence -- 13/05/08

    How can these people(G8) sleep at night.

    They still wish to play the deceive game, the whinge and win and hope to pull the wool over Government eyes again. Australians are awake, Government is awake, we are all awake so forget the garbage G8, show us your plan.

    First the Opel swindle, now the G8 deal where no competition is allowed. Next we will hear the SOB story of no finance available so government must throw in another few billion. Go to hell G8 we are sick of your tricks.

    1. Translation of anything Sydney Lawrence says: Anonymous -- 13/05/08

      "I'm a sad bitter old man who made a bad decision on buying Telstra shares, and Telstra says if I astro-turf for them it will help the value bounce back!"

    2. Grow up Anonymous -- 14/05/08

      Grow up fool.

    3. "I'm a sad bitter old man who made a bad decision on buying Telstra shares, Anonymous -- 18/05/08

      True, I'm another sad bitter man who bought Telstra shares but I've since sold them all because I'm absolutely ashamed of their commercial tactics and their monopoly arrogance.

      That's all.

    4. More like sold them to buy something else Anonymous -- 18/05/08

      I have never me a shareholder that makes share ownership decisions on moral grounds as you claim "because I'm absolutely ashamed of their commercial tactics and their monopoly arrogance". It is more likely that you sold them to buy into another company that you expected to perform better, in all likelihood it is those we complain about with high bank fees, petrol prices or similar.

      I on the other hand have increased my holdings each and every year since T1, I am sitting on a very healthy profit on my trades and if I sold all of my shares now I would have a very nice profit. The best thing they have done in recent times is to allow dividend reinvestment, now I increase my holding by over 1,000 shares every 6 months without paying brokerage.

    5. What you say? Shaun W -- 14/05/08

      From what I can last recall, it was called the G9...

      How can you call it a "deceive game"? The only company that is deceiving us is telstra themselves.

      If it wasent for the members of the G9 as well as other telstra competitors, we wouldnt have the cheap ADSL and ADSL2 plans that we have today. Take the Wireless internet in Australia for example, telstra offer a 1GB plan for $79.95p/m, while three offer a 1GB plan for $15p/m. They may not have the coverage of the NextG network, and the speed may be a slight bit slower, but its sure as hell cheaper, and does the exact same thing.

      I live in Tasmania, and am disappointed at the pricing ISP's have to pay to transfer data between a little bit of water. I support the G9 fully, and hope that they can help "resolve" some of the issues we face with our internet in Australia.

    6. Supporting the G8 SJT -- 14/05/08

      Good for you Shaun, you support them all you can!

      FYI - the G9 you support are now (at least theoretically anyway) the G8 due to a merger!

      With all due respect, seems you don't even know who you are supporting, but as long as it's not Telstra hey!

    7. Research your facts Shaun Brian -- 14/05/08

      If no one is investing in Tasmania then too bad, move to a populated and profitable city.

      If it is only a little bit of water then why is it not profitable enough for other companies to run their own cable ... that's right it has been done but can't seem to get it to work.

      From a mobile perspective, yes 3 offer $15 plans and it is available in limited areas and you may cop massive roaming charges when you leave those areas without knowing about it. Telstra has coverage in over 2 million Sq Km at the same speeds, same rate. If you never leave a 3 area go for it, if you are someone who needs it in lots of locations then the added cost is worth it.

    8. Yeah Shaun.. it's your fault for living in Tasmania! James Bell -- 14/05/08

      As per Brian's post you should move to one of our more civilized and deserving of broadband locations (please note the sarcasm)

    9. Internodes Fault Anonymous -- 15/05/08

      C'mon we all know Intrenode are playing a little political game (To the detriment of Tassie) so they can put pressure on the ACCC.

  4. C'mon G9 Lleyton Hewitt from Redfern NSW -- 13/05/08

    C'mon you little Aussie battlers show the world what you have and what can happen when people have faith and there is a little competition.

    You little beauty cheap internet for all!

    To ron stop overusing "Poor Little Optus"

    Optus is not a little company and this article is not really about them. Basher...

    1. C'mon K9 or Kwhinnne Anonymous -- 04/06/08

      More of the same whinging from the K9 camp. What are they called this week in their Bogus Bid????

