HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris O'Neill)
Subject: Re: Cream skimming considered beneficial
Organization: Telecom Australia Research Laboratories
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 04:43:03 GMT

In article <chris.724549699@suite.sw.oz.au> chris@suite.sw.oz.au (Chris Maltby)
writes:
>In <summer.724484681@murillo> summer@mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU (Mark Summerfield)
writes:

>>I believe more centralised control is appropriate [for some industries]
>>(e.g. energy provision, telecommunications, many forms of transport).
>
>I think the distinguishing mark is whether the industry manufactures
>a generic commodity (eg electricity) or a complex product. That's why
>the exchange connection is and will remain a monopoly, but the provision
>of telecommunications services should be competitive. I don't think
>anyone would describe even the basic telephone service as a simple
>commodity anymore.

The only thing for which Optus competes with Telecom (apart from mobile phones
perhaps) is provision of bandwidth.  I do not agree with your opinion that
bandwidth carries some fundamental distinction from electricity in this
context.  The only reason that Telecom needs to develop a good public image on
things like phone connections (for which Optus doesn't provide any service at
all apart from mobiles) is so that customers have a positive image of Telecom
when it comes to the things that Telecom does compete on, i.e. provision of
bandwidth.

Chris O'Neill
Telecom Research
From: brendan@otc.otca.oz (Brendan Jones)
Newsgroups: aus.followup
Subject: Re: Cream skimming considered beneficial
Date: 19 Dec 92 03:38:07 GMT

in article <1992Dec18.062704.29553@trl.oz.au>, c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris O'Neill) says:
> [re competition worldwide improving cellular mobile penetration]
> Excuse me but this is not proof.  It is not a controlled experiment.

OK, but it's a pretty large coincidence, no?

-- 
Brendan Jones  | ACSnet:  brendan@otc.otca.oz.au               | This space
R&D Contractor |   UUCP:  {uunet,mcvax}!otc.otca.oz.au!brendan | for lease
Network Access |  Phone:  (02)287-3128    Fax:  (02)287-3299   | pending new
|||| OTC ||    |  Snail:  GPO Box 7000 Sydney 2001, AUSTRALIA  | .sig
Newsgroups: aus.followup
From: c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris O'Neill)
Subject: Re: Cream skimming considered beneficial
Organization: Telecom Australia Research Laboratories
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 03:36:11 GMT

chris@suite.sw.oz.au (Chris Maltby) writes:

>introduced competition. But if Telecom had been as wonderful as everyone
>is now saying (;-) there wouldn't have been a need to introduce competition.

The "need" to introduce competition was based on the belief that competition
was a desirable end in itself, even if that competition did not achieve
fundamental objectives.

Chris O'Neill
Telecom Research
From: brendan@otc.otca.oz (Brendan Jones)
Newsgroups: aus.followup
Subject: Re: Cream skimming considered beneficial
Date: 14 Dec 92 21:51:23 GMT
Distribution: aus

in article <1992Dec13.222411.19722@trl.oz.au>, andrew@medici.trl.OZ.AU (Andrew Jennings) says:
> I'm surprised nobody's mentioned the real scandal here. At present Optus
> is purchasing capacity from AOTC at substantially below commercial rates.
> The fact that this receives no coverage in any of the media could not of
> course be related to the advertising revenue derived from both carrriers.

Wrong.  It just means you don't read the right newspapers.  This startling
revelation is hardly a secret.  It was widely reported when the interconnect
agreement was struck, both in the popular press and in industry magazines.

So if you're looking for a conspiracy, there ain't none to be found.

