 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General General TopicsGSMBluetoothProviders AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizonManufacturers EricssonNokiaMotorolaCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics PocketPCPalmMore Topics ... |
Cellular Phone Forum / Country Specific / Australian Group / May 2008Telstra chairman hits back at Optus
From http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Telstra-chairman-hits-back-at -Optus-E9BLD?OpenDocument Telstra Chairman Donald McGauchie has hit out at the Optus-backed G9 consortium's renewed interest in building the national broadband network, declaring Telstra the only viable bidder. In an exclusive KGB Interrogation, Mr McGauchie told Alan Kohler, Robert Gottliebsen and Stephen Bartholomeusz that Telstra was the only company that could build and operate the high tech fibre-to-the-node (FTTN) network. "No one else can do it in the way we are capable of doing it," Mr McGauchie said. "I can't imagine that the Government would want to go down a path with someone who was not capable of delivering." Earlier in the week, Optus Chief Paul O'Sullivan said his Optus-led G9 consortium would bid to build the network, but was unhappy at the Federal Government's decision not to extend the deadline of July 25. In a wide-ranging interview, Mr McGauchie categorically ruled out bidding for the network if structural separation was imposed as a condition of the tender. "Structural separation is frankly really dangerous in what it does to a system. "Not only would it be unattractive to us, but it would be incredibly damaging to Australia," he said. Structural separation would lead to the break-up of Telstra's retail and wholesale divisions, a move floated by Labor during its time in opposition. However, McGauchie was coy when discussing his views on the Rudd Labor government. "The new government has a view as to what they want out of telecommunications and we'll do our very best to work with that," Mr McGauchie said. > From > http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Telstra-chairman-hits-back-at -Optus-E9BLD?OpenDocument [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > "Not only would it be unattractive to us, but it would be incredibly > damaging to Australia," he said. Pity that Telstra won;t have a say in it > Structural separation would lead to the break-up of Telstra's retail and > wholesale divisions, a move floated by Labor during its time in [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > telecommunications and we'll do our very best to work with that," Mr > McGauchie said. ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** > From > http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Telstra-chairman-hits-back-at -Optus-E9BLD?OpenDocument > Telstra Chairman Donald McGauchie has hit out at the Optus-backed G9 consortium's renewed interest in building the > national broadband > network, declaring Telstra the only viable bidder. Wota surprise. > In an exclusive KGB Interrogation, Mr McGauchie told Alan Kohler, Robert Gottliebsen and Stephen Bartholomeusz that > Telstra was the only company that could build and operate the high tech fibre-to-the-node (FTTN) network. Clearly a pathological liar. > "No one else can do it in the way we are capable of doing it," Mr McGauchie said. No one else can rape the customers like Telstra can. He did get that bit right. > "I can't imagine that the Government would want to go down a path with someone who was not capable of delivering." Could that be because you clowns arent prepared to do it the way the govt wants it done ? Same reason you lost the Opel contract. > Earlier in the week, Optus Chief Paul O'Sullivan said his Optus-led G9 consortium would bid to build the network, but > was unhappy at the > Federal Government's decision not to extend the deadline of July 25. Because telstra has refused to provide the vital info thats necessary to do a viable bid until a day or so before the deadline. If the new govt lets telstra get away with that, they deserve a right royal boot in the arse. > In a wide-ranging interview, Mr McGauchie categorically ruled out bidding for the network if structural separation was > imposed as a condition of the tender. Great. If the govt has a clue, they will require that, and f.ck telstra over just like was done with the Opel contract too. > "Structural separation is frankly really dangerous in what it does to a system. Fine, then you wont get the $4.7B. > "Not only would it be unattractive to us, but it would be incredibly damaging to Australia," he said. Nothing like as damaging to Australia as you have been, arsehole. > Structural separation