      For Godsake even EGAN has been quoted as saying they do not want to win?? What gives??

  5. What information? Anonymous -- 13/05/08

    Oh no - waiting for Telstra to provide information? Hello - whoose tender is this from again G9???

    If you're going to build your own network from scratch (ie. what is needed) then you don't actually need any information from Telstra at all... maybe the location of some 'shared underground network' of pipes etc.. but that would be it. In fact, why not just get council approvals and roll out your own Infrastructure - that way you would have a better network surely?

    Again - why the delay? Waiting for what? Telstra shouldn't have to provide G9 with diddley s#@! They should be able to build something by themselves all the way to each and every house in Australia... what? you need to borrow Telstra infrastructure to do that... just what are G9 looking at building - a telephone exchange?

    So will G9 then give Telstra access to their information or share their network infrastructure so Telstra could sell G9 services via wholesale? Hahahahaha I haven't laughed so hard...

    G9, put up or shut up.

    Oh and if you're not building a national fibre network - then you are limited to copper data network speeds. Why would you spend the money on that?

    1. This is the whole problem! Anonymous -- 14/05/08

      Noone is going to build a new network at all. What is being proposed is an upgrade to one of Telstra's many customer access networks. In this case they want to upgrade Telstra's copper telephony access network.
      Surely Telstra are the ones who should perform this upgrade, after all it's their carrier grade asset.

  6. Foolish Reggie "The King" Crooner -- 13/05/08

    QUOTE:"In fact, why not just get council approvals and roll out your own Infrastructure - that way you would have a better network surely? "

    I'm not supporting either side but in relation to this comment what are you thinking mon?

    2 FTTN networks isnt a real viable solution to Australias broadband woes. I believe the government does not want 2 network either hence the tender process.

  7. Everyone compete. Sydney Lawrence -- 13/05/08

    Hi there King but are you trying to tell us that the ACCC is now against competition?. Or is it just G8 that is against competition?.

    What would happen if G8 did build the NBN and when they became operational Telstra wanted to build their own FTTN. I think it would be a little hypocritical if the ACCC was to ban Telstra's competition.

    I was under the impression that all competition was good.

    1. Sydney you know yourself it's not viable Anonymous -- 13/05/08

      So don't try to pretend that it is.

      There's neither the demand or the need for two competing FTTN networks and it would be a complete waste in capital investment. The best solution for consumers is to have an independant entity which wholesales network access to all competitors on equal terms and is not permitted to provide retail access to the netwok. Anyone who believes otherwise is seeing stars.

    2. Not at all Reggie "The King" Crooner -- 13/05/08

      Mr Lawrence Sir I do not mean that at all. I just believe that the ACCC is a rather useless body because at the end of the day its only as powerful as the government empowering it.

      I could be wrong but I remember reading elsewhere that 2 Networks are not wanted and I believe that it too would be pointless.

      On that note "does not want 2 networks" does not mean that there cannot be 2 networks. Hence anyone with the finance and resources would be welcome to put forward any proposals for approval pending

    3. Not at all Reggie "The King" Crooner -- 13/05/08

      Mr Lawrence Sir I did not mean that at all.

      I believe that the ACCC is only as powerful as the government empowering it and if 2 networks are not wanted then thats the way it will stay.

      That said " I believe the government does not want 2 networks" does not mean that there wont be. I thought I recalled a statment indicating that only one network is wished for but cannot find it.

      I believe 2 networks are not viable either so I dont really care who builds this network. I just want it done right. That said if its Telstra or G? good on them, get it built and give us our High speed access.

      That is all!

    4. What if Anonymous -- 13/05/08

      2015 the G8 finishes their rollout of the FTTN and there is new technology released that enables another company to roll out 100Mbps to every home regardless of distance for half the price using the existing CTTH (Copper To The Home) infrastructure. That would mean that the G8 solution is obsolete before it has 1 subscriber.

      Based on the crooner's logic this would not be a viable solution and based on past comments by the Gx this new technology would not be permitted to be switched on for 20 years as they have previously asked for a 20 year caveat on any competing technologies.

    5. What if Reggie "The King" Crooner -- 14/05/08

      Quote Anon "Based on the crooner's logic "

      Once again i'm just going by what I believe I remember reading but I cannot quote the source.