-- 
Brendan Jones  | ACSnet:  brendan@otc.otca.oz.au               | This space
R&D Contractor |   UUCP:  {uunet,mcvax}!otc.otca.oz.au!brendan | for lease
Network Access |  Phone:  (02)287-3128    Fax:  (02)287-3299   | pending new
|||| OTC ||    |  Snail:  GPO Box 7000 Sydney 2001, AUSTRALIA  | .sig
Newsgroups: aus.followup
From: c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris O'Neill)
Subject: Re: Cream skimming considered beneficial
Organization: Telecom Australia Research Laboratories
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 06:27:04 GMT

In article <6982@otc.otca.oz> brendan@otc.otca.oz (Brendan Jones) writes:
>in article <1992Dec17.042656.8287@trl.oz.au>, c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris
O'Neill) says:
>> Bear in mind that there is only one other country in the world (Hong Kong)
>> that has more than one mobile phone service covering any particular area.
>
>This is blatantly untrue, I'm afraid.  It's becoming increasingly common for
>countries to allow two cellular operators to serve the one area.
>
>The UK has two national providers (Vodafone and Cellnet); most US cellular
>markets have two operators (one wireline and one non-wireline); since
>deregulation in Japan, Nippon Idou Tsushin (IDO) and Daini Denden Inc (DDI)
>offer competetive mobile services with NTT, although I'm not sure whether all
>*three* operate in the one market; Korea has recently allowed a second 
>national cellular carrier; Thailand has two government owned cellular carriers
>TOT and CAT; Sweden has two national operators with Swedish Telecom and Comvik
>and a third licence has been awarded to NordicTel; Germany has two services,
>operated by Deutsche Bundepost Telecom and D2 Mannesmann Mobilefunk; Finland
>has two operators Finland Telecom and Radiolinja; and with the advent of GSM,
>most GSM MOU signatory countries have or are offering at least two mobile
>licences; India has recently offered separate licenses for competitive
>cellular services in each of its major markets.
>
>I could go on, but I think you get the picture.
>
>Perhaps what you should have said is that currently, Australia and Hong Kong
>are the only countries that have *three* mobile phone operators covering the
>same area (thanks to the arrival of Arena GSM), 

Yes, that is what I should have said.  Sorry, I misread the report.

>and even that won't be true
>for very much longer.  Hong Kong is soon to get it's fourth operator, and many
>other countries are poised to get their third.
>
>In every one of the markets mentioned above, the advent of competition has
>lowered the costs to the customer and increased the uptake of mobile services
>(ie made the pie bigger).  We are already seeing this in Australia.  Since
>Optus began offering Mobilenet resale in July, *both* Telecom and Optus have
>seen an increase in customer growth rates compared to the six months previous.

Excuse me but this is not proof.  It is not a controlled experiment.  Too often
we see people saying that something happens after a change therefore the change
caused the something to happen (the change in this case meaning the increase in
growth rates).

Chris O'Neill
Telecom Research Labs
Newsgroups: aus.followup,aus.politics
From: andrew@medici.trl.OZ.AU (Andrew Jennings)
Subject: Re: Cream skimming considered beneficial
Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne, Australia
Distribution: aus
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 22:24:11 GMT


I'm surprised nobody's mentioned the real scandal here. At present Optus
is purchasing capacity from AOTC at substantially below commercial rates.

So by dictates of its owners (the government) AOTC is being forced to 
subsidise its own competition. 


The fact that this receives no coverage in any of the media could not of
course be related to the advertising revenue derived from both carrriers.
Only a cynical person would suggest such a proposition.


a.jennings@trl.oz.au               phone  : 61 3 253 6241 fax : 61 3 253 6173
Andrew Jennings   AI Systems       Telecom Australia Research Laboratory

Newsgroups: aus.followup,aus.politics
From: taso@munnari.OZ.AU (Taso Hatzi)
Newsgroups: aus.followup
Subject: Re: Directory Assistance
Date: 11 Dec 1992 21:29:33 +1100
Organization: University of Melbourne
Distribution: aus
NNTP-Posting-Host: munnari.oz.au
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Michael Flower (mcf@medici.trl.OZ.AU) wrote:
: 
: Of course, in these days of OCR, scanning the telephone book wouldn't be
: that arduous.
: 
Approx 2500 pages at say 1 minute per page, is approx 42 hours.

