The below will probably bore alot of people here so apologise if I have, I apologise stryker if my comments appeared abrupt but when I read what people write about NBN compared to the LNP solution it really irks me that people base their views on what they read in the media or what people who back the LNP to the hilt want to spin who actually aren't as well informed as they should be prior to spinning the crap they do (much is life unfortunately). Difference is NBN is in the field I work in so it gets to me more than other things do.
Do I support NBN? to a degree, it is the best option for the country from a viewpoint with Medical, Law enforcement, educational - from a housing perspective I wish they would re-evaluate areas which actually this would benefit and possibly offer an extended reach solution however the positives are the advancements it allows and new opportunities it creates in years/decades to come (work from home - many people work harder at home funny enough, allowance for a skilled worker to operate from rural/interstate instead of direct in an office environment having to relocate etc). I'm often critical of governments for not thinking longterm and well this definitely is a long term approach. The other benefit is that this is government owned meaning it should be for the people and not provided by Telstra who have to look after their shareholders interest 1st and foremost. I'm a network architect (not for NBN) transmission is my background but of late have spent alot of time in the voice & ip infrastructure space given the rapid rate we are moving towards IP based solutions instead of the traditional ATM backhauls which for the last 5yrs especially has seen a large push in this country to fibre backhauls anyway.
On to the topic and regarding the costs of materials this is based on a variety of estimates for example the contractors costs based on the rate which NBN advise is the going rate simular to materials used by NDC contractors (Testra & Optus) etc this costing is based on per tender process, each process takes around 2-4weeks to submit then agree apparently, it is quicker than what Telstra operates under because they want the work done and size of the work required (shores up work for some contractors), most regional areas apparently aren't running on the same tender nor are the same contractors being used so price estimates won't be deemed valid, further to this it is also dependant on companies like Telstra & AAPT who are mainly investing in their own fibre infrastructure, NBN won't request provisions of fibre rollout in areas which already has fibre so essentially this could infact decrease the estimate given over the years as well (AAPT for instance just worked on a Nth QLD route and have some of the biggest branches in CBD areas already due to their agreement with energy companies to use the free space in conduits.ducts which bypass the council approval delays and costs). So as to it exceeding just on materials isn't something that realistically anyone should profess to know since it isn't available and honestly wouldn't be available as NBN / Government don't know the forecasted plans of AAPT, Telstra, Pipe etc as such could only relay their worst case scenario figures which again would be pointless to put across due to the other companies rolling this out.
LNP policy has very dramatic flaws in it which haven't been highlighted since after all their policy hasn't been pushed to the senate and they haven't actually sat down with anyone yet to nut out whats required. The costs they predicted will blow out, as to how much directly (being within 3-8 years) is one thing but the costs will also have to be ongoing and it's solution is only a short term view that is being presented.
The LNP solution won't create mass jobs, the big telcos who would support it have call centre staff, have engineers, have contractors who move across the land on their behalf and won't provide infrastructure support which this country needs, it will provide cost fundings on requirements which in the past Telstra will head to in ways which it deems it has to, they won't be pushed nor will any other Telco to grab the business as they don't have the available infrastructure or costing budget flexibility to focus on those areas outside of their own interests. Telco's won't do anything at a cost to them, they will do it for profit purposes. You only have to look at phone services to see where the buck stops currently and the views from a Telco perspective - there isn't profits to be made in country rollouts so the bare minimum will be done.
Going the Wireless approach will require numerous points created across the place, not hundreds, your talking given our national expansion 10s of thousands, their is already cancer concerns (yes people still panic about these), land acquisition, backhaul implementation (which will have to be fibre), then upgrades to existing infrastructure to support the expansion, vendor agreements and the list goes on to be rolled out. Only have to look at what happened to TelecomNZ as to why this isn't a great idea and they don't have the distance between communities or residential locations we have here. They did purchase large chunks of equipment and decoders to try and expand on the quality and speeds given which backfired at a large cost.
Going the Sat option …. hmmm ok this one isn't great and puts people in a position they are already in. You can often struggle to get over 50kbps upstream let alone the so called 256/512kbps downstream offerings around the place in remote areas. On top of this going down the path of Sat in the wet seasons in those areas means zero internet option due to cloud coverage, during peak temp conditions it also can distort the signal and cause issues etc sure you have software packages that are meant to roam to selected zones such as directpc but reallity is as a future option this really is just a toilet paper offering and the LNP way to continue wiping their bum of the guys in the bush.
As to copper well when it was talked about rolling ADSL2+ to regional areas I nearly fell off my chair, Telstra currently has an over 2yr waiting list for metro replacement, this is in some areas over 6yrs outside the 30km zone of metro regions, this length of time grows each month and won't improve unless massive amounts of money is thrown to upgrade this network, it isn't weather tolerant unless you have great protection and in the country/rural areas this won't be an option, the speeds can change with the wind (literally,) then you get cross talk concerns with radio frequencies etc, soldering of joins is often a concern if underground and put protection is another kettle of fish, it would require far more assistance to repair and maintain than other sources provided. Further to this there is a reason why 9billion was thrown at Telstra and why they focus most of their network strategy around fibre and off copper
Who will fund the above not just to implement, not just to maintain the implementation but also to maintain and provide assurance requirements in the years to come? Us of course and it won't be a very pretty cost either, sure might be cheaper than NBN but it will be ongoing and for what real benefit? It is also short term viewability. What I mean by this it isn't a solution that can last decades it's something to last this decade if that.
Further to above Networks require upgrades and often. These often occur within 3yrs as most vendor agreements aren't agreed much beyond this these days due to advancement in technology. This covers IT based (application or servers as IT plays a massive roll in the Telco environment currently), this could also lead to software upgrades (regression testing etc) and then of course possible hardware upgrade replacements (vendors supply new cards that don't fit the equipment in the field this changes yearly with some vendors). Vendor support costs alone cost millions and to offer new features it often requires software upgrades which also costs millions to support, you add more nodes into the network it costs more again, not less. Your not just talking vendor agreement/support costs but also costs for the telco engineers, support documentation, regression testing of existing products and new product releases etc - it is a large expense to manage
Regarding NBN approach as a negative in a GFC, I actually don't agree given the jobs that this will create (there is already 180+ people directly on the payroll), you have expansion of workforce such as IT, Billing, Marketing Wholsale and Retail, call center staff, assurance staff, engineers (voice, ip, transmission, field), field staff to support the engineers, carrier & vendor, provisioning staff etc, then the thousands of contractors that will be working on this, then you have electricians who's work would increase due to internal cabling of houses, then there is hardware replacements which will see people move to the retail outlets to get a new TV, new router, new PC, new air conditioner to hook up to smart wiring abilities, new phones, the list goes on all to try and sap some of the features offered over time off this network further enhancing the economy which would be a positive thing not negative.
Fibre whilst yes is costly, it is something you only have to put in once and lasts decades, it is weather tolerant (they have cables running under the oceans, they have it running over deserts) and further to this they won't be rolling this to areas in which fibre is already located and will be located as the years go on. It is also an investment owned by the country which again is something that is appealing to alot of people. This counts to those in the bush who got burnt more than most when Telstra was sold.
Thats just my thoughts on the topic