      I'm not saying that something like you suggested would not be viable and I'm sure the government will be open to other improvements in years to come.

    6. That's funny Charles Gregory -- 13/05/08

      .. that you say "I was under the impression that all competition was good." - I thought the official Telstra line, which we all know you tow, was that others building their own infrastructure was duplication, which is apparently bad? So which is it?

    7. And again... SJT -- 14/05/08

      Once again for all the dummies. Charles you asked elsewhere before and was answered, so why ask again? You're becoming just like James! Anyway...

      The duplication issue was in relation to hOPELess. Where they were to be given $1b to service under serviced areas, but decided they'd sneakily use it as a means to duplicate in a lot of areas where Telstra already has Next G. So Telstra complained. Thankfully the hOPELess folly is over!

      Once again, competition (i.e. true competition) not the leeching regulated brand you all love, is good!

    8. A government subsidy to duplicate a government subsidy James Bell -- 14/05/08

      Yes, as SJT has correctly stated there were some areas where the Opel network was to provide coverage where NextG was also available, so essentially in certain areas it would have been one government subsidised network (Opel) duplicating another government subsidised network (NextG). The only problem with the point you've tried to make however is that I'm fairly certain every single one of the 200 odd exchanges Telstra were paid by the government last October (via the Australian Broadband Guarantee scheme) to enable for ADSL are also located in NextG coverage areas, but of course there's nothing wrong with that since it is Telstra after all... right?

      You also forgot to mention SJT that Opel were to operate as an independent wholesaler (unlike Telstra) without the ability to provide any retail services, the network was to provide coverage to many thousands of customers not residing in NextG coverage zones or the fact that NextG is not at all comparable with metro broadband pricing (another condition of the Opel contract). That's ok though.. nothing like leaving out a bit of crucial information to make your argument look better hey? ;)

    9. hOPELess - the gunners! SJT -- 14/05/08

      Simply read my above reply to you, about the one that got away.

      hOPELess really were the gunners weren't they. Gunner do this and gunner do that, but did sfa! But they were gunner be great!

      Again I reiterate, you aimlessly cling to the past and this stupid hOPELess dream, snap out of it!

      Next you'll be suppling links to years ago, in a vain and desperate attempt to try and discredit people about shareholdings (which have obviously changed over the years)!

      Oh wait you already did that, didn't you - doh. lmfao!

    10. *yawn* James Bell -- 14/05/08

      SJT the way you have responded really comes at no surprise. If I read back through these posts I believe it's you who keeps going on about Opel. I simply added some additional information you conveniently forgot to include.

    11. That explains it! SJT -- 14/05/08

      Ah, yawn.

      Thanks James, I now know why you miss so many of the facts.

      It's because you are asleep - lol!

    12. Leaving information out - Contradiction James Anonymous -- 14/05/08

      You failed to include the fact that Optus was proposing to sell all of their ADSL infrastructure to Opel at undepreciated costs instead of investing their own cash. Opel would have actually been $1.2B of new investment with just under $1B being from the taxpayers. The taxpayer would not be funding 50% of the new network they would have been funding close to 75% of the network.

      The Next G network uses about 15% of the old CDMA infrastructure (primarily base stations) and being generous to say the tax payers funded 50% of this then the Next G network had 7.5% government funding which has since been repaid by allowing CDMA to be resold to competitors for close to a decade. If there was still anything owing to the taxpayers then I am certain the Liberal government would have forced conditions on them which we all know didn't happen.

      Why are you talking about comparing a new government funded network (Opel) and an upgraded privately owned network (Next G) in terms of separation, we are yet to see what comes from the FTTN proposal but if Telstra wins it then we could compare one new network proposal with another new network proposal.

      You will always find a bias argument to every point raised on this site and I am sure that no matter how many facts are put in front of you there will be plenty of contradicting or distracting comments made up by you.

