I've cobbled that sentence together from a Huawei press release announcing a report into the impact of broadband on the UK economy, commissioned from the Economist Intelligence Unit (the first part) and from a news item in the UK's Financial Times, which had got hold of the report ahead of its official release by Huawei on Tuesday evening, 30 October, Australian Eastern Time.
Beyond the initial positive 'spin' Huawei's press release was broadly in line with the FT's article - ie not overly optimistic about the short term benefits.
"The report concludes that if the anticipated benefits of superfast broadband are to be realised, obstacles such as a shortage of digital skills across many industries and antiquated working practices and business processes need to be addressed," Huawei said.
Given those sentiments the report will no doubt be seized on by Malcolm Turnbull and all the rest of the anti-NBN brigade, but before they get too carried away they should examine the basis for the report's conclusions.
First of all, it's hard to find any real effort in the report to specify the timeframes that are considered short term and long term. However its aim is to explore the case for the UK's rollout of superfast broadband over the coming five years, and the UK Government's aim is for the UK to have "the best superfast broadband network in Europe by 2015."
At one point the report says: "Outside of high-tech, it is difficult to find good examples where superfast would in the next four to five years make a striking difference to a firm's ability to compete."
Elsewhere it says: "gains as outlined [earlier in the report] would undoubtedly provide a substantial fillip to the UK's economic growth and the competitiveness of its businesses. But will the gains be as vast as promised, and realised in as little as four to five years, as some of the studies suggest?"
So its probably a safe bet to say that the report is looking for short term benefits within four to five years and longer term benefits beyond five years.
And the evidence for its conclusions? Well that's either anecdotal or second hand, gleaned from various studies and reports and from various quoted experts. There is not one skerrick of research that I could find undertaken by the EIU anywhere in the 25 page report to support its conclusions.
The FT's story described the EIU as "a leading business consultancy". So it may be, but any competent researcher could have pulled together the information it contains in, at a guess, a couple of weeks. And no doubt could equally have pulled together a set of views and research findings to support a contrary conclusion to the one the EIU arrived at.
In any case the report makes no examination of efforts being undertaken in the UK, if any, to accelerate the benefits of superfast broadband. In Australia the Government, conscious of the criticism continuously heaped on the NBN, has allocated millions of dollars to several schemes designed to develop NBN applications and prepare various sectors of the market for its arrival.
Any attempt to pass judgement on the timeframe for the realisation of NBN benefits should attempt to assess the likelihood of success, or otherwise of these initiatives.
The EIU report was commissioned as an examination of the impact of super broadband in the UK. And that's where it should stay.