would lead to the break-up of Telstra's retail and wholesale divisions, a move floated by Labor > during its time in opposition. And with any luck they'll f.ck over telstra and you clowns will miss out on the $4.7B With any luck the new govt will be able to use that as an excuse to keep the $4.7B and wont be spending to that to give Murdoch what he should be paying for if he wants it. > However, McGauchie was coy when discussing his views on the Rudd Labor government. > "The new government has a view as to what they want out of telecommunications and we'll do our very best to work with > that," Mr McGauchie said. Clearly a pathological liar. Cant even manage a consistent line of bullshit in a single interview. > From > http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Telstra-chairman-hits-back-at -Optus-E9BLD?OpenDocument > > Telstra Chairman Donald McGauchie has hit out at the Optus-backed G9 > consortium's renewed interest in building the national broadband > network, declaring Telstra the only viable bidder. Telstra is planning to start in the cities. The government wants broadband in the bush. It's good business to pay attention to your biggest customer - one would have thought ... > "The new government has a view as to what they want out of > telecommunications and we'll do our very best to work with that," Mr > McGauchie said. Huh? > Alan Parkington wrote >> From >> http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Telstra-chairman-hits-back-at -Optus-E9BLD?OpenDocument >> Telstra Chairman Donald McGauchie has hit out at the Optus-backed G9 consortium's renewed interest in building the >> national broadband >> network, declaring Telstra the only viable bidder. > Telstra is planning to start in the cities. So is labor. > The government wants broadband in the bush. That govt has gone, stupid. > It's good business to pay attention to your > biggest customer - one would have thought Only when you noticed that the govt has changed. >> "The new government has a view as to what they want out of telecommunications and we'll do our very best to work with >> that," Mr McGauchie said. > Huh? >> Alan Parkington wrote > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > That govt has gone, stupid. The *labor* government wants 98% coverage, speedy boy, how do you suppose they will achieve that by starting in the cities? >> It's good business to pay attention to your >> biggest customer - one would have thought > > Only when you noticed that the govt has changed. Well of course its entirely possible that Labor can't do arithmetic but neither can you >>> "The new government has a view as to what they want out of telecommunications and we'll do our very best to work with >>> that," Mr McGauchie said. > >> Huh? > Rod Speed wrote >>> Alan Parkington wrote >>>> From >>>> http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Telstra-chairman-hits-back-at -Optus-E9BLD?OpenDocument >>>> Telstra Chairman Donald McGauchie has hit out at the Optus-backed >>>> G9 consortium's renewed interest in building the national broadband >>>> network, declaring Telstra the only viable bidder. >>> Telstra is planning to start in the cities. >> So is labor. >>> The government wants broadband in the bush. >> That govt has gone, stupid. > The *labor* government wants 98% coverage, So it clearly wants a hell of a lot more than broadband in the bush, fuckwit. > how do you suppose they will achieve that by starting in the cities? They START in the citys and end up doing the bush as well, fuckwit. >>> It's good business to pay attention to your >>> biggest customer - one would have thought >> Only when you noticed that the govt has changed. > Well of course its entirely possible that Labor can't do arithmetic but neither can you You in spades. 98% is a hell of a lot more than JUST the bush, fuckwit. And the real bush is the 2% that isnt even covered, fuckwit. >>>> "The new government has a view as to what they want out of telecommunications and we'll do our very best to work >>>> with that," Mr McGauchie said. >>> Huh? >> Rod Speed wrote >>>> Alan Parkington wrote [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > They START in the citys and end up doing the bush as well, fuckwit. And when do you suppose they will end? Not even Labor would fall for that one, speedy boy... >>>> It's good business to pay attention to your >>>> biggest customer - one would have thought [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > And the real bush is the 2% that isnt even covered, fuckwit. ...but apparently you would >>>>> "The new government has a view as to what they want out of telecommunications and we'll do our very best to work >>>>> with