    13. Very few facts were "put in front of me" in your post James Bell -- 14/05/08

      Anonymous, instead of questioning the various unsubstantiated dollars and percentages you've quoted where your objective simply appears to be a means of diversion from the core of my argument, I'll go straight your main question; "Why are you talking about comparing a new government funded network (Opel) and an upgraded privately owned network (Next G)..." and the answer is I honestly believe comprisons should never have been made to begin with! It is Telstra and its fan club who instigated these asymmetrical comparisons by claiming Opel was only going to duplicate NextG whilst not discussing the inherently different services, pricing and choice Opel would have provided many hundreds of thousands of Australians for the first time.

    14. Back to the story Anonymous -- 14/05/08

      Great point James, let's get back to the purpose of this story.

      A MD of a company that was installed yesterday got up and immediately stated that the information presented by Telstra to the government was a joke. This information is only available to companies that put up a $5 million bank guarantee. To date the G? consortium has not made that guarantee and as such are not privy to what has been supplied by Telstra. If this is not a political stunt by the boss of a $2 company then I don't know what is.

      Let's not compare 3GSM with 802.11b/g/n, let's not compare profit margins, let's not compare ownership structure, let's not compare track records, lets not compare capabilities, let's just compare who has actually invested funds and done more then stand on a podium and make noise.

      Even when we stick to the story at hand the 'facts' speak for themselves.

    15. Let's wait see what the government has to say James Bell -- 15/05/08

      "This information is only available to companies that put up a $5 million bank guarantee. To date the G? consortium has not made that guarantee and as such are not privy to what has been supplied by Telstra... Even when we stick to the story at hand the 'facts' speak for themselves."

      If a report in The Australian today is correct then shortly Conroy is going to request Telstra to improve the details of the network information it submitted whilst also extending the tender deadline.

    16. Looks like that will be another story Anonymous -- 15/05/08

      Until this is official it is rumor and speculation. Right now the story at hand is still this one. If we all survived on rumor and speculation we would all be twisted and bitter like you.

    17. Time will tell in any case James Bell -- 15/05/08

      It's about as speculative as your assumption that the G9 have no idea what network information Telstra submitted and referring to it as "a political stunt by the boss of a $2 company". Neither you or I know what the G9 have access to or what Telstra has submitted.

    18. May not know what was submitted but... Anonymous -- 15/05/08

      But I am certain that this information has not been seen by any member of the G9 through approved or official channels.

      It took you a long time to read both halves of the paragraph. I'll be back tomorrow to read your multiple posts in reply to this one.

  8. Free and open competition. Sydney Lawrence -- 14/05/08

    I believe by consensus we have solved the problem created by the ACCC and the Howard Government.

    The deception, that the ACCC by trying to falsely create competition would help consumers, has now been exposed as a failure. Their actions in fact did quite the opposite and entrenched operators in business that truly should not have been able to survive had true competition been allowed to operate.

    "WHAT IF Anon" above exposes a crystal clear argument as to the failing of the policy of the ACCC. Open competition with all parties fighting hard and where the winner is determined by the consumer is the only way.

    1. The Howard Government James Bell -- 14/05/08

      Perhaps since the Howard Government supposedly stuffed up so much Prime Minister Rudd should take back the PSTN as well while they're at it hey Sydney?

    2. Ah the complete circle - we're now back to PSTN. SJT -- 14/05/08

      Here we go again!

      You're not re-writing history through the eyes of James again, by snidely inferring the PSTN was gifted are you?

      I don't really want to and shouldn't need to explain it AGAIN, especially to one who thinks he knows it all anyway! However, I do realize that it helps the anti-Telstra agenda to re-write history and suggest PSTN was gifted to Telstra and therefore can simply be taken back?

      But, athough you pretend it wasn't so, I'm sure you already know about the PSTN, the $b's in debt incurred thereof passed on to Telstra and how it all actually came to be. If you don't you either were ignoring the facts AGAIN or shame on you for commenting without knowing!

      So please...

    3. More good financial advice please. Sydney Lawrence -- 15/05/08

      Could any of the super smart financial advisers who were so kind as to advise Telstra supporters to sell their Telstra shares a short time ago let me know how Telstra shares are performing lately?

    4. Sound advice Lord Watchdog -- 15/05/08

      Sydney, if you were half as smart as the people you are being flippant to you wouldn't have bought into Telstra in the first place. In my view it isn't a question of when to sell but why one would bother to begin with.

      There are plenty of better stocks available that are not only more stable than Telstra's but also pay better dividends too.

