Holy Smokes Batman: Telstra might be broken up!

April 13, 2009 — 8 Comments

Age:?Ǭ†Telstra set to abandon major cable upgrade

In the aftermath of the Government’s decision last week, Telstra’s immediate task will be to rethink its investment in cable after it emerged that regulatory changes could include forcing the telco to divest the network which passes 2.5 million homes and businesses.

Wow. Just wow.

Should the Government decide to force Telstra to divest the cable network, Merrill Lynch said it could be folded into the proposed national broadband network, which would mean that fibre-optic cables would not have to be rolled out to many homes and businesses in the cities.

The broker said the new company proposed by the Government to run the national network was the “only logical buyer” of Telstra’s city cable network.

More wow.

8 responses to Holy Smokes Batman: Telstra might be broken up!

  1. That's not just broken up, that sounds more like wholesale theft by the government. Wow indeed. I'm no big fan of monopolies, but I'm even less of a fan of socialist style government-owned monopolies. The government sees a lucrative position, and is taking it away from Telestra. Wow.

  2. I wonder if the government really understands the ramifications of the new network. How fair can it be that the government sells off Telstra and then finances a whole new publicly financed company?

  3. look, I'm no more a fan of Government ownership of networks than you are. However, this idea that we should duplicate Telstra's network with the NBN is obscene. Telstra should never have been sold off without a split between retail and wholesale (note, I was in favor of the selloff as an idea), the problem being is we delivered a monopoly where we shouldn't be doing monopolies.

    I think this is a good thing, even if the Government will own it…well, until they sell it off. I'm still suspicious of the NBN costings, but this might make me change my tune

  4. Here in lies the problem. Should never have been sold as one entity to start with. But having said that, anti-monopoly type actions aren't unprecedented: break up of AT&T for example was a step that most would agree was for the greater good.

  5. My only objection to the sell of is that the government is “the only logical choice” -BUT this is said from the point of view of an american, and not a native. I'm usually not in favor of monopolies, and virtually never in favor of government owned monopolies. When the government forces a takeover in favor of themselves, is smacks of outright theft – another version of “eminent domain” (a hot topic here to be sure)

  6. My only objection to the sell of is that the government is “the only logical choice” -BUT this is said from the point of view of an american, and not a native. I'm usually not in favor of monopolies, and virtually never in favor of government owned monopolies. When the government forces a takeover in favor of themselves, is smacks of outright theft – another version of “eminent domain” (a hot topic here to be sure)

  7. My only objection to the sell of is that the government is “the only logical choice” -BUT this is said from the point of view of an american, and not a native. I'm usually not in favor of monopolies, and virtually never in favor of government owned monopolies. When the government forces a takeover in favor of themselves, is smacks of outright theft – another version of “eminent domain” (a hot topic here to be sure)

  8. Just to test if this backlink is indexed. Thanks.

Leave a Reply

Text formatting is available via select HTML. <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

*