No. 1 Story
Construction needs cloud flexibility
Australia’s embattled construction sector could benefit from cloud based information systems that can be switched on and off in lockstep with individual projects – with the exception of those organisations based in remote areas like the Kimberleys.
read moreMore From
Telstra pulls no punches on regulatory risk
Stuart Corner
Monday, 09 October 2006 10:47
Page 4 of 4
Not exactly. Who has made investment in infrastructure and where any profits from that investment go concerns the ACCC not one iota. It is required to consider only the long term interests of end users and the interests investors only in so far as they serve those interests through economically efficient investment.
The three 2G GSM networks cover about 96 percent of the population and about 10 percent of the land mass. To reach the remaining two percent (400,000 people) Telstra has had to extend coverage by almost three times, to more than 25 percent of the land mass.
It would a brave person that would suggest a duplication of this coverage would be economically efficient investment in infrastructure. Such investment would serve the long term interests of end users only if such facilities based competition created lower prices or greater choices that outweighed the considerable investment required.
Oddly, in all the ra-ra about Next G, I never saw this statistic about land mass percentage mentioned - it came from a congratulatory release from the UK Based GSM Association. It's easy to see why. It begs the question: "With those stats, Why would the ACCC not seriously look at opening the Next G network to competitors rather than force them into wasteful duplication?
You think you have a disaster recovery plan?
Think again. Most businesses only have PART of a DR plan - and this spells business disaster in the event of an IT disaster.
Download The Seven Sins of Disaster Recovery White Paper now and find out how you can prevent this happening to you.