      Of course, if Labor continues to hand Telstra the exclusive right to build new networks on a silver platter then I would concede that this would (and in fact SHOULD) cause Telstra's share price to go up.

      However if the FTTN/H is handed to another party then watch your retirement nest egg fall off the wall sunshine and don't sulk on here about being stabbed in the back by your mate Kevin 07 either - you were warned. :-p

    5. Whinge wont win. Sydney Lawrence -- 16/05/08

      Lord Watchdog you certainly have either a very bad memory or an extremely short attention span.

      I did not say I have Telstra shares. That is another fabrication by you, but that aside, you must know that every person in Australia (you included Lord Watchdog) have a financial interest in the well-being and prosperity of Telstra.

      It is my belief that the G9 cunning deceptions, calls for delays, employing the Federal Opposition to champion their cause, the introduction of their Singapore friends etc will have no effect on Senator Conroy who will deliver Australia a NBN on time and within budget and it will very likely be built by a champion Australian company , Telstra.

    6. Neither does living in a world of self-denial Lord Watchdog -- 16/05/08

      There are three reasons why I believe you are a Telstra shareholder Sydney:

      1. Other users claim that this is the case and have linked to pages elsewhere that provides evidence, albeit largely circumstancial.
      2. You constantly boast about Telstra's share price when it rises and never say anything to the contrary when it goes down.
      3. You have never categorically denied being a shareholder in Telstra.

      Don't get me wrong - I don't have a problem with people owning Telstra shares - my problem is with telstra shareholders who complain about the need for an active and competitive market. As much as Labor tries sometimes, Australia is not a socialist or communist society and where a fully government-owned and controlled utility is not the primery service provider, markets should provide customers with real choice. We do not have that in telecommunications at this time.

      "you must know that every person in Australia (you included Lord Watchdog) have a financial interest in the well-being and prosperity of Telstra."

      Yes, I agree with that and I have mentioned this in other threads here. Telstra can continue to grow without being the sole survivor though. If Sol and the Amigos cannot make and keep Telstra viable whilst competing for business fairly then there is something seriously inadequate about their business model.

    7. Lord Hypocrite Stephen Pappas -- 16/05/08

      Why don't you practice what you preach.

      Post a categorical denial that you had dealings with Telstra several years ago and due to being upset when they stopped allowing you to abuse the policies they had in place and removed your services from their systems you became sore and disgruntled.

      Deny the fact that you set up your own operations to compete with a Telstra service which has since been effectively abandoned by Telstra due to not having any technical and financial future for the company (and for most of the world).

      Deny that you still operate this and it is in your best interests to have people leave Telstra's platform to utilise yours.

      You use the pretense of wanting better services and pricing for the country while in reality the sole intention is to benefit you towards your own personal and financial goals.

      Yes competition is good but true competition involves investment and accountability and not to ride the coat tails of your competitors. If Telstra was allowed to operate by, as you claim, overcharging and under servicing the country then after 15+ years I am certain that the other companies would have invested more of their own money to deliver competing services. It is only when there is real profits to be made that these companies stop using Telstra infrastructure and build their own.

      Why is it that we only see non-Telstra ADSL in major exchanges and not in rural / remote areas? Why is it that the Tasmanian Government is paying $2M per year to a Singtel owned company for a fibre link that has not been operational for 2 years while at the same time they can build a massive trans continental cable to Asia and the USA in less time? Why is it that Optus did not plan to extend their mobile network until Telstra got agreement to not have the Next G network declared? Why are there still hundreds of locations with only Telstra backhaul when there are dozens of companies that built and are competing for the sale of Brisbane - Sydney - Melbourne capacity?

      One simple answer for all of these questions ... not enough profit compared to wholesaling from Telstra.

    8. Another whingefest from a Telstra fanboy Lord Watchdog -- 20/05/08

      "Post a categorical denial that you had dealings with Telstra several years ago..."

      I categorically deny your conspiracy theory.

      "Deny the fact that you set up your own operations to compete with a Telstra service..."

      I categorically deny your conspiracy theory.

      "Deny that you still operate this and it is in your best interests to have people leave Telstra's platform to utilise yours."

      I categorically deny your conspiracy theory.

