KRUDD is building the network.
No one won it!!
Exactly, the only good thing for TLS is that they're back in contention to be part of a partnership ie NBNCo. As mentioned, TLS owns valuable assets like the exchanges that will route the optic fibre across Oz. The government can play hardball with TLS and introduce regulation to take ownership, but considering the number of voters in the country who are also TLS long term holders I doubt that's what they'd do. If anything, they'll be offering TLS a strategic position within NBNCo. that will see the assets either sold to NBNCo. or do what SingTel did with their assets and lease them to the government.
Telstra back in the build if they want. to be up to 49% private owned
Typical Rudd hypocrisy during the launch...having a dig at the previous government for selling TLS, then making mention that NBNCo. will be a fully public company within 5 years...doush-bag.
A good result for Telstra though i beleive, means their competitors cant dominate the market and the government will probably sell it to Telstra in the end anyway...
The gov is replacing one monopoly with another, ie TLS for NBNCo. I wonder how they're going to deal with the conflict of interest of being both the regulator and wholesale owner?? TLS will only dominate if their sold or leased assets to NBNCo. give them a greater say in the new partnership of TLS, Optus, Maquarie, AAPT (Telecom NZ), Vodafone/Hutchinson, etc, etc.
Would a breakup be a good or bad thing for Telstra shareholders? The share price hasn't be knocked around too much since talk of a break up started.
Talk of a breakup has been mentioned ever since the launch of T3 - re-read the prospectus. It'll be a good thing if we end up getting shares not only in the incumbent (TLS) but in NBNCo. as well. How cool would it be if for every 1 TLS share you have, you're entitled to 1 NBNCo. share ;-)
According to BT and Telecom NZ, a break-up of their businesses by their respective governments has seen a disastrous affect on their share price...can't see TLS letting go of Foxtel and the HFC Broadband business without some kicking and screaming...unless the government offers them a sweetener...sweetener's however more often that not have a use by date, usually the election of a new government.
An analyst commented that if the NBN can't be made to work at $10 billion what makes Rudd think it will work at $43 billion? According to the analyst the return will take forever unless the pricing model is very expensive. That of course can't be true, since it was meant to be affordable to everyone.
The original idea was to lay fibre to the pillars - those grey stumps that one sees on street corners, and then it was to utilise the copper wire running from the pillar to every house, business, etc connected to that pillar. That's been scrapped since they'd have to compensate TLS (figure is roughly $3 billion) and the technology to do this would be out of date in the not too distant future and have to be replaced. This non-upgradable idea would have cost them $13billion.
The problem with fibre to the home (FTTN) is they're going to have to dig up streets and footpaths, and for those with telegraph poles, there will lbe bureaucratic red tape as most councils think there is enough wire hanging off them already. The government has yet to decide who will pay for NBN to flats and units - as the cable will probably go to the basement and then use existing copper wire via a new technology called VADSL (cousin of ADSL) to every tenant. For those buying in green belts you'll be slugged an extra $5K for the installation of ducts in anticipation of NBN....all this in 8 years and two federal elections.