Then there's the matter of Telecom's copyright notice imprinted
(in extra fine print) on every page.
Newsgroups: aus.followup
From: c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris O'Neill)
Subject: Re: Cream skimming considered beneficial
Organization: Telecom Australia Research Laboratories
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 04:26:56 GMT

In article <chris.724549523@suite.sw.oz.au> chris@suite.sw.oz.au (Chris Maltby)
writes:
>In <1992Dec16.033611.20285@trl.oz.au> c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris O'Neill)
writes:
>
>>chris@suite.sw.oz.au (Chris Maltby) writes:
>>
>>>introduced competition. But if Telecom had been as wonderful as everyone
>>>is now saying (;-) there wouldn't have been a need to introduce competition.
>>
>>The "need" to introduce competition was based on the belief that competition
>>was a desirable end in itself, even if that competition did not achieve
>>fundamental objectives.
>
>Wot, like improvements in the service? And is that what we have now? No
>improvements, but just unnecessary competition? So how come the response
>time to phone connection requests has suddenly dipped? I guess just the
>threat of competition is enough...

The fundamental objectives I was referring to were the total effect (including
long term) on Australia's phone system, including things such as the demand for
capital by the system.

For example, if Optus actually does set up its own mobile phone network, this
will require capital of $700 million, compared with the $800 million that
Telecom has spent setting up its mobile network which could handle the traffic
carried by an Optus network with little additional cost.  The question
Australia has to ask itself is, what does it get for this extra $700 million. 
Australia is supposed to be a capital starved country.

Bear in mind that there is only one other country in the world (Hong Kong) that
has more than one mobile phone service covering any particular area.

Chris O'Neill
Telecom Research
Newsgroups: aus.followup
From: chris@suite.sw.oz.au (Chris Maltby)
Subject: Re: Cream skimming considered beneficial
Organization: Softway Pty Ltd
Date: 18 Dec 92 00:21:00 GMT

In <1992Dec17.044303.9134@trl.oz.au> c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris O'Neill) writes:

>The only thing for which Optus competes with Telecom (apart from mobile phones
>perhaps) is provision of bandwidth.  I do not agree with your opinion that
>bandwidth carries some fundamental distinction from electricity in this
>context.

Eh? When was the last time I bought "badnwidth" from telecom? It may look
like I'm buying bandwidth to you guys, but to me, I'm buying a service.
Bandwidth (if I'm even aware that it exists) is just part of the package,
and the least interesting part too.

Optus may not connect your phone (at present) but when they connect your
calls (be they mobile, long distance or local) they have to provide you
with a package more attractive than Telecom if they want your business.
The package will no doubt include cheaper prices, user friendly billing,
improved handling of complaints, etc etc. If the bandwidth they offer is
substandard, as it can be in the 0099 NZ service, they'll find it harder
to get business.

Anyway, we got into this discussion by talking about what bits of Telecom's
business might be natural monopolies. If I hear you correctly, you're
saying that provision of bandwidth is a natural monopoly. Surely the 
present competitive arrangements recognise this. Telecom's monopoly
business provides bandwidth to Telecom's competitive business and also
to Optus' competitive business. The price is regulated to prevent the
two bits of Telecom sitting on the one bit of Optus. Perhaps the two
bits of Telecom should be split apart to protect competition as well.
Optus is taking its own steps to protect its competitive business
by building its own infrastructure...

In the future, technology may make individual exchange connections more
feasible. That's why I said that the exchange makes the most sensible
monopoly boundary. Connecting things to 10 million homes is a lot harder
tham connecting things to several thousand(?) exchanges.

>The only reason that Telecom needs to develop a good public image on
>things like phone connections (for which Optus doesn't provide any service at
>all apart from mobiles) is so that customers have a positive image of Telecom
>when it comes to the things that Telecom does compete on, i.e. provision of
>bandwidth.