      "You use the pretense of wanting better services and pricing for the country while in reality the sole intention is to benefit you towards your own personal and financial goals."

      I would agree that everyone is entitled to the same good products and services that I expect to receive. However Telstra does not currently qualify as their products are expensive and their service (after they have sucked a customer into a two year contract) is C R A P!

      "Yes competition is good but true competition involves investment and accountability and not to ride the coat tails of your competitors."

      I agree and this is why Telstra should not be chosen to build the new broadband network. Give it to a competitor and let them prove that Telstra is not automatically entitled to be the sole network provider in Australia. This will provide true competition and lessen the extent of the freeloading that Telstra shareholders continue to bleat and moan about.

      "Why is it that we only see non-Telstra ADSL in major exchanges and not in rural / remote areas?"

      Probably for the same reason that Bigpond has only enabled ADSL2+ in areas where competitors have done so.

      "One simple answer for all of these questions ... not enough profit compared to wholesaling from Telstra."

      How is this relevant to your categoric allegations that I run a service that is intended to compete with one offered by Telstra? Your post sounds more like personally vindictive diatribe than a genuine desire for a competitive communications sector.

    9. "Spot On" Jim -- 21/05/08

      I think he is "spot" on. Some very intersting poits raised by Mr Pappas!!!

    10. Poits Carl Smith -- 21/05/08

      Interesting or not, the points raised by Mr Pappas are irrelevent to the subject raised by the original poster.

    11. Crap Simon -- 23/05/08

      Why do you all go on with this pro-anti telstra/optus crap? These are just private telco companies who could not give a toss what any of us think. Id rather see the discussion focus on the national interest and impact of technology change, not who is the biggest dichead. I do not care less which multi national corporate entity wins the national FTTN contract. I do care about how this national infrastructure, sponsored by public money, is administered. I do want to see unequivocal separation of wholesale and retail in this administrator of the national resource.

    12. I don't get it M Brown -- 16/05/08

      Why would someone holding shares in a company have any impact on this story. There is an unnecessary focus by contributors on things that are not associated this story. This normally happens when a writer is trying to change the subject because they are not willing to concede the argument.

    13. PSTN costing Simon -- 23/05/08

      The PSTN was indeed a gift, Telstra did not pay a cent for the public and private easements, the value of which is higher than the physical infrastructure. No other organisation (except Govt) can build a national ULL infrastructure (copper or fibre) due to the easement cost and litigation cost.

    14. Not a Gift!!! Anonymous -- 23/05/08

      Wrong!!! Repayed in full by Telstra to the Government and now owned by shareholders.

      Give them a "Truckload"...no make that a "container ship" of money and they may part with it!!! Not a gift!!!

      Do your homework first before talking absolute rubbish

    15. More information please Lord Watchdog -- 23/05/08

      Can you please tell me how much Telstra pays to rent the space they occupy below the ground for their pits and conduits?

      When Optus was granted leave to install their cable network they had to cough up $3.00 per pole per annum to the various electrical supply authorities whose poles were being used.

      Telstra is a private company and every millimetre in depth of land is owned by the Crown. If Optus has to pay then so should Telstra.

    16. Who maintains the poles? Anonymous -- 24/05/08

      Optus pays $3 p.a., they do not have to maintain poles, they do not have to maintain pits, if a pole is moved or replaced they have no technician costs. The only time they have to get technicians out is when there is a cable issue. Telstra pays for all maintenance on the pits and associated work. Once again Optus chose a path to offload responsibility and the cheap eyesore option.

    17. Who does maintain the poles? Lord Watchdog -- 25/05/08

      You speak about pole maintenance but you fail to realise that there is barely a straight pole in Sydney. That said, when maintenance is carried out on Optus' cabling, optus do the work and they pay for it, along with the $3 rental fee. However who maintains the poles is not the point.

      The point is that Optus does not have the same free and easy time that Telstra does when rolling out new network cabling. Telstra has almost exclusive use of an underground network paid for my you and me.

    18. WRONG!!!!! SJT -- 25/05/08

      WRONG...

      It was not a gift. For your information in 1975 following budget appropriations, it was found the PSTN was in debt to the tune of $4b ($4b in 1975, think about it)!