that," Mr McGauchie said. > >>>> Huh? > Rod Speed wrote >>> Rod Speed wrote >>>>> Alan Parkington wrote >>>>>> From >>>>>> http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Telstra-chairman-hits-back-at -Optus-E9BLD?OpenDocument >>>>>> Telstra Chairman Donald McGauchie has hit out at the Optus-backed >>>>>> G9 consortium's renewed interest in building the national >>>>>> broadband network, declaring Telstra the only viable bidder. >>>>> Telstra is planning to start in the cities. >>>> So is labor. >>>>> The government wants broadband in the bush. >>>> That govt has gone, stupid. >>> The *labor* government wants 98% coverage, >> So it clearly wants a hell of a lot more than broadband in the bush, fuckwit. >>> how do you suppose they will achieve that by starting in the cities? >> They START in the citys and end up doing the bush as well, fuckwit. > And when do you suppose they will end? Well after they start, fuckwit. >>>>> It's good business to pay attention to your >>>>> biggest customer - one would have thought >>>> Only when you noticed that the govt has changed. >>> Well of course its entirely possible that Labor can't do arithmetic but neither can you >> You in spades. 98% is a hell of a lot more than JUST the bush, fuckwit. >> And the real bush is the 2% that isnt even covered, fuckwit. > ...but apparently you would Nope, its never going to be feasible or sensible to deliver FTTN everywhere, fuckwit. >>>>>> "The new government has a view as to what they want out of >>>>>> telecommunications and we'll do our very best to work with >>>>>> that," Mr McGauchie said. >>>>> Huh? >> Rod Speed wrote >>>> Rod Speed wrote [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > Nope, its never going to be feasible or sensible to deliver FTTN everywhere, fuckwit. I never commented on the feasibility, twit, it is Labor's goal to cover 98% of the population. That's going to take longer if they start in the city. Try to keep up. >>>>>>> "The new government has a view as to what they want out of >>>>>>> telecommunications and we'll do our very best to work with >>>>>>> that," Mr McGauchie said. > >>>>>> Huh? > I never commented on the feasibility, twit, it is Labor's goal to cover > 98% of the population. > > That's going to take longer if they start in the city. Try to keep up. WTF? Surely you can't be THAT stupid??  SignatureKwyj. >> I never commented on the feasibility, twit, it is Labor's goal to cover >> 98% of the population. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > WTF? > Surely you can't be THAT stupid?? It's logical, you idiot. >>> I never commented on the feasibility, twit, it is Labor's goal to cover >>> 98% of the population. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > It's logical, you idiot. Hmmm. I guess you CAN be that stupid....... Poor c.nt. SignatureKwyj. >>>> I never commented on the feasibility, twit, it is Labor's goal to cover >>>> 98% of the population. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Hmmm. I guess you CAN be that stupid....... > Poor c.nt. Why don't you explain it kwik boy? >>>>> I never commented on the feasibility, twit, it is Labor's goal to >>>>> cover 98% of the population. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Why don't you explain it kwik boy? Because it would make more sense to try to explain it to a stone, fuckwit. >>>>>> I never commented on the feasibility, twit, it is Labor's goal to >>>>>> cover 98% of the population. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Because it would make more sense to try to explain it to a stone, fuckwit. No no no. You're speedy, the other fwit is kwik boy >>>>>>> I never commented on the feasibility, twit, it is Labor's goal >>>>>>> to cover 98% of the population. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > No no no. You're speedy, the other fwit is kwik boy Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag. > Rod Speed wrote >>> Rod Speed wrote >>>>> Rod Speed wrote >>>>>>> Alan Parkington wrote >>>>>>>> From >>>>>>>> http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Telstra-chairman-hits-back-at -Optus-E9BLD?OpenDocument >>>>>>>> Telstra Chairman Donald McGauchie has hit out at the Optus-backed G9 consortium's renewed interest in building >>>>>>>> the national broadband network, declaring Telstra the only viable bidder. >>>>>>> Telstra is planning to start in the cities. >>>>>> So is labor. >>>>>>> The government wants broadband in the bush. >>>>>> That govt has gone, stupid. >>>>> The *labor* government wants 98% coverage, >>>> So it clearly wants a hell of a lot more than broadband in the bush, fuckwit. >>>>> how do you suppose they will achieve that by starting in the cities? >>>> They START in the citys and end up doing the bush as well, fuckwit. >>> And when do you suppose they will end? >> Well after they start, fuckwit. >>>>>>> It's good business to pay attention to your >>>>>>> biggest customer - one would have thought >>>>>> Only when you noticed that the govt has changed. >>>>> Well of course its entirely possible that Labor can't do arithmetic but neither can you >>>> You in spades. 