Wait a minute, the reason Telecom needs to develop a good public image
is because the one it has now (acquired through it's wonderful service)
is putrid. Telecom has in the past taken the approach that by advertising
"good, better, best" they can get a good image without making the really
important changes.
-- 
Chris Maltby - Softway Pty Ltd		Internet: chris@softway.sw.oz.au

PHONE:	+61-2-698-2322	"I'm waiting for X-Windows to become just that;
FAX:	+61-2-699-9174	 Ex-Windows" - A McGrath.
Newsgroups: aus.followup
From: chris@suite.sw.oz.au (Chris Maltby)
Subject: Re: Cream skimming considered beneficial
Organization: Softway Pty Ltd
Distribution: aus
Date: 16 Dec 92 04:43:07 GMT

In <1992Dec16.084913.165369@dstos3.dsto.gov.au> mjp@itd.dsto.gov.au writes:

>Isn't this presupposing that competition was necessary, in
>my opinion that argument was never conclusive and the
>introduction came as much as anything along in a wave of
>other deregulation.

Hey, Telecom! You need this guy. He's the only one in Australia
who thought your service was perfect and couldn't be improved.
Note, I'm not saying Telecom was doing a bad job, but I'm surely
not saying that it was even close to perfect. Why would 85% of
the commonwealth Ombudsman's complaints relate to Telecom otherwise?
-- 
Chris Maltby - Softway Pty Ltd		Internet: chris@softway.sw.oz.au

PHONE:	+61-2-698-2322	"I'm waiting for X-Windows to become just that;
FAX:	+61-2-699-9174	 Ex-Windows" - A McGrath.
Newsgroups: aus.followup
From: mcf@medici.trl.OZ.AU (Michael Flower)
Subject: Re: Optus v AOTC. The Facts. (was Re: Cream-Skimming)
Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne, Australia
Distribution: aus
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 06:06:35 GMT

From article <pod.724287081@sour.sw.oz.au>, by pod@sour.sw.oz.au (Paul O'Donnell):
> In <1992Dec12.234850.16243@runx.oz.au> lawriew@runx.oz.au (Lawrie Waller) writes:
> 
>>But at what price? I note for instance that the current Optus/Telecom
>>price war is being directed at STD and hence essentially benefits the
>>business phone user. Now this of course cant be bad for a Country
> 
> What?  How do you make this leap of intuition?  Come and look
> at my the phone bill at my house some time, STD calls account
> for about 70% of our bill.  Cheaper STD calls are the best thing
> that could happen to our bill.
He makes this leap of intuition from the fact that business is BY FAR
the largest user of STD. They really do spend MUCH more than you do,
and actually orders of magnitude more than all the rest of the subscribers
put together.
> 
> -- 
> Paul O'Donnell - Softway Pty Ltd         |"You're just saying that because
> Internet: pod@softway.sw.oz.au           |you don't understand art."
> Phone: +61 2 698-2322 Fax: +61 2 699-9174|     - Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Michael Flower
Artificial Intelligence Systems         Email:     m.flower@trl.oz.au
Telecom Research Laboratories           Voice:     +61 3 541 6179
Melbourne, AUSTRALIA                    Fax:       +61 3 543 8863
Newsgroups: aus.aarnet,aus.general
From: elaine@mhs.oz.au (Elaine Pensabene)
Subject: Net access in Sydney, Brisbane & Melbourne
Organization: Message Handling Systems
Distribution: aus
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 92 21:06:21 GMT
Keywords: TMX

>From: l.gudiksen@uws.edu.au
>
>>     ------------------------------------------------------
>>      PAX - Public Access Unix (Adelaide, South Australia)
>>     ------------------------------------------------------
>>PAX is now available.
>What's available in Sydney and surrounds?????
>***
>From: rasas@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Greg Patten)
>...
>And what's available in Melbourne?
>***
>From: weig@qut.edu.au
>...
>And anything similar in Brisbane?


