NBN History and Delays.....or prudence?

Ok, so it's been a while since my last post. I've been busy beavering away around forums and Tech sites trying to spread the word on the NBN (would you believe some people don't even know what it is?...). One thing I've noticed over these past few weeks is the argument from the Coalition and from supporters- "The NBN is drastically behind schedule- they were supposed to have 150 000 connections by now! This just shows how much of a waste it is and how much longer it is going to take."

Is this true? There's no question that it is indeed a long time, in anyones' book, since the NBN as we know it, was started. But why? For this, first I would suggest you read my new page NBN History. There is alot of backstory of the NBN and it is necessary to understand before we continue, where we came from.

Regulation- Bane and Saviour

Such as life in Australia that we have many, MANY, MANY regulations/laws for just about everything. NBNCo. needs legislation to make it exist and give it power, albeit funded by the government (those funding requirements need legislation too). The power OF NBNCo. must be regulated, to ensure it doesn't get above itself, even with the funding restrictions imposed by government. Regulations must be put into place surrounding how NBNCo. will offer services to RSP's (Retail Service Providers as they are in an NBN world) and how much they can charge for this- enter the ACCC. Legislation must also be passed to separate Telstra, seeing as the government can't just force a company to separate just because they use publicly bought infrastructure and have paid to use it (shareholders); the ACCC has to approve this too.

The upshot of all this boils down to- time. These agreements with Telstra took time. These regulation discussions and negotiations took time. This new legislation passing parliament (with a hostile Opposition too) took time. And add to that a hung parliament with the election of Gillard in mid-2010, meaning each and every piece of legislation must be gone over with a fine tooth comb before the Independents/Greens could force its' passage through parliament with the government, due to a completely hostile Coalition on the issue.

The discussions with Telstra started in late 2009, but they aren't completed until mid-2011 and they aren't signed into existence (with agreement from shareholders) until December 2011 or enacted until March 2012....only 6 months ago! The legislation to create, give power to and manage NBNCo. isn't passed and completed until 2010, well over a year after NBNCo's birth. And the regulations surrounding NBNCo's WBA (Wholesale Broadband Access) are still ongoing, due to constant objections from the big Telco's who are barging for more money, more restrictions on pricing and shorter contract terms.

The agreements with Telstra are crucial- they allow NBNCo. to sign a lease for accessing Telstra ducts, pits and exchange space for the next 35 years, at a cost of around $5.5 Billion. This is essential, so that NBNCo. DON'T have to dig holes and rip up driveways and paths (sound familiar....) and it saves them a bunch of money and time. They also allow NBNCo. to migrate customers off the Telstra copper and HFC (cable internet), 18 months after those areas are provided with live FTTH, ensuring the customer uptake is high without exception and maintaining NBNCo's business case which will allow it to service its' loans and thereby not costing the taxpayer by using bonds to borrow the capital. This part comes at a cost of $4 Billion over 8 years. The final piece is about USO (Universal Service Obligations) of Telstra to the government to maintain Payphones, Emergency (000) Services, traffic lights etc. This doesn't directly impact NBNCo, but will in the future. This amounts to about $1.5 Billion. Total agreement cost, $11 Billion. But, the agreement has a clause- If Telstra has to sign this agreement, Optus must also sign a binding agreement to migrate customers off their HFC (cable internet).....more on this next post....

That hurdle is overcome and, as stated, is finally signed and sealed in December 2011 and implemented in March 2012 by Telstra shareholders (99.5% agree in fact....). However, in the mean time, there is an interim agreement that allows NBNCo to use Telstra ducts etc. to enable it to start trials.

Now, this is where things start to get a bit dicey in terms of timing. Do we count the schedule, released by NBNCo. in mid-2010, as part of the original Corporate Plan, as the beginning of the construction of the NBN? After all, they're putting in fibre to premises, signing satellite contracts, running wireless backhaul and planning towers. Or do we count it AFTER the trials have finished? After all, you can't very well rollout infrastructure for millions of customers without first trialling it in real-world scenarios? What if something doesn't work properly, or takes longer than expected? This is the point of trials.