98% is a hell of a lot more than JUST the bush, fuckwit. >>>> And the real bush is the 2% that isnt even covered, fuckwit. >>> ...but apparently you would >> Nope, its never going to be feasible or sensible to deliver FTTN everywhere, fuckwit. > I never commented on the feasibility You have always been, and always will be, completely and utterly irrelevant. What you may or may not have commented on in spades, fuckwit. That was a comment on that terminal stupidity of yours, 'but apparently you would', fuckwit. > it is Labor's goal to cover 98% of the population. You quite sure you aint one of those rocket scientist terminal fuckwits ? > That's going to take longer if they start in the city. You have to start somewhere, fuckwit. No point in starting where most people aint, fuckwit. >>>>>>>> "The new government has a view as to what they want out of >>>>>>>> telecommunications and we'll do our very best to work with >>>>>>>> that," Mr McGauchie said. >>>>>>> Huh? >> Rod Speed wrote ... >> That's going to take longer if they start in the city. > > You have to start somewhere, fuckwit. > > No point in starting where most people aint, fuckwit. No point is starting where FTTN already *is* fuckwit >>> Rod Speed wrote > ... [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > No point is starting where FTTN already *is* fuckwit So you don't even know what FTTN is then. SignatureKwyj. >>>> Rod Speed wrote >> ... [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > So you don't even know what FTTN is then. What is it? > Rod Speed wrote >>> Rod Speed wrote >>> That's going to take longer if they start in the city. >> You have to start somewhere, fuckwit. >> No point in starting where most people aint, fuckwit. > No point is starting where FTTN already *is* fuckwit Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had a f.cking clue. There is no FTTN in the sense that Telstra is spruiking it currently, fuckwit. >> Rod Speed wrote >>>> Rod Speed wrote [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > There is no FTTN in the sense that Telstra is spruiking it currently, fuckwit. (speedy starts to get an inkling that's he's dug himself a hole) >>> Rod Speed wrote >>>>> Rod Speed wrote [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> ever had a f.cking clue. There is no FTTN in the sense that Telstra is spruiking it >> currently, fuckwit. > (speedy starts to get an inkling that's he's dug himself a hole) Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag. >>> Alan Parkington wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > The *labor* government wants 98% coverage, speedy boy, how do you > suppose they will achieve that by starting in the cities? By moving into the bush once the cities are covered, perhaps? >>>> Alan Parkington wrote >>>>> From [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > By moving into the bush once the cities are covered, perhaps? The cities already have broadband (mostly), so starting there will just delay the whole process. Maybe that's the aim. >>>>> Alan Parkington wrote >>>>>> From [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > The cities already have broadband (mostly), They don't have FTTN, which is what is being discussed. > so starting there will just delay the whole process. You really have no idea what you are waffling on about, do you? SignatureKwyj. ... >>>>>> The government wants broadband in the bush. >>>>> That govt has gone, stupid. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > You really have no idea what you are waffling on about, do you? The CBDs already have FTTN, you idiot. > ... >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > The CBDs already have FTTN, you idiot. Who mentioned CBD's, fuckwit? SignatureKwyj. >> ... >>>>>>>> The government wants broadband in the bush. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Who mentioned CBD's, fuckwit? Who asked you, moron? >>> ... >>>>>>>>> The government wants broadband in the bush. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Who asked you, moron? You were replying to me when you stupidly tried to introduce "CBD" into the discussion, fuckwit. Learn to follow a thread. SignatureKwyj. > ... >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >> >> You really have no idea what you are waffling on about, do you? > The CBDs already have FTTN, you idiot. The CDBs are completely irrelevant to what is being discussed, fuckwit. And they dont have FTTN already anyway, fuckwit. >> ... >>>>>>>> The government wants broadband in the bush. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > And they dont have FTTN already anyway, fuckwit. What is FTTN, fwit? Exactly. >>> ... >>>>>>>>> The government wants broadband in the bush. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >> The CDBs are completely irrelevant to what is being discussed, >> fuckwit. And they dont have FTTN already anyway, fuckwit. > What is FTTN, fwit? Something you clearly dont have a f.cking clue about, fuckwit. > Exactly. Nope. ... >>>>>> The cities already have broadband (mostly), >>>>> They don't have FTTN, which is what is being discussed. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Something you clearly dont have a f.cking clue about, fuckwit. Sure, so educate me. Is it a product, a technology, a protocol? What is it? C'mon speedy, you should know - here's your chance to tell Australia. >> Exactly. > > Nope. > Rod Speed wrote >>>>>>> The cities already have broadband (mostly), >>>>>> They don't have FTTN, which is what is being discussed. >>>>>>> so starting there will just delay the whole process. >>>>>> You really have no idea what you are waffling on about, do you? >>>>> The CBDs already have FTTN, you idiot. >>>> The CDBs are completely irrelevant to what is being discussed, >>>> fuckwit. And they dont have FTTN already anyway, fuckwit. >>> What is FTTN, fwit? >> Something you clearly dont have a f.cking clue about, fuckwit. > Sure, so educate me. Not even possible. > Is it a product, a technology, a protocol? What is it? None of the above. > C'mon speedy, you should know I do indeed. > - here's your chance to tell Australia. No need to, they arent as clueless as you always are. >>> Exactly. >> Nope. >> Rod Speed wrote > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > None of the above. I thought so - pathetic >> C'mon speedy, you should know > > I do indeed. No evidence of that >> - here's your chance to tell Australia. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >>> Nope. >>> Rod Speed wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] >> >>>> Nope. I think that Roddles needs to do us all a favour and self-immolate. If you are not up to it Roddles, I'm sure I could drum up a few volunteers to assist you. > Rod Speed wrote >>> Rod Speed wrote >>>>>>>>> The cities already have broadband (mostly), >>>>>>>> They don't have FTTN, which is what is being discussed. >>>>>>>>> so starting there will just delay the whole process. >>>>>>>> You really have no idea what you are waffling on about, do you? >>>>>>> The CBDs already have FTTN, you idiot. >>>>>> The CDBs are completely irrelevant to what is being discussed, >>>>>> fuckwit. And they dont have FTTN already anyway, fuckwit. >>>>> What is FTTN, fwit? >>>> Something you clearly dont have a f.cking clue about, fuckwit. >>> Sure, so educate me. >> Not even possible. >>> Is it a product, a technology, a protocol? What is it? >> None of the above. > I thought so Obvious lie. Ear to ear dog sh.t isnt even capable of thought. > - pathetic Your sig is supposed to be at the bottom with a --- on a line by itself in front of it, fuckwit. >>> C'mon speedy, you should know >> I do indeed. > No evidence of that You wouldnt know what evidence was if it bit you on your lard arse, fuckwit. >>> - here's your chance to tell Australia. >> No need to, they arent as clueless as you always are. >>>>> Exactly. >>>> Nope. > Horry wrote >>> Rod Speed wrote: >>>>> Alan Parkington wrote >>>>>> From >>>>>> http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Telstra-chairman-hits-back-at -Optus-E9BLD?OpenDocument >>>>>> Telstra Chairman Donald McGauchie has hit out at the Optus-backed G9 consortium's renewed interest in building >>>>>> the national broadband network, declaring Telstra the only viable bidder. >>>>> Telstra is planning to start in the cities. >>>> So is labor. >>>>> The government wants broadband in the bush. >>>> That govt has gone, stupid. >>> The *labor* government wants 98% coverage, speedy boy, how do you suppose they will achieve that by starting in the >>> cities? >> By moving into the bush once the cities are covered, perhaps? > The cities already have broadband (mostly), So does the bush, fuckwit. > so starting there will just delay the whole process. That process is FTTN, not just broadband, which almost everyone already has, fuckwit. > Maybe that's the aim. Wota terminal fuckwit. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.