The Message eXchange (TMX) is a service provided by Message Handling
Systems that allows dial-in connections to the net in Sydney and we have 
recently set up this service in Brisbane (TMXBRIS) and Melbourne (TMXMELB).

The TMX service provides network access to Australian and United States
based services, including electronic mail, Usenet, FTP and Clarinet.

Clarinet is an electronic publishing service that provides professional
news and information, including United Press International news, as well
as international computer news and other major interest groups.

Operational costs are $8 per connect hour and, with an annual prepayment,
this reduces to $4 per hour.

The initial establishment charge is $50 (available for UUCP, DOS* or Mac*
platforms) with an optional $495 offering that includes the MHSnet software.

Please contact me for further information.

				Elaine Pensabene
				elaine@mhs.oz.au
				Tel: (02) 550-4448

*  DOS and Mac connection software are currently being beta tested.

...............................................................................
==========----------	Elaine Pensabene
=======||=----------	Message Handling Systems Pty Ltd
==========----------	1st Floor, 2 King Street, Newtown NSW 2042
==========---M-H-S--	Tel: (02) 550-4448 Fax: (02) 519-2551 
			Email: elaine@mhs.oz.au
From: daemon@jatz.aarnet.edu.au ()
Newsgroups: aus.aarnet
Subject: Re:  Tas link down
Date: 17 Dec 1992 05:31:42 GMT
Organization: Australian Academic and Research Network (AARNet)
Reply-To: Douglas Ray <ray@ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 139.130.204.4

> The link between the university of tasmania, hobart, and the
> university of melbourne dropped sometime around 14:00 today
> (thursday 17th).

the line came up again, for unknown reasons, sometime before
15:55.
						- douglas ray
						doug@unimelb.edu.au
						networks & comms
From: rak608@huxley.anu.edu.au (Rick A Kuhn)
Newsgroups: aus.aarnet
Subject: AARNet<->Nexus gate, is it open?
Date: 17 Dec 92 02:50:53 GMT
Organization: Australian National University
Distribution: aus
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.2.12
Summary: What is the address of people on Nexus from AARNet?
Keywords: aarnet nexus

Can someone let me know if the AARNet-Nexus gate is open yet and what
the address of Nexus from AARNet is?

Thanks

Rick


_______________________________________________________________________________

Rick Kuhn                                Department of Political Science (Arts)
phone +61 6 249-3851                             Australian National University
fax   +61 6 249-5054                                        GPO Box 4, ACT 2601
internet: rak608@huxley.anu.edu.au                                    Australia
From: pte900@jatz.aarnet.edu.au (Peter Elford)
Newsgroups: aus.aarnet
Subject: Uni Research Network Threatened
Date: 15 Dec 1992 07:04:49 GMT
Organization: Australian National University
NNTP-Posting-Host: 139.130.204.4
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

On page 16 of today's Daily Telegraph, just beside the article
headlined "REPRIMAND FOR BROTHEL SOLICITOR", is a small box ...

Uni Research
Network Threatened

AUSTRALIA's uni-
versities have threat-
ened to quit a Federal
Government research
program, claiming
the Government has re-
neged on a Budget
promise of $13 million
in funding.
 Vice-chancellors say
the $3.4 million allo-
cated to the Austral-
ian Academic Re-
search Network (AAR-
Net) is not enough.
 Professor Ken Mc-
Kinnon said AARNet,
which links Australia's
resrach scientists
with top researchers
around the world by
computer, would not
be able to operate
effectively.


--
Peter Elford,                             e-mail: P.Elford@aarnet.edu.au

* this sig cut to save costs*
From: pte900@jatz.aarnet.edu.au (Peter Elford)
Newsgroups: aus.aarnet
Subject: Re: AARNet<->Nexus gate, is it open?
Date: 17 Dec 1992 03:18:44 GMT
Organization: Australian National University
Distribution: aus
NNTP-Posting-Host: 139.130.204.4
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Rick A Kuhn (rak608@huxley.anu.edu.au) wrote:
: Can someone let me know if the AARNet-Nexus gate is open yet and what
: the address of Nexus from AARNet is?