Trials and Timing- Subjective or Objective

And here I suppose is the crux of the issue. NBNCo. are a government company who has a duty to provide the Australian people with the best, most cost-effective and fastest build possible. To go ahead, full steam after nothing more than on paper planning would be extremely reckless- Australia is a vast country and many factors in geography, existing infrastructure, housing types and so on could effect the rollout. These need to be analysed in a real-world rollout. Hence the trials. The first FTTH trials started to rollout in Tasmania, where a State NBN had already been planned and given to Aurora Energy and NBNCo. had tied up a deal to incorporate that into the NBN at large. That saw the first fibre trials rolled out in 2010 by Aurora  and after legislation was passed in early 2010, saw that come under NBNCo. jurisdiction. The trials were completed and the first services tested in mid-2011, modest as they were (several thousand premises were connected, a few hundred used the service). Several thousand are now connected since commercial services have been turned on, with tens of thousands now passed.

The next fibre trials, on mainland Australia were in Armidale, Kiama, Townsville, Wilunga and Brunswick. These covered varying geographies and societal differences. They were conducted from September 2011. Again, initial takeups of the service were small, but have now risen to many tens of % in several of the sites after commercial service was turned on, including to nearly 35% in Kiama. While this seems small in the overall scheme of things, takeups of 15% overseas in similar rollouts are considered excellent. Don't forget too, takeup is largely irrelevant because of the Telstra deal- all those on Telstra copper (most people) will be migrated automatically to the NBN after 18 months of receiving fibre in their area and the FAN being active. Therefore even small takeups of 20% now, will still result regardless, in 70-80% takeups in 2 years time.

In the meantime, satellite deals for NBNCo's "Interim Satellite Services", which see 6/1 services supplied over existing commercial satellites, were signed in May 2011 with Optus and IPStar and offered from July 1 2011. These services have much cheaper prices than normal commercial services (see SkyMesh and compare NBN Satellite with IPStar satellite plans) and much higher speeds, with much higher downloads. And the contention is managed on these satellite slots, meaning these NBN customers continue to receive higher speeds when in peak times, on the same satellites. Once NBNCo. launch their own satellites, by 2015, there will be 90Gbps shared between 300 000 premises. This seems low; after all, if everyone were to download at full speed the entire time, it would result in 450Kbps maximum speed. However, the satellite area is so vast, the likelihood of even half these services downloading at full speed (12/1) at the same time is negligible. However, NBNCo. are also only predicting some 120 000 people to use these satellite services (see the new Corporate Plan), making contention even easier to manage.

The second mainland fibre trial sites partially skipped "trial" phase and instead switched on commercial services as soon as connected. These were done at 15 other locations and expanded 4 of the original locations in the trials, resulting in some 65 000 connections by April of 2012. However, reported takeup was only some 3700 actual services by then, on fibre.

Wireless trials were conducted from April this year, with a few hundred premises outside the fibre footprint of the trials in Armidale, being connected via NBNCo's fixed wireless LTE solution, for current speeds of 12/1. This was expanded to Toowoomba and Tamworth in June. There are a little over one thousand people on the NBNCo. wireless plans.

All these trials, as you can see, have been planeed, executed and spaced out according to the best ways to tackle the various geographies of Australia. The trials are now totally completed. Full commercial rollout of the NBN services, announced as part of the 3 Year Rollout plan in very late March this year (just after the Telstra agreement signed in December took effect in March), were to begin in July. Some 750 000 connections will be started or completed by the end of this year and 3.5 Million will be started or completed by 2015.

Why did I just go through, what may seem like, a giant advertisement for the work NBNCo. have done? Because it gives an indication of the sort of groundwork that has to be done for a rollout on this scale. It cannot be simply rolled out as soon as the numbers are crunched. Real-world numbers must be seen and compared to ensure the best outcome. And this is exactly what has happened as a result....

Blowout? or Blow hard?

So here we come to the point- is NBNCo. on time, on budget and prudent in their efficiency? Most of the mainstream media would have us think not- the term "blowout" was used in conjunction with the new Corporate Plan (2012-2015) announcement more times than I've seen it used in the 5 years previous....

