• Congratulations to the Class of 2024 on your results!
    Let us know how you went here
    Got a question about your uni preferences? Ask us here

Why did the government EVER privatise telstra? (1 Viewer)

UGFighter

Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2005
Messages
159
Location
Bogun-Town
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Not-That-Bright said:
wtf it doesn't matter if it's 'financially screwed'...

If you give telstra to a private company, services will get accelleratedly (is that a word?) worse. If we have a crappy communications service in Australia, that is bad for business... same with having a shit transport service.
It doesn't matter that the key company behind the communication services in Australia is worth billion of dollars and is financially screwed, in that it's not financially viable to maintain?

playboy2njoy, glad someone knows what I am talking about!
 

Not-That-Bright

Andrew Quah
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Messages
12,176
Location
Sydney, Australia.
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Because they wont have to keep funding the bloody thing. Exactly why they sold Qantas.
But Qantas had great potential to maintain profits / provide a decent service to the Australian community. That will not happen when you sell telstra... they will notice that it's not profitable and they will cut corners and downgrade services to a point where the economy is effected.

Of course it doesn't matter! Telstra not being financially profitable is the same thing as the railroad... WE NEED THEM.
 

Rafy

Retired
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
10,719
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
Uni Grad
2008
T3 is the gov selling their 50.1% shareholding......not a capital raising by telstra.....
 

UGFighter

Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2005
Messages
159
Location
Bogun-Town
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
haha, shit.. you're right. Guess I don't follow Telstra as closely anymore since I sold my holdings.

Still, the point remains that Telstra is in a bad financial position... just not as bad as I thought it was :D
 

loquasagacious

NCAP Mooderator
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Messages
3,636
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2004
A natural monopoly does not exist for carriers, a natural monopoly does however exist for infrastructure. Eg it is more efficient if there are lots of carriers eg optus, telstra, etc etc however it would be widldly inefficient if there was lots of infrastructure eg your house connected to eight different copper networks.

As it stands the retail division of telstra forces the wholesale division to act in a way contrary to wholesale's interest but in retail's interest. Eg charging more to third parties than to retail for network access, not upgrading network infrastructure etc.

Thus the best solution is seperating the retaila and wholesale divisions of telstra and privatising the retail division. The result would be a wholesale company controlling all of the former telstra's infrastructure. This company would now be able to respond to the market demand for infrastructure rather than just telstra's. So we would see ADSL2+ etc rolled out quicker. The govt would be able to fund infrastructure upgrades were they neccessary/forced to by the nats. The retail division meanwhile would now be competing on a level playing field with all the other carriers.

The final result beng better infrastructure being upgraded quicker and lower prices for the consumer.
 

Raginsheep

Active Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2004
Messages
1,227
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
addymac said:
A natural monopoly does not exist for carriers, a natural monopoly does however exist for infrastructure. Eg it is more efficient if there are lots of carriers eg optus, telstra, etc etc however it would be widldly inefficient if there was lots of infrastructure eg your house connected to eight different copper networks.

As it stands the retail division of telstra forces the wholesale division to act in a way contrary to wholesale's interest but in retail's interest. Eg charging more to third parties than to retail for network access, not upgrading network infrastructure etc.

Thus the best solution is seperating the retaila and wholesale divisions of telstra and privatising the retail division. The result would be a wholesale company controlling all of the former telstra's infrastructure. This company would now be able to respond to the market demand for infrastructure rather than just telstra's. So we would see ADSL2+ etc rolled out quicker. The govt would be able to fund infrastructure upgrades were they neccessary/forced to by the nats. The retail division meanwhile would now be competing on a level playing field with all the other carriers.

The final result beng better infrastructure being upgraded quicker and lower prices for the consumer.
The only problem is that the only valuable thing Telstra owns is the copper network. In numbers of customers, Im pretty sure its losing alot in all areas to other telecommunication companies and it also has a service obligation to the not profitable rural areas that its competitors don't have. All in all, not a good investment.
 

loquasagacious

NCAP Mooderator
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Messages
3,636
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2004
Carefull Ntb you'll make me blush....

Ragin: Exactly it is a problem - just not in the way you envisage it. It is a problem because rather than the retail division of Telstra becoming more efficient and competitive it is able to rely on bullying competitors via wholesale and controlling the market via wholesale.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top