[plug] adsl opinions

[Craig Ringer]

>>> If people on this list are willing to spend a little time, sit down 
>>> and write a letter to editor at postnewspapers.com.au or 
>>> letters at postnewspapers.com.au . Explain why its an issue, and how it 
>>> affects you. Make it short and clear. If you can, bring in local 
>>> (western suburbs) issues.

> Itchy keyboard fingers (all two of 'em) at the ready.  Is there a 
> southern-suburbs equivalent -- i.e. are you part of the Community 
> Newspapers group or is Post an independent like Freo's Herald?

Independent :-P

I can't help you with the Community Group papers. The POST does have 
contacts with the other Perth independents through Perth Independent 
Newspapers but only really for cross-publication ad sales etc.

> Way I'm 
> thinking here is that it *if* you're part of a larger group then it may 
> pay to hit the corporate HQ and get "broadband" coverage.  Pun intended.

You can try that with Community Group ... but given who owns it I doubt 
they'll be willing to rock the boat.


> and is probably all the more 
> topical in the light of Telstra's impending sell off.  No?   I am *not* 
> suggesting a Telstra beat-up but certainly they are a key stakeholder in 
> providing infrastructure and also financially unviable alternatives.

<rant>
Oh, don't start me on the telstra sale. Its insane. The /only/ things 
holding Telstra in check now are political pressure and the ACCC. The 
ACCC is being limited by the government out of corporate fears that its 
too powerful, and it would probably not be allowed to regulate Telstra 
if sold completely. Telstra is fundamentally broken anyway since it 
controls the national infrastructure but yet has a retail arm that deals 
direct with customers. So they have a serious case of schizophrenia, 
with the infrastructual arm having to try to treat the retail arm's 
competitors fairly, and the retail arm wanting competitor's blood at all 
costs. It CAN NEVER WORK as a company without either being regulated to 
the point where it may as well be gov't anyway, or being a monopoly in 
the market.

So, what do we do? We rip it apart. Retain government ownership of the 
infrastructure, and sell off the retail arm. Conflict of interest 
eliminated, national infrastructure remains in government hands, and the 
whole mess is neatened up. Downside? Dumb bastards sold half of it 
already, so how to handle this given that its a part-public company with 
shareholers who'll likely be pissed when told that "oh sorry we totally 
restructured the company and devalued it massively in the process". I 
don't have an answer on that issue.

Telstra currently justifies the x cents/mb they charge by saying they're 
"only passing on the costs" ... yeah, from their own wholesale arm which 
imposes them. Of course telstra retail doesn't care, its charging an 
on-paper fee to itsself, but it hurts the competitors badly. Oh, so sad 
- it even helps Telstra rake in more money, too. This is the kind of 
crap that can be eliminated or at least put on a level playing field by 
splitting Telstra. An accounting separation, as currently proposed, will 
help make it more obvious where the dodgy dealing is going on but won't 
actually help fix it.

So - I don't see any viable long-term alternative to breaking up Telsta. 
Currently its in telstra's best interests to be anti-competitive using 
its control of the infrastructure, and its in the govt's interests not 
to step on that too hard since they get 1/2 of Telstra's profits from 
said behaviour. Thats just got to stop, since its Australia's population 
getting screwed. (sure, the gov't cash theoretically makes it back to 
us, but I'd prefer a more up-front choice about how that worked).
</rant>

*phew*. Hope I made my point.


-- 
Craig Ringer
GPG Key Fingerprint: AF1C ABFE 7E64 E9C8 FC27  C16E D3CE CDC0 0E93 380D
	-- if it ain't broke, add features 'till it is. (or:)
	while (! broken) { features ++ ; broken = isBroken(features) }