ABC: "NBN Co confirms billion-dollar cost blowout"

The Australian: "Extra $3.2bn needed to fund NBN" (Google the Headline to get around the paywall..)

SMH: "NBN costs blow out by billions"

None of those are particularly positive for NBNCo. or the government. But let's have a look a bit more closely about what the new Corporate Plan actually says....

1- An extra 3.9% in Capex (Capital Expenditure) or $1.4 Billion
2- An extra $3.2 Billion in Opex (Operating Expenditure)
3- A slight dip in revenues of $0.6 Billion
4- Internal Rate of Return raising from 7% to 7.1%
5- 9 Month Start delay, compressing to 6 month end delay (Jun 2021 instead of Dec 2020)

Now, this all seems quite odd- NBNCo. appear to be spending more to build the network, more to operate the network, taking longer to build it AND receive less from customers, yet they will produce MORE return on investment?? Firstly, here's the mistake often overlooked by the media- the IRR of 7.1% is over 30 years. The Capex, Opex and Revenue forecasts are over 10 years. (till 2021)

Second, the start date was pushed back, but that doesn't actually mean it's taking longer to build. The total build time is actual 9 years 3 months (Mar 2012- Jun 2021) but it was supposed to begin in July 2011 and end in Dec 2020 (9.5 years). Primarily because of the Telstra Definitive agreement vote being pushed back to December 2011 and the agreement not becoming effective until March 2012, meaning NBNCo. could not access detailed information on ducting, current infrastructure condition and other detailed work offered through the Telstra deal, the start date for commercial (or volume) rollout was pushed back from Jul 2011 to Mar 2012.

3rd- let's have a closer look into that extra Capex and Opex:

Capex increases for 2 main separate reasons:

1- Build Drop- This is the method used by NBNCo. in predetermining and pre-building the lengths and connections of the fibre being rolled out through every street. Originally, NBNCo. were using a Demand Drop system, ie. The main local fibre would be run past all premises and then when the customer wanted (or was migrated to) an NBN connection, an NBN crew would then come out and connect the premises connection device (PCD) to the street fibre (the drop). Then the team would install the NTD and connect it to the PCD to have a full service operational by the end of the day for the customer to ring up an RSP and be connected.

Now however, NBNCo. have chosen the "Build Drop" method. This is where the drop to each premises and the PCD are installed AS the local fibre is rolled down the street past each premises. This means, when a customer wants an NBN service, 2 technicians simply come out with an NTD and connect it to the PCD and the customer is up and running. This technique saves on double work requirements (treading the same streets twice) and is expected to save NBNCo. money and time in the long run, while bringing forward some extra costs (speeding up customer connection time artificially with the Build Drop).

2- The Optus Agreement- This Agreement (which a clause built into the Telstra agreement required) was not assumed in the first Corporate Plan. This agreement has seen much debate, as it essentially pays Optus $800 Million to migrate its' internet customers off their HFC (cable internet) instead of letting NBNCo. slowly remove customers as natural speed improvements tempted customers to change to the NBN. It is a lot of money to pay Optus, especially when they are likely not to actually compete with the NBN anyway, however, the ACCC believed it was for the good of the NBN business case (and anything that increases the business case for the NBN increases the likelihood the NBN stays intact- the best outcome for the consumer) that this deal should be allowed. This requires NBNCo. to accelerate rollout in these areas to ensure it meets the guidelines of the agreement (all Optus HFC areas to be connected by 2018) thereby requiring NBNCo. to move forward Capex to cover this.

Several other increases in Capex included:

- Greenfields- NBNCo. must connect Greenfields even outside the current fibre footprint now, raising Capex costs to get fibre to these areas in the next few years.

- Network Distances- More accurate network data, available after the Telstra agreement came into affect, has caused the amount of fibre required to be increased after this data was analysed.

- MDU's (Multiple Dwelling Units)- NBNCo. had underestimated the Capex required to connect all MDU's with fibre

- Higher Labour costs.....don't think this needs much explanation.