      The PSTN was vested to Telecom (now Telstra) in 1992 with this debt (plus one would assume the additional interest incurred on that $4b over many years).

      When Telstra was privatised, Telstra shareholders not only bought Telstra for some $50b, they also repaid the debt and therefore paid for PSTN.

  9. Dont mess with the man, let him bring it! Sydney supporter -- 16/05/08

    Dont mess with sydney!

    http://images.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=http://www.nowwearetalking.com.au/library/Image/your-stories/shareholder/sh_syd-lawrence.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.nowwearetalking.com.au/shareholder-stories/sydney-lawrence-from-manly-qld&h=153&w=161&sz=12&hl=en&start=16&tbnid=rPE7yeXchSX2wM:&tbnh=93&tbnw=98&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsydney%2Blawrence%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den

  10. Amazing what further google searches find Anonymous -- 16/05/08

    25 Sep 2006 ... Howard has to persuade Telstra investors like the retired forklift driver, Sydney Lawrence, that they will not lose their money again.

    Share holder... maybe not now but once at least

  11. Dogs Reggie "The King" Crooner -- 16/05/08

    You 2 above are complete dogs. Maybe if you list your name Sydney can post stuff about you guys and your personal dealings.

    Then again Sydney isnt a dog that would revert to that. Sure I'm a fence sitter but would say the same thing if people kept posting about James Bell or Lord Watchdog. Not to mention its completely irrelevant to the story.

    ZDnet I apologise for my 2 cents of offtopic rant.

    1. Their getting rattled. Sydney Lawrence -- 17/05/08

      Thanks Reggie but it's sticks and stones. Anyway if the King is for, who can be against.

  12. Lord Watchdog Stephen Pappas -- 24/05/08

    I know you Lord, I know your history and dealings with Telstra. I have a list of lies and contradictions I could publish about you but there is not enough room available at the national library. The only thing that you never lie about is your hatred towards Telstra, too bad you will lie about anything and everything just to try to get a story across.

    1. Delusional Steve, very delusional heh Lord Watchdog -- 25/05/08

      Steve,

      You don't know me, you are a dill. You are a liar, you are deceitful and you wouldn't know the truth if it slapped you across the face.

      More to the point, I don't believe I know you either. If I am wrong then my challenge to you, little boy, is to put up or shut up.

      I've been insulted by professionals and that doesn't even rate you as a starter mate but if you think you know as much about me as I know then bring it on. Let's hear about this hate campaign you think I have.

      Oh, I almost forgot to mention... Your headline news posted previously has made its way on to my website and plenty of people ave had a laugh at you :-)

    2. Nerve Anonymous -- 25/05/08

      Steve a nerve didn't he ***ker!

    3. Oh please... Graeme Abbott -- 26/05/08

      Surely you can do better than that Mr Anonymous...

      "Steve a nerve"

      Not only is your insult petty and childish but you can't even construct a sentence.

    4. Getting old are we? Stephen Pappas -- 30/05/08

      Lord, not sure if is Alzheimers, stupidity or if you simply don't want to admit there is someone that has had dealings with you that disagrees with your bias and arrogant attitude. If you don't recall me then I don't care, if I come across you again I might remind you, until then I hope the medication helps. I'll go back to reading your stupid comments and having a nice laugh.

    5. We are all getting older Lord Watchdog -- 01/06/08

      We're all getting older but I won't blame any disease or mental condition on me getting older - not sure what your excuse is Stephen but as far as I can remember, and my long term memory is excellent, I do not remember anyone called Stephen Pappas, whether they were an acquaintance of mine or not.

      I'll put your inability to "remind" me down to a lack of backbone on your part. In the mean time I will refrain from playing your childish guessing game and sticking to what is relevant here - Telstra's childishness, ahh and their bias and arrogance too.

  13. Enough Telstra vs Optus. What about looking at Michael Simmons achievements? Anonymous -- 26/05/08

    Hi All,

    Sorry to throw a rational comment into all the we love/hate telstra rhetoric but what about Michael Simmons?

    He's leaving Soul just after Soul 'acquired' TPG. in a bizarre turnaround it is actually TPG executives taking over how Soul do things because the corporate structures that were in place at Soul w