They have applied for mail affiliate membership as from 1 Jan 1993. I
understand that the actual work to get the gateway going is being
done under contract right now. The email address will be 

something@nexus.edu.au

(no idea what the something will be ...)

--
Peter Elford,                             e-mail: P.Elford@aarnet.edu.au
Network Co-ordinator                      phone: +61 6 249 3542
Australian Academic Research Network      fax:   +61 6 249 1369
c/o, Computer Services Centre             pager: +61 6 245 3035
Australian National University            post: GPO Box 1142     
Canberra, AUSTRALIA                             Canberra ACT 2601
Newsgroups: aus.aarnet,comp.org.eff.talk
From: kre@cs.mu.oz.au (Robert Elz)
Subject: Re: Uni Research Network Threatened
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 17:38:31 GMT

In <1gn5c6INN8f1@manuel.anu.edu.au> axl867@huxley.anu.edu.au (Albert Langer)
writes:

| The budget promise was for $13M to fund a cooperative RESEARCH centre
| for upgrading AARNet - not an operational subsidy to AARNet's owners
| who are so incompetent they need to ripoff research funds to cover
| operational expenses.

My reading of that is that the $13M was meant for upgrading aarnet, and
the CRC was the (pretty stupid) funding method someone picked out of
the hat to make the $'s available ... its pretty hard to see exactly
what research is involved in upgrading aarnet after all (or not at the
level that $13M can possibly do when spread over multiple years).
$13M could be spent on research into what huge amounts of money could
be spent on later, but that doesn't seem useful without some indication
the $'s will eventually come - or it could be spent simply providing a
fairly low level AARnet upgrade (ie: what is really needed).

As for "ripoff research funds" - that (and teaching funds) is what
the AVCC have available, what funds do you expecvt them to use?

Since the net is supposed to benefit research, research funds should
pay for it (or at least part of it) - just as they pay for (some of) the
connected computers, as well as photocopiers, secretaries, libraries,  ...

| AARNet cannot operate effectively with owners who think it is only
| worth employing a couple of staff

I kind of agree with this, but its not quite that bad, as well as
Geoff and Peter (the "couple of staff") AARnet (and thus, the AVCC)
does fund people (or part people) at each of the hub sites to help
run things there, so there are really more than just a couple of
people looking after things.  Not full-time, and mostly doing just
maintenance type things (upgrades of hardware, making sure all the
links keep working), and certainly more full time staff would help,
but better than nothing at all (imagine if one of Peter or Geoff
had to continually be roaming all over the country resetting modems...)

kre
Newsgroups: aus.aarnet,aus.acs,aus.archives,aus.auug,aus.comms,aus.computers,aus.computers.amiga,aus.computers.ibm-pc,aus.forsale,aus.general,aus.mac,aus.mail,aus.news,aus.radio.packet,aus.wanted
From: philip@research.canon.oz.au (Philip Craig)
Subject: Re: PAX - Adelaide Public Access Unix - now online
Organization: Canon Information Systems Research Australia
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 21:19:16 GMT

l.gudiksen@uws.edu.au writes:

>>     ------------------------------------------------------
>>      PAX - Public Access Unix (Adelaide, South Australia)
>>     ------------------------------------------------------
>>PAX is now available.
>What's available in Sydney and surrounds?????
> 
>Lars

There's RUNX, with several fast lines.

The 2400 number (they have faster) is 487 2533
The voice number is 489 4661.
The sysop is Mark Webster.

-- 
Philip Craig philip@research.canon.oz.au Phone:+61 2 8052951 Fax:+61 2 8052929

"It is better to be hated for what you are than loved for what you are not."
-- Andre Guide
Newsgroups: aus.aarnet,comp.org.eff.talk