Opex increased for several reasons:

1- Once again, the Optus deal, which will result in more customers being online on the NBN faster than originally planned, meaning higher Capex to deal with this (but also correspondingly higher Revenues).

2- The Telstra deal gave NBNCo. access to more dark fibre and exchanges than predicted, meaning Opex goes up for using these systems, but Capex goes down for not having to provision them separately.

3- Small extra requirements for IT and network interactions between NBNCo. and Telstra as well as with other RSP's.

Revenue decreases for 1 primary reason- The agreement NBNCo. made with RSP's in mid 2011 for a rebate on the first 150Mbps of CVC, before a POI reaches 30 000 connected customers. This erodes NBNCo's initial revenue takeup in each of the CSA's (Connectivity Serving Areas) until a critical limit is hit and all CVC has to be paid for. This can be seen on page 62 of the Corporate plan- you can see the CVC earnings are pushed back significantly, taking nearly 4 years to come back to initial predictions. This lowers overall revenue earned in the first 10 years (covered by the new Corporate Plan).

All this is pretty dry, but the point about all these things is, the major changes to the costs and thereby the explanation for the "blowout" (I don't like that word- I'd hardly call 4% or $900 Million a blowout when BHP just dumped $50 Billion on an investment a few weeks ago....) is quite clear and it is, primarily, due to changes in scope. Both the Optus deal (not part of the original Corporate Plan) and the New Developments requirements to connect all houses over 100 premises, rather than over 500, as NBNCo. originally budgeted for, soaks up 50% of the cost increases. Add the build drop for another 20-30% of the cost now, but less costs later. The 20-25% left (or 1% overall) in increased costs shows actually how close NBNCo. assumed and predicted many costs to be in its' original Plan. I don't know about you, but I think if my custom built house was to come in 1% over budget + 3% over budget for additions I made to it, I'd be pretty happy with that.... (remember that Opex increase is a move forward of costs from the Optus agreement. Those costs would always have been required, they're just required sooner rather than later when there is more Revenue to cover them)

NBNCo. appear to be doing a decent job of designing and rolling out a network over the past few years, that has constantly had its goal posts moved. Their original predictions about the costs within the scope they were given, was within about 2%. And the scope changes have added around 10% extra cost of 10 years, but much of that is clawed back through higher revenues and no longer required labour for the Demand Drop.

Is takeup relevant?

Well, I guess that depends on what you believe. Does it matter that people aren't jumping left, right and centre onto the NBN straight away? (although in some cases they are- see Kiama and Willunga takeups of 25% and 38% respectively) Not really- the Telstra deal, which the Coalition regularly overlook in explaining how uncaring people regard the NBN, requires that any FSA (Fibre Serving Area) that has full and active connections for its' coverage have ALL premises within its' footprint migrated to the NBN, off Telstra copper or HFC and now Optus HFC as well, within 18 months of commissioning.

This means, at an average of 12 months from beginning work on an FSA to completion (some will take 16 months, some will take 9 months) that within 2.5 years of a FSA being started, all ~40 000 premises connected in that FSA will be on the NBN. That's a 100% takeup rate of all fibre connected premises (a 70-80% total takeup rate once wireless only premises and vacant premises are taken into account, as they are in the Corporate Plan). There are dozens of FSA's finished each year during the rollout. This means, after an initial delay, there will be some 40 000 premises connected every few weeks. Regardless.

Don't agree with me about any of this? Comment away, or, come join me and others debating it over in the Whirlpool forums (Fighting the NBN FUD, 2012-2015 NBN Corporate Plan or the Coalition NBN Position are 3 threads many, including myself, frequent readily). Many analysts and tech journalists have said since the new Corporate Plan has emerged that now that NBNCo. is in full rollout mode, their predictions of takeup and spending should be judged from here on out. I think this is fairly reasonable- CEO of NBNCo. Mike Quigley said himself, along with Senator Stephen Conroy, that this is the first Operational Corporate Plan. The original was a Corporate Plan for a company starting up. But this new Corporate plan should be used to judge their performance over the next few years (new Plans will be released each year regardless).

So, NBNCo. have vaulted most of their hurdles and are now on the beginning of the 200m back straight. They're due to pickup speed over the next few months and years and we'll soon see, by June next year in fact, whether NBNCo. are capable of delivering. And if they are, what is going to happen at the next election in late 2013.....

Direct Action....no, not the kind that saves the trees

As I have stated in my first post on this blog, I am largely pro-NBN. I still have issues with some aspects, but I truly believe this FTTH NBN is the future Australia needs in broadband. And that it is the ONLY solution that can deliver that quickly, relatively affordably and reliably to the largest portion of Australians possible. There are other solutions, like FTTN or wireless that are cheaper and faster, but they don't have the overreaching aim of providing ALL Australians with access to cheap, reliable, fast broadband. They are stop gaps. They do not ensure our ability to continually innovate in a digital world and be part of it at large.

I've been getting more and more frustrated with the ineptitude of Labor promoting the NBN. And conversely, more and more angry with the ability of the media, at large, and the Coalition to almost outright lie about the NBN and get away with it.

As a result, I've decided to start a....Pro-NBN action group I suppose you can call it, called NBN4Oz.

http://nbn4oz.blogspot.com.au

At the moment, this site is a temporary setup, to gauge reaction and support for such a group. I hope, with support, to extend it to a dedicated website based around information about the NBN, discussions, promotions of services, portals and links to other relevant sites and an overall aim to "fight the FUD" coming from the mainstream media and the Coalition at large.

I know some of you reading will probably disregard this, seeing as my aim with THIS blog was to provide unbiased and factual information on the NBN. But I cannot deny what I believe, which is that the NBN is the way forward for Australian broadband. Also, I am NOT discounting that the Coalition could come up with a better way to provide >90% of homes with FTTP....I just think it unlikely. However, one of the primary goals of NBN4Oz will hopefully be to try and engage the Coalition directly on the issue of no details around their policy. After all, how can Australians fairly decide UNLESS they have all the information from BOTH sides, unlike the current situation?

I will continue to try and provide factual, evidence based writings here. After all, the point of the new site, will be to conglomerate pro-NBN sentiment to allow the maximum exposure of factual, evidence based support for the NBN to the public, allowing them to make the most informed choices possible in a media full of false reporting and dubious political connections.

I simply believe that with so many dozens of individual blogs "busting the myths" and "fighting the FUD" surrounding the NBN, the point is being missed in a sea of small players, while the mainstream media is firing artillery that receives no answering fire. It needs focus and it needs goals. Otherwise, come the elections, the public at large will believe....whatever they're told to believe.

If you disagree with this sentiment, even after reading my and other peoples blogs such as  http://nbnexplained.org, http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/ or various tech sites like Delimiter and ZDNet, then you are entitled to your opinion and I hope that you will continue to read widely in the hope of believing what I believe. For those of you who agree, I would ask you visit NBN4Oz and, even if nothing else, just put a tick on "Yes, I support this" in the poll to help me gauge the idea. If you would like to help, the site has details on contacting me and any comments or support in any form would be appreciated.

Uploads- The silent destroyer of souls....

I realise my last post was, how do I put this..... RIDICULOUSLY long, so I figured we'd go for a (marginally) shorter one this time. This is a hazard of writing about the NBN though. The arguments are complex and often mired in both politics and marketing hype. This post, I'll be dealing with the issues of uploads in an NBN or non-NBN world. It's not exactly the most riveting subject, but, it is VITALLY important when it comes to business particularly and increasingly, personal use over the next few years. The NBN will give us ALL access to upload speeds starting at up to 40x what the majority of us on ADSL can get and 10-20x that of HFC. But why are uploads so important?

What's an Upload?...

Most of us, when we're hunting for the best deal in broadband, look at download speeds and quota. Downloads are the main way most of us interact with the web. It's the process of a server connecting to our computer and "downloading" the information to our browsers cache. There are varying degrees of downloading required depending on whether you're checking email, looking at Facebook, shopping in a virtual catalogue, watching a youTube clip, using HD Skype or streaming an HD movie. Download speeds are important. For many, the most importnat. But what about uploads?

Uploads are what happen usually BEFORE you download. After all, when we type in "funny cat videos" into Google, how does Google know we want results about "funny cat videos", rather than "appallingly inappropriate stuffed cat helicopters...."? This is where uploads come in. Each time we request a webpage or element ON a webpage for information, our computer is uploading; ie asking a server somewhere for access to a file it hosts, such as a webpage or video, or in the case of Google, results of a database query (the database being EVERYTHING on the web Google indexes for search). Uploads, in these cases, make up a tiny portion of our web traffic. They're generally less than 1% of traffic, as they are usually short requests to a server, followed by a much more complex download to display information.

Why do I NEED better Uploads?

In recent years, uploads have become increasingly important. Obviously, they have always been important to web companies; they host the servers all OUR uploads request from, so their servers are CONSTANTLY uploading from our perspective (downloading to us). However, video streaming requires constant, reliable upload speeds to maintain a position in a stream of video. Without it, youTube, Netflix, Bigpond and iTunes type content providers would simply not be able to serve us with content. And Skype video wouldn't exist. Nor Facetime. Certainly, these speeds are usually still a fraction of download speeds, say 200-500Kbps, but get a bunch of them going.....you're gonna have a bad time.

Most people in Australia have ADSL as their main broadband connection. ADSL has VERY poor relative upload speeds. Try some time going to http://www.speedtest.net and checking your uploads. On ADSL? Don't expect over 1Mbps 90% of the time. On cable/HFC? Don't expect over 2Mbps. Wireless is better, on 3G, up to 4Mbps (HSPA-DC) and on 4G, up to 25Mbps...but HIDEOUSLY expensive for heavy day-to-day use. Satellite? Forget it. IF you're lucky enough to already be on fibre, you'll have considerably higher uploads depending on your speed tier. Why is this so? It's fairly complicated largely involving bandwidth allocation and frequency splitting, but essentially it's explained in the name; Asynchronous Digital Subscriber Line (ADSL). It is Asynchronous meaning it is faster in one direction than another. In this case, downloading is much faster. It is the way the technology is based and so it has physical limits to upload speeds. SDSL or more likely SHDSL (Synchronous OR Single-Pair High Speed DSL) are available in Australia, to give similar upload speeds to download. SDSL is not much use for consumers, as it cannot be used with an analog phone service. SHDSL can and can also provide up to 5Mbps at up to 3km from the exchange. But at what price? Type SHDSL into Google and you'll get ads that pop up to show SHDSL lines from as low as....$300 a month....mmm....

Besides, your average consumer doesn't NEED these speeds do they?....do they?? Well, many don't.....now. Most of our applications require much higher downloads than uploads. But have you ever tried to upload a photo? Or worse, a video, particularly if it's HD, to youTube? Takes a while doesn't it.... And this is only the beginning. Many SMB's host their own websites and these servers need upload capacity. If they're popular, upload capacity in the 10's of Mbps may be required. That's NOT cheap, even if you ARE on fibre (as most fibre is a specially provided service outside of Greenfields and selected networks such as TransACT and iinet trials). But the biggest hog of uploads is yet to come.....cloud computing.

Right now, you may or may not be using Dropbox, or gDrive or SkyDrive or any other "cloud" storage solutions. But give it a few years and you'll find it INVALUABLE to have your files wherever and whenever you need them. This is ONLY possible with uploads. And the larger the files, the longer the upload takes....Ever tried streaming your own videos or recorded TV to a computer at a friends house? Don't bother. Unless both of you have HFC as a MINIMUM, it is an exercise in artifacts and blurry half formed video, because your computer simply can't upload the quality of video needed with the bottleneck of speed it has.

So what, the NBN won't help, will it?

Enter the NBN. The NBN, even on it's lower tiers, such as 25(down)/5(up) has, obviously, higher uploads than 90% of premises now. 5Mbps is a 5 fold increase MINIMUM on ADSL2+ (I don't even get 750Kbps). And it's usually a 2 or 3 fold increase on HFC, at around 2Mbps. And it costs just as much, if not less, than you pay now for ADSL2+ or HFC. I've covered this in my previous posts. So, get the NBN and already things are looking up for your daily video making or photo taking, as well ensuring your cloud sync of files doesn't prove an exercise in futility trying to upload a 75mb presentation for work. Go up  a tier and you get 50/20. NOW you've got uploads that rival the downloads you are likely to have now (if you're that lucky). Certainly no problems with MULTIPLE users doing all these things now. Video streaming and HD teleconferencing/Skype (particularly heavy on uploads due to your computer needing to transmit high bit-rate video of you) will be a breeze, even for multiple users. We can even go to 100/40....wow.

This is great for consumers. But there are many people who NEED it for business. Not necessarily because they don't have it now, many do. But because it may cost THOUSANDS of dollars a month to get 20 or 30Mbps uploads for a business server. Now, with the NBN? Well, the business plans on iinet can give you 1TB of quota (shared between up and downloads) on 100/40 speeds for $130....THAT's a saving. And there will be new 500/200 and 1000/400 plans later in the NBN build too for proportionally more money a month. Not only will it save current businesses alot of money, but new small businesses based around your own home servers can spring up, because you don't have to pay through the nose for uploads anymore. Anyone with a decent 50/20 or even 25/5 (if it's a site with few images or videos) plan can host their own website and not get hundreds of complaints about poor access times, without having to hand over hundreds of dollars a month for an external company to handle it. (in this case too, you have to remotely upload everything....time consuming and painful if you need to make changes regularly)

WARNING- Tech Speak coming!

Is it possible to get higher uploads WITHOUT the NBN? Yes, definitely. There are technologies for HFC AND ADSL that will enable higher uploads, although they have their problems. I've discussed some of them in my posts about "FTTN vs FTTH....Fight!". The ADSL equivalent, VDSL and VDSL2, have MAJOR range issues, dropping to ADSL speeds even before 2km from the exchange, which, as I've said before, is largely useless considering more than 60% of Australians are more than 2km from their exchange. This is primarily because VDSL works on MUCH higher frequencies than ADSL and they don't propagate as far without degradation. HFC technologies upload increase's largely rely on similar technologies to copper such as QAM and DMT, which I won't go into here. Or on node-splitting ; expensive, unsightly and not guaranteed, depending on demand at the time, as HFC and copper are both shared systems, unlike fibre. This is basically because in HFC and copper, one cable shares multiple connections until the fibre node, whereas FTTH has a single, multi-mode fibre going to each home and back to a fibre node, where either technology combines.

This diagram from Wikipedia illustrates the problem with both HFC and, to some extent, plain copper (although this is specifically an HFC diagram) seeing as multiple hundreds of houses share the same line back to a central hub. This is where node-splitting helps HFC and FTTN, because it reduces the number of shared connections on a line, making more nodes. In FTTH though, each house has its' own single fibre cable, and where they DO combine, like HFC and copper at the node, technologies such as wavelength division-multiplexing enable vastly superior speeds for the main line connection. WDM is available to fibre, because it uses light, which has multiple carrying possibilities in the form of different wavelengths. All wavelengths are distinguishable in light by a detector, as they can simply be amplified at the other end, with no appreciable difference in signal-to-noise (SNR) ratio (seeing as little to nothing can interfere with light in a sealed cable). Whereas in copper and coaxial (HFC), the frequencies are ALL carried electrically and the more noise on the cable, the harder it becomes to amplify, until eventually, the signal has a SNR so low, the signal quality is lost. This happens at a much smaller distance than on fibre. (5km compared to 50km)

Uploads are becoming more and more important in todays web. It allows all of us to share what WE'VE been doing and share our thoughts, ideas and services from our own locations, rather than paying large companies to host for us. It decentralises information, making it harder for hackers AND making it easier to retrieve lost or damaged data, seeing as it's always in the cloud. The NBN will provide these upload speeds for both big and small business at a GREATLY reduced cost. And it will, for the first time, provide access to cheap, fast uploads for the majority of consumers, giving us more